Chapter VIII: Part II (4)

On the first Sabbath of the new order nearly the same number were in attendance. But many had no teachers provided, and I could have nothing to do about arranging for the school's best interest.[4] The following Sabbath brought a great falling off, still greater the next, and so on. In a few weeks the warden peremptorily dismissed one of the teachers he had invited, telling him that if he would call at another time, he would give his reason.

[Footnote 4: In speaking of the Sabbath school teachers employed, page 69, the author intended to say, such a number that each teacher could have a guard stand by him and see that nothing contraband passed.]

At first, a prisoner would occasionally ask a question, as usual, and a little discussion spring up; but the warden at once crushed all this, requiring the teachers simply to put the questions as in the book and the pupil to give the answer and nothing more. The number continued to fall off until it went below thirty, giving me fears that none would attend, all my efforts for their continuance being of no avail. No excuse would usually be given. But one said, "I won't attend with such a warden," and I judged this the general reason. At length I found uneasiness pervading the teachers, one having determined to resign; but I entreated him to remain for the sake of the prisoners and the Sabbath school, for, if he left, his class would follow, dropping the number to twenty or under, and all would be likely to take the same course. He did not feel satisfied with laboring under such circumstances, with a guard, may be a mere boy, at his side to watch him, and he, perhaps, turned off as unceremoniously as the other. He preferred going of his own accord. But my plea prevailed, and he remained.

The average attendance after the advent of the new order was forty-eight; for the whole year, fifty-seven.

41. _Religious success._ The contrast between the religious element of the present year and that of the past was painful. Still, among those who at first gave up all hope of struggling against the tide, a few were induced to forsake that ground and struggle on; thus we hope something of the past was saved.

In my discourses I felt impelled to dwell more largely on the moral code, to which the inmates gave respectful attention. The prayer meetings were well attended, though but few of the inmates would take any part. One of the Sabbath school teachers was usually present, and labored with good effect. We took up more of the time in Bible exposition, which would occasionally seem to awaken some interest.

As to our true religious success this year, or the real good accomplished, none but that Being who knows all things can decide. One thing is certain, much earnest, prayerful effort to that end was made, much hard labor performed. But it is difficult rowing against wind and tide. Still, we probably shared in as large success as could reasonably be looked for under all the circumstances.

42. _Lack of truthfulness at the prison._ We are often told that no confidence can be placed in the word of a prisoner. But in my experience under the new rule, I was taught the sad lesson that I could place no greater confidence in the assertions of some of the officers. A complaint of this character had repeatedly been made by released prisoners. Still, it required personal experience to enable me to appreciate its full and lamentable force. Hence, the shock I felt at the virtual request of the warden for me to join in the falsehood course, by telling the prisoners that Henry Stewart, when removed to the insane asylum, was taken out to be tried for attempts to murder his overseer.--Then, again, there were the assertions I repeatedly heard the warden make to prison visitors, on passing through the cook-room. "We give the prisoners good food and enough of it. We purchase the best of articles the market affords, and have the food well prepared." He would repeat this in earnestness and apparent sincerity, as though he really believed it himself.--Subsequently, a gentleman of the city, of undoubted veracity, being about to visit the parents of a prisoner, called and asked the warden how he was, with the answer, "He is all right; you may tell his folks that he is all right." In a few days after, it was found that, at the very time of this assertion, the man was so sick that the doctor had nearly given him over to die.

Then I would sometimes smile and sometimes feel sorrowful at his changeable appearance; perhaps if one of influence and authority came in, he would put on peculiar airs of suavity, and expatiate upon how things were and should be in prison, while one without that influence might enter and receive entirely different treatment. I here see how our rulers may have been led on at times, unaware of the true state of things in the institution. How easy to cover up!

Then in the female department, I called for a convict in order to arrange for her disposal on leaving prison, and was told, "The assistant is in the city with the key to their apartment, therefore you can not see the woman." But how was I surprised shortly to learn that, at the moment of this assertion, the assistant was in the kitchen at work, and known to be there by my informant.

Is it any wonder that such people disbelieve in prison reform?

43. _Reported quarrel between the warden and chaplain._ The idea has been circulated, how extensively I know not, that the warden and chaplain had a quarrel between them at the prison. It seems to have pervaded some minds in the legislature at Concord in '71, being used to the disadvantage of a bill before that body in regard to the prison, the fate of which perhaps was made to turn on that. No doubt a certain Concord gentleman, who had an ax of his own to grind in connection, knows very well how this report was made so prevalent. Whether he or another started it, I know not.

But that idea had not the slightest foundation in truth. The circumstances of our official intercourse in all that passed, have been faithfully set forth in the preceding pages, and the reader can see for himself that there was no quarreling. When the warden told me to "bring the key back and not touch it any more," I did as required, without uttering a word. When I told him what I should do about fixing up the Maine man before sending him away, his remark was in no fault-finding tone. When he pointed out my work at first, and in our connected colloquy, all our words were civil and courteous, no unpleasantness in tone; and when he informed me on the point of the man's glasses and the sick man's flannels, I gave him no unkind answer. And where was the quarreling? Nowhere. It did not exist. He taught me my bounds after the manner he did, and I accepted them and conformed my moves thereto with not a lisp of fault-finding. He never spoke a word in disapprobation of what I was doing, but that all was agreeable to his mind. Again, where was that place of quarreling? Not in the prison between the warden and chaplain. Whenever we met, it was on the most civil terms, we invariably passing the compliments of the day.

True, we each had our notions on prison reform, he thinking that attempts in that direction are useless, that, when one has fallen into prison we can not reform him, that punishment is _the_ great mission of the prison, and thus on; I, supposing that reform is practicable, that we should faithfully use all available means for it, and make it the paramount object of imprisoning. On the question of prison order we were exactly alike in sentiment,--perfect order, strict discipline,--though, perhaps, varying as to the ultimate results, he securing that as a deterrent to crime; I, as an important and indispensable element in reform, leading the once erring to that state of mind in which he will hate wrong and love right.

Then, as we had not a word of debate over our differing ideas, so there was no clashing in carrying them out. The warden established his line of policy, as he had a legal right, then I surveyed the ground and decided to go on with my reform efforts, so far, with respect to time and place, as I could consistently with his arrangements, at all times looking to the best prison order, and at no time to interfere with any of his moves.

This was our prison quarreling, and the whole of it; a very peaceful affair. How happy, if all quarrels were of this character! I felt assured that, though what I was endeavoring to promote in our prison was held by those at present in the ascendant as being an interloper in such an institution, and wholly out of place there, truth would at length prevail. Prudent labors, persevering efforts, patient waiting and firm trust in the great Leader, would now, as ever before, result in the triumph of the right. With such views I daily toiled in quietness, interfering with nobody around me.

44. _Prison Report for '71._ I had looked for a pretty free use of whitewash in this, but it goes immeasurably beyond my anticipations. I really expected to find some regard for truthfulness in the statement of facts. But, in my astonishment at reading, I would inquire, "Have I fallen into a general confusion of names? Is black indeed white?"

Let us read, p. 13,--"He [the warden] ... spends his whole time in and about the institution, not having been absent to the value of half a day since he entered upon his duties."

Thus we have it. Sum up the time spent by the warden during the year in going to the P. O., or in calls out on business, or errands, or attending meeting on the Sabbath, or journeying to New York even, and the whole does not amount to "the value of half a day." This prepares us for any statement we may find. If we admit that, we can anything.

Let us, then, look at the food question.

On page 6. we have,--"The food furnished the prisoners has been selected with more than ordinary care and great pains have been taken in having it well cooked and served. We have a regular weight from which the rations are made, and any man, wishing for more than the regular allowance, is always furnished with an extra quantity." P. 13,--"The warden is not only valuable as a disciplinarian but is economical in his management of the affairs of the prison, at the same time allowing to the prisoners liberal rations of food of the best quality, but none to waste."

This can be admitted just as easily as the quotation preceding. How rejoiced the prisoners would have been to realize the truthfulness of this assertion one short week,--"Selected with more than ordinary care!" "Regular weight!" "Liberal rations of food of the best quality!" That will do,--decaying fish, potatoes "not fit to put into the human stomach," and all.

But when the Report comes to the chaplain it uses a black wash with quite as unsparing a hand, thus, (P. 13) "But the warden has not had that sympathy and assistance from the chaplain, which should be mutually rendered to each other by officers of the prison. The chaplain, for reasons best known to himself, has not acted in harmony with the warden in the discharge of his various duties, a matter very essential to the discipline of a prison. He has on the other hand, manifested peculiarities of his own which have been very detrimental to the discipline, and, we have reason to believe, have caused some uneasiness among the prisoners, which has made it more difficult for the warden, and, in some instances, causing punishment which would otherwise have been avoided."

But let us read what the warden says (P. 9),--"In conclusion, I desire to express my thanks to all the officers connected with the institution, for the prompt, cheerful and efficient manner in which they have discharged their several duties."

The chaplain was one of those officers. What, then, shall we believe? Who tells the truth? What has become of straightforward dealing? Where is that trait once called honor among men? The reader, having fully informed himself of the real facts, will pronounce the above charge against the chaplain as unqualifiedly untrue from beginning to end.

But one says, "That first assertion must be true. The warden could not have shared your sympathy in his acts." No, that first assertion is not true. It is equally false with all the rest, that is, in the sense of the writer, which evidently is that the chaplain did not sympathize with the warden in his desires for order, and labor with him to that end. Order is the first thing to be sought in prison as everywhere else. It has my fullest sympathy and for the very purpose of helping towards it, under this warden, I voluntarily undertook what I did.

"The warden has not had that assistance from the chaplain," &c. The reader has seen the chaplain putting in a pacific word here and there, doing all he could to interest the mind in its privations, helping men keep down their angry passions, robbing the solitary of its occupants, excusing, entreating, helping to order in every way possible, and is held up in that light.

"Not acted in harmony." Not a discordant word or step is the truth.

"Manifested peculiarities of his own." Peculiarities! What were they? Honest devotion to duty and not an eye to personal popularity; most arduous toils engaged in for helping to the best interest of the prison; patient efforts for reforming and elevating the fallen. All I said or did there would come within some of these points. Were those peculiarities? What then must be the character of the prison management? If the chaplain's moves were held as peculiarities it could have been only from contrasting the animus and acts of those who ruled with his. They would hold the prisoners as so many "dumb, driven cattle;" he, as human beings, with instincts of reason to be addressed and emotions of right to be stirred; they, in all cases, would move their brute fears, threaten, scold, drive; he, a part of the time at least, would appeal to the manhood sentiments, persuade, entreat, expostulate; they would regard them as morally hopeless, to be cruelly treated, and made money of; he, as those for whom hope lives, and on whom redeeming influences should be used, and efforts made for coining from them gold purer than earth affords.

Nor are these moves of the chaplain peculiarities in many other States, if in N. H. Nor are they original with him. Other minds had brought out such ideas and pushed them somewhat widely into public acceptance, and he was only attempting to introduce something of their benign influence here.

"Detrimental to discipline." What gross darkness!

"Made it more difficult for the warden." Change "difficult" to "easy" and the truth would be told.

"Causing punishment." What an idea!

The chaplain saw the changes attempted to be brought upon the prisoners, and thought he understood something of the effects which the move would produce on their minds and the results likely to follow. He knew that to some extent he had the confidence of the men, that they were looking to him as their friend, and as working for their best good; that, therefore, he could, by carefully using his influence in a quiet, unassuming way, help slide the matters round the very sharp corner which was being turned, and thus, on the one hand, make things more endurable to the inmates, and, on the other, easier for the rulers. With an eye single to this purpose he acted, and has the satisfaction of possessing pretty clear evidence that he prevented a measure of trouble in the prison, and thus rendered the warden some aid at least, and made his task somewhat easier. Indeed, he did what he could in that direction, though with no blowing of trumpets. And, after doing all this, to be held up in this light by the agent is a pretty hard cut.

Now, one of two things is true in regard to all the quotations above made. The assertors either believed they were telling the truth or they did not. If the former be taken, if they really thought they could purchase the articles they did and from them make the best quality of food; if they really supposed the chaplain's moves were as deleterious as they represent, what does it show in regard to their judgment as fitting them for place and trust? or, if the other, what of their character as to truth and veracity? Let them take which horn of the dilemma they may choose.

One perhaps says, "The writers were so informed about the chaplain." Could that be any extenuation of their wrong? If such insinuations had been made to them, why did they not first give some intimation of it to him, thus giving him the opportunity of showing their falsity? Why did they not have the parties face to face, and thus learn the truth? But, instead of this, they published what they did, and that to the injury of an innocent man, so far as their influence could go.

But what could have impelled the assertors to such a course? The author does not pretend to know, but it looks as though the object was in this way to push the chaplain to resign, and they thus be rid of those reform efforts. Hence p. 13,--"The prison is a penal institution, and is intended for punishment, not primarily as a reformative one, as some people think." Here is, undoubtedly, the key to this raid on the chaplain. But what is its full import? These reformers fully believe that the sentence of the court must be strictly carried out, and that, too, as an element of reform. The above sentence must mean that the prisoner is put there to be punished as the State directs by its laws and courts, and, in addition, for the managers to "use him so that he will not wish to come back," or to punish him as they may choose. If the sentence means anything, it must mean that. This being the true way, let us have it so understood, and, next summer, let the legislature recognize the idea by a specific act, and then let the judge change his sentence accordingly, putting it, "Your sentence is, that you be confined at hard labor in the State Prison at Concord for ---- years, and that you there be further punished at the discretion of the prison officers acting for the time being." Let this be announced to all evildoers; and, further, let the warden, agent and all, give a true account of the severity of their several punishments, to be published yearly, that the prison may thus appear as deterring to crime as possible. Away with this covering up and pretending to the best living and best usage generally, thus making the institution appear so attractive. A lady visited a friend there and returned, having been made, by the warden's palaver, perfectly reconciled to the friend's condition, remarking, "They are kept so well there, and used so kindly, that one can not feel bad at all about a friend in the prison, except from the fact that he can not have his liberty to go out as he chooses." I protest against such proceedings. But let the truth stand forth, just as it is, that the wicked may really know upon what they must depend.

Why not put out the sentiment squarely that reform moves have no place in the prison? Let us be truthful in this, too. Then dismiss the chaplain and save that expense to the State, for he can be of no use.

It is made evident that the writers would banish from prison all reform moves from this assertion, p. 13,--"We think, sometimes, the matter of reform or sympathy for the prisoners is carried so far, in attempting to reform, as to lead the prisoners to believe that they are injured persons instead of transgressors, which is, in our opinion, wrong, and has a bad tendency." Is not the writer here a little muddled? or would he hold up these reformers as so absurd a set as to think of reforming men by making them believe they are good already and really sinned against? Indeed, would not the labors of such men of straw be bad? True, the writer pretends to found his objections to the reform efforts on the fact that they are carried too far, not perhaps, feeling exactly ready, at this late day, to come out squarely against efforts to raise the fallen, and to induce the erring to become good citizens. No, but it is "carrying the matter too far." Just as though we could go too far in efforts for saving the drowning man. Away with such a sham!

This indirect charge must have been aimed at the chaplain, for he was the only prison officer, that year, who could rightly be accused of such a crime as attempting reform moves.

We are again told that Mr. P. had brought the institution to where it was "with firmness, but with kindness and a Christian spirit," which unfolds the writer's views of "kindness" and the "Christian spirit." No doubt the prisoners were just wicked enough to say, "Lord, deliver us from all such 'Christian spirit.'"

We are further assured, that Mr. P. "has accomplished wonders in this direction, for, in our view, there is now no better disciplined prison in the N. E. states."

That is a very comfortable feeling, very much more so than the emotions of some, who, going into others States, are made to blush at the taunts thrown out about our prison management, that "such things will do for you N. H. folks, for those so far on the background."

But let us turn to the financial part of the Report. Long before the document made its appearance, it had been heralded far and wide in the papers that those now running the prison had made it produce a clear gain of over five thousand dollars in nine months. Of course, making this announcement was for personal popularity. Let us look at the figures after the Report comes to hand. Number of prisoners, 85 males and 6 females. Profits reported for nine months and twenty days, $5173.51, including $396.65 paid on roofing shop. Without deducting this item, we have $5570.16 gain over the real running expenses, which, for a whole year, would amount to $6914.67. Let us compare this with the gain of the Massachusetts State Prison for '72, that Report being at hand. Its number of inmates were 543. If our 91 prisoners gained what they are represented, then 543, in that proportion, would gain $41,260.06, without considering the advantage in larger numbers. Reckoning that in, it would raise this gain to some $45,000, no doubt, the gain of Massachusetts in proportion to ours. But what was her gain? It was $14,635.23, ours being, in proportion, more than three times as much as hers, we thus leaving her all out of sight.

The writers say, p. 11, in regard to Mr. P., "His management has been perfectly satisfactory to your committee. The results of his administration are the most conclusive proofs of its efficiency." Do any wonder that the committee should be satisfied with such showing, if looking to nothing but to the dollars and cents?

But does not the announcement itself show an aggravated wrong to the prisoners, or a false representation? It must be one or the other, if not both. There is no possible way to accomplish all this by honest shrewdness in financiering and rightful treatment to the convicts. All articles of food have their market value. If really suitable for use, the value is fixed for the time being, from which no material deduction can be had. Things have their wholesale and retail prices. True, these vary more or less, from accidental causes, such as the abundance or scarcity of the article, the state of the money market, or the season of the year. Buyers, by watching these accidental influences, may purchase more or less to their advantage. And one can look to these points, and profit from them, as well as another. Prison providers, especially in large establishments, will purchase, of course, at wholesale, and those at Charlestown enjoy quite as good advantages, to say the least, for sharing in these accidentals as those at Concord; and they no doubt look out quite as shrewdly. If, however, one is willing to turn from articles fit for use, he can find those as cheap as he desires, going down from thirteen cents to three or one, if he likes.

Then this boast of great gains at our prison gives a suspicious look, to say the least. If we allow for all that cruel cutting off, previously depicted, and even more, that would not bring the accounts to what would appear probable. The agent, in purchasing legitimate articles, manifested no skill beyond others. He certainly ran behind on wood as as I happened to learn by experience. The man who furnished the prison with this, agreed to supply some for me, of the same quality and price, but failed to bring it at the time, which forced me to look elsewhere for what I needed and which I found, with no extra painstaking and at a bargain, reckoning price and quality, better by one dollar at least per cord.

But if this withholding from the prisoners what they so greatly needed and what was their just due, will not bring the accounts within the region of probability, to what source shall we look for the discrepancy? Let us examine the accounts carefully and see what we thus find. True, it is said, "Figures won't lie," but men, when disposed, may so use them as to lead wide of the truth. In our examination we find the same dealing as before pointed out. Important items of expense in running the institution are deliberately omitted in reckoning. Thus, there is the warden's salary of $1000, the chaplain's, $750, printing the Report, $121,98, appraisers', $78, amounting to $1949,98. Subtracting this from the pretended gain, $6914,67 - 1949,98, gives 4964,69. Let us see what this would be with the Charlestown number of men, $29,625,56, over two times the comparative gain at Charlestown, a very large margin to be accounted for in our withholding.

Certainly we can not afford to boast very loudly over these figures, but should rather blush. The reader should bear in mind, that the prisoners are let at both places on contract, ours at ninety cents per day, and those in Massachusetts for over one dollar, so that her prison managers enjoy an advantage over ours for rolling up gains. And when we talk of gaining more than twice as much as she, we have reason to fear that those hearing us will say, that too many of those dollars were ground out of the flesh, and blood, and sinews, and life even of the prisoners,--not a very welcome sentiment.

45. _Efforts of the Prison Aid Association for legislation in favor of the prison._ The Governor, in his message of '69, proposed that the prison be put under the management of a Board especially appointed to that purpose. But, instead of this, and in connection, making such other provisions for the institution as were really needed, the legislature simply passed the whole matter over into the hands of the Governor and Council, as this Board, an improvement somewhat, no doubt, over the former system, but an arrangement, which, in the views of many of our best citizens, carries with it grave objections.

The Board, thus constituted, is a changeable body, the members never remaining in office more than two years, and sometimes but one. As a result, the prison must necessarily be managed largely by the inexperienced, for the men, generally, no doubt, come to the office without having given any special attention to the subject. This is much like setting a company of untaught landsmen to navigate a ship.

Again, the prison is liable to no little changeableness in its mode of being directed, a great detriment to its welfare, unless it be from bad to good. Men will possess their varying notions, and some, though lacking a knowledge of the best prison interests, will persist in having their peculiar views put in practice, however conflicting and contradictory. It is also now liable to be left largely in the hands of the warden to be run as he wills, besides being exposed to the unfavorable effects of political party influence. Finally, the institution can receive only its part of the largely divided attention of its managers, and thereby, at times, be liable to inconvenience.

But the best interest of the prison evidently demands the control of men especially adapted to their task, men who shall form a body with all possible permanence, possess ripe experience, be free in their rule from partisan control, who shall make the institution their speciality, and manage after some fixed policy involving the most enlightened principles, principles of true reform.

The Association took up these matters, and for the purpose of obtaining legislation looking as undividedly in this direction as possible, appointed a committee, of which Rev. Mr. Sanborn of Concord served as chairman, who should, after due investigation and correspondence with other States, prepare the requisite bill for legislative consideration. After much labor, the following, as subsequently amended, was presented to the legislature at its session in '71.

STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE.

IN THE YEAR OF OUR LORD ONE THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED AND
SEVENTY-ONE.

An act in relation to the Penal Institutions.

_Be it enacted by the Senate and House of
Representatives in General Court convened:_