VISIT TO THE EASTERN PENITENTIARY.

417

CHAPTER XXXII.

Visit to the Eastern Penitentiary of Philadelphia.-Statistics of Crime among its Inmates.-Chief Sources of Crime, Ignorance and Intemperance.-English Origin of the Pennsylvania System.-Prisons of Gloucester, Glasgow, and Philadelphia.-English, Prussian, Belgian, and French Testimony.-Report of Mr. Crawford on the Penitentiary System.Objections answered by American Authorities.-Report to the State Legislature of Pennsylvania.-Corrupt Picture of Society ten Years ago.Contrast of present Tranquillity and Order.—Superior Morality of the City of Philadelphia.-Public Discussion of the Subject in Massachusetts.--Opinions of the Legislature of Ohio.-Questions of Religious Instruction in Prisons.-Defects of this at Auburn and Singsing.-Superiority of this at the Philadelphia Prison.-Advantages of voluntary over coerced Reform.-Opinion of Mr. Surgeon, an English Writer-Question of comparative Expense in the Systems.-Disadvantages of Prisoners' Intercourse at Auburn-Advantages of Prisoners' Seclusion at Philadelphia.Concluding Testimonies of De Tocqueville and Crawford.

OUR last visit to any of the public institutions of Philadelphia was to the Eastern Penitentiary, where we were accompanied by Mr. Nicholas Biddle, and met by Mr. Wood, the warden, and Mr. Bradford and Mr. Bacon, two members of the board of inspectors. Our former visit had been made with Mr. Matthew Carey; and a general description of the building and the discipline of the establishment has been given in a former page. But on this second visit we had an opportunity of bestowing a more deliberate examination, of visiting several of the prisoners in their cells, of conversing freely with them alone, and of having all our inquiries frankly answered by the inspectors and warden, who took the deepest interest in showing us all we desired to see, and explaining to us all we wished to understand; and we spared no pains to make the most of these advantages, as there is, perhaps, no subject on which it is more important to the interests of humanity to have correct views extensively circulated, than in that of ascertaining what are the chief causes of crime, and what are the best modes for its prevention and cure.

The distinct manner in which, in this and in almost all other prisons, the commission of crime can be traced to two predominant causes, ignorance and intemperance, is a circumstance of the highest value in directing the attention of legislators and philanthropists to the proper remedies for the evil, education and sobriety.

Of those that remained in the penitentiary in 1837, the following was the condition on the two points named: VOL. I.-3 G

The opinions of the warden himself, whose age, experience, intelligence, and official situation give the highest weight to his testimony, are thus powerfully expressed on this subject:

"Important as it is to possess a good penal code and prison discipline, it is even more essential that our youth be so trained and educated as to fit them for useful members of society. If this subject were properly attended to, I believe the number of criminals in this highlyfavoured country would be very small indeed. A close personal observation of all the prisoners who have been admitted into this Penitentiary (675), convinces me that, with few exceptions, they were an ignorant and much-neglected part of the community-thrust into society without school-learning; without moral training, or scarcely any idea of religion; without habits of industry, or trades to qualify them to gain an honest livelihood-can it be wondered that, sooner or later, they become offenders against the laws, and the unhappy inmates of a prison? No class is so entirely neglected as our coloured population, and we accordingly find a large comparative number of this class among the convicted."

The distinguishing feature of the discipline observed in the Penitentiary of Philadelphia is, that each prisoner is confined in a separate cell, and furnished with labour to perform alone, out of the sight and hearing of any of his criminal companions. This is called the Separate System, in contradistinction to the plan observed at Auburn and Singsing in the State of New-York, where the mode pursued is called the Silent System, from the circumstance of the prisoners working in company with each other, but being strictly forbidden, under severe penalties, to utter a single word. At the first introduction of this Separate System into America, a strong prejudice existed against its adoption, and even now the opposition is far from being withdrawn, though it is lessening in its force every year. It is thought by many to be of American origin, but this is an error, though it has certainly been brought to greater perfection in Philadelphia than elsewhere. It is of English birth, as is shown by the Second Report of the Inspectors of Prisons for the Home District in England, addressed to Lord John Russell as secretary of state for the Home Department, under date of April, 1837, in which they say,

"The system originated in England in the year 1790, and was first enforced in the county-jail at Gloucester. For some time previous, that

THE SEPARATE SYSTEM.

419

distinguished magistrate, Sir George Paul, had been associated with Sir William Blackstone and Mr. Howard in devising a plan for a National Penitentiary; and the Separate System, as introduced at Gloucester, was adopted, as imbodying the views which these eminent men entertained of the most efficient system for the management of prisoners. The building was provided with separate cells. Prisoners were confined individually apart, day and night, from the hour of their admission to that of their discharge. Those committed for short periods were not provided with employment, while convicts sentenced for longer terms were furnished with labour. Moral and religious instruction was administered in the cell as well as in the chapel. The discipline was enforced at Gloucester for a period of 17 years, and surpassed the most sanguine hopes of its enlightened founder. During this period few, if any, convicts were subjected to a second punishment. As population, however, advanced, the numbers committed so greatly increased beyond the means of separate accommodation, that the discipline was necessarily broken in upon, and at length superseded. The beneficial effects of the system were exhibited, however, up to the period of its being abandoned, by the number of recommitments proceeding almost exclusively from that class who were confined in association.

"But although, from the circumstances stated, separation could no longer be carried into effect at Gloucester, the labours of Sir George Paul proved the practicability and excellence of the discipline; and in the year 1824, when the magistrates of Glasgow reconstructed the Bridewell of that city, they determined to adopt the Separate System. Since that period the plan has been in full operation at this prison. The prisoners have sustained no injury in regard to their health; and the best effects have resulted, in deterring offenders sentenced for lengthened terms. It has, in fact, been found, that the longer the detention, the more beneficial has been the discipline; and if we had no other evidence than that furnished by the experience of the Glasgow Bridewell for a period of thirteen years, we should be justified in pronouncing the plan of separation to be safe and efficacious.

"It was not likely that the advantages of the system, so strikingly exhibited at Glasgow, should be overlooked by the friends to the improvement of prison discipline in the United States. In the State of Pennsylvania, where the subject has been long regarded with deep interest, several enlightened and benevolent characters warnily advocated the superiority of separation. In Pennsylvania the punishment of death is rare, and transportation is unknown. Penitentiary imprisonment for life is the secondary punishment; and, in the case of the more heinous offences, it is rigorously enforced. The introduction of the Separate System was, therefore, the more strongly opposed; and loud were the complaints of its cruelty and predictions of its danger. The most searching inquiries were accordingly instituted with reference to its character and effects. The result of these investigations was the adoption of the system.

"The Eastern Penitentiary, erected in Philadelphia on the principle of individual separation, was opened in 1829 for the reception of prisoners. The admirable construction and management of this Penitentiary are too well known to justify us in entering into any detailed description of its government; nor shall we advert farther to its discipline, except to state that it affords irrefragable proofs that individual separation can be enforced for lengthened periods with perfect safety to the mind and health.

"There are prisoners who have now been in this Penitentiary for years, during the whole of which period they have been confined alone

in their cell, day and night, and cut off from all intercourse with the world and with their fellow-prisoners; the solitude being mitigated solely by employment, and the visits of the prison-officers and others authorized to inspect the Penitentiary. And what is the result? It appears that of twenty-six prisoners who have been in confinement for three years and upward, all are apparently improved, rather than otherwise, in mind, and decidedly better in bodily health than when they entered the prison; while, in the opinion of those most competent to judge on such a subject, the deterring influence of the discipline has had a powerful effect in preventing crime."

The opinion of the warden of the Philadelphia Penitentiary, Mr. Wood, is in exact accordance with that of the English inspectors quoted above, as to the effects of the discipline in deterring from the commission of crime, and this, of course, is one of its most important ends; for in the last report of the warden, after the financial statement connected with the prison, he says:

"The pecuniary affairs of the Penitentiary never exhibited so favourable a result, notwithstanding the very high price of all kinds of provision, as appears from the settlement of our accounts to the 31st of December last, a statement of which the clerk has prepared for transmission to the proper authorities to be audited and settled.

"Satisfactory as our financial condition appears, we have, I conceive, much higher reason to rejoice at the happy influence produced on the minds and habits of many who have been inmates of this institution, as evinced by their good conduct and industrious habits since their discharge. Some of them we have known and watched for several years; and, although a few have returned, yet the greater part have shown a decided disposition to improve the salutary lesson given here. The result has been, thus far, such as not only to compensate the sacrifices incurred for the purpose of carrying the system into complete operation, but to encourage us to persevere in the good work; which affords, as I confidently believe, the most efficient means which human intelligence has yet devised, or human efforts can probably accomplish, of protecting the novice in crime from contamination by the more hardened and depraved, and of reforming, at the same time, a large proportion of both these classes of offenders."

Besides the testimony furnished by the English inspectors of prisons to the excellence of this system, intelligent foreigners of the highest character add their suffrages also in its favour. In 1834, the Prussian government, ever foremost, to its honour be it said, in legislative measures for promoting education and abating crime, sent out a distinguished jurist and excellent man, Dr. Julius, to make inves tigations into the prison-discipline of the United States; and, after bestowing the most careful attention on the subject in all its details, and visiting the several establishments in which the different plans of the Silent System and the Separate System prevailed, though he came out strongly in favour of the former, he ended in being convinced of the superiority

of the latter, as he thus expresses himself in a letter addressed to the inspectors of English prisons before named:

"Such are the arguments by which I am led to adopt with you the plan of separate confinement by day and night, in preference to the Silent System with night-cells, wherever a new prison is erected for convicts or for prisoners before trial, a class who ought to be more carefully preserved from contamination than even convicts. These arguments are the result of my observations in America, and of my subsequent researches; and, although I went to the New World with a strong bias for the Silent System, yet, after having seen both plans, I must say that I fully concur in the sentiments expressed in the following letter from my friend, the Rev. Charles R. Demmé, the respected minister of the German Church at Philadelphia. This gentleman, in adverting to the first establishment of the Eastern Penitentiary, observes:

"I then thought that the necessarily attendant evils of this system would be an impaired constitution, brutal insensibility and lethargy, or incessant anxiety, gradually settling down to gloomy dejection and melancholy; and that, if the prisoner should be aroused from that state, resentment, malignity, and feelings of revenge on society would be evinced by a repetition of the offence, or the commission of other crimeş of still greater moral turpitude. I watched, therefore, with deep solicitude, the progress of the building, and willingly would I have assisted in taking down every stone, and considered such a task a work of benevolence. When the system had been in operation for about six months, I was requested to speak to one of the prisoners, a German, who asserted his innocence of the crime for which he was sentenced. I went, but with reluctance. Since that time I have been to the prison repeatedly, and, as every opportunity was afforded me of doing so, I conversed with many of the prisoners. I have, consequently, become better acquainted with the principles of the institution and the effects which it has produced: these communications have changed my sentiments, and I have since learned to regard the Penitentiary as an institution suggested by the most enlightened and active benevolence, and calculated to produce the happiest results on the moral character and condition of society.'

The Belgian government, also taking an interest in this question, sent its inspector-general of prisons, Monsieur Ducpétiaux, to England and Scotland, where, after examining the Bridewell of Glasgow, he became so convinced of the superiority of the Separate System to every other that had yet been tried, that he induced the Belgian government to adopt it in the principal prisons of that country.

The two distinguished French travellers, Messrs. Beaumont and De Tocqueville, whose opinions on any subject connected with legislation and jurisprudence are entitled to the highest weight, also made the subject of prison discipline one of careful examination, and they speak of the Separate System pursued at Pennsylvania in the following terms:

"In Philadelphia, the moral situation in which the convicts are placed is eminently calculated to facilitate their reformation. We have more than once remarked the serious turn which the ideas of the prisoners in the Penitentiary take. We have seen convicts there whose levity had