..':^j.;:-J^tl.-i.'*i
?.;.^';..:».^*.kw:^






,vfti i  •«!'';r'.|.






--   ;•••fl.*;\,:<-f.t:«t> u
:■■■•;•■}■;'.•'{«#■
 ..  .<••■! j^ifi ».:i,
I 

RY OF MEDICINE   NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE  N
ATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICIN
                         LIBRARY OF MEDICINE  NATIONAL LIBRAR





















man ivnoiivn   3Ni3iajw jo Aivaan ivnoiivn  jnisiosw jo Aavaau ivnoiivn
ARY OF  MEDICINE
RY OF MEDICINE   NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE  NATIONAL LIBR
'1)811 1VNOILVN   3NI3IQ3W JO A a V a a II IVNOIIVN  3NI3I03W JO AaVRail IVNOIIVN
IY OF MEDICINE   NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE  NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINI
van ivnoiivn   snoiojw jo Asv.au ivnoiivn jnisiojw jo n.yitn ivnoiivn
F
UOy-
 

IVN 1NI3I0IWIOIIUII1 IVNOIIVN INIJigiNIO UVItll IVNOIIVN 3NI3I03WJO;

























INE NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE NATIONAL IllUIr OF MEDICINE NATIONAL LIBI


























IVN INDI01W JO UVIII1 IVNOIIVN 1NI3I0IW JO A a V « « I 1 IVNOIIVN iNOIOiw JO A

•«^

I -^
! V
%


INE NATIONAL LIBRAIT OF MEDICINE NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE NATIONAL LIB!
\^
jpm^
VN 1NI3IQIW JO UVIII1 IVNOUVN INI3I0IW JO 1IVIII1 IVNOIIVN INOIOIW JO A

























NE NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE NATIONAL LIBR

N IN 13 I03W JO A«V«ail IVNOIIVN INOIOIW JO ARVIBIl IVNOIIVN INI3I03WJOA


Li
INE NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE NATIONAL LIBR
VN INI3I0 W JO ARVRBI1 IVNOIIVN I N I }I0 IN 10 1IVII I MVNOI1V N 1NI3I0IWJOAI
F ^
J  Ag 1 VN I /^
\^>\<

NE NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE NATIONAL LIBR
PQ
tor
»N INI3IQ IN JO A»V»«M IVNOIIVN ! N I 3 I 0 3 W J O A « V « B I 1 T V N O I I V N I N I 3 I 0 I W J O A 1 
 
AN
            ESSAY








SEPAEATE AND  CONGREGATE SYSTEMS




                 OF





      PRISON DISCIPLINE;









            \ REPORT
MADF TO
THE BOSTON PRISON DISCIPLINE SOCIETY,
S . G .  HOWE.
•»L;

         BOSTON:




WILLIAM D. TICKNOR AND COMPANY.




           1846. 
H25S&
a 
PREFACE.
   The following pamphlet was written under peculiar circumstan-
ces, which should be understood by those who  may  have  the pa-
tience to read it.  They will then  be ready to make due allow-
ance for its want of artistic arrangement, and for some of the other
imperfections.   They will see that  my own  course of conduct
with regard to the Prison Discipline Society has not  been guided
by any feeling of hostility toward it, or any sentiment inconsis-
tent with kindness to its  Secretary.  They will  find,  moreover,
what they never have been able to find  in the  Reports of our
Boston Prison Discipline  Society, a discussion of the merits  and
advantages of the Pennsylvania system of Prison Discipline.
   I  have been  a member of the Boston  Society  during many
years.  For a long  time  I supposed that  perfect reliance could be
placed upon the statements and  opinions put forth in its Reports ;
consequently, I was a believer in the  great  superiority of the  Au-
burn system of Prison Discipline.  But several causes  led me to
doubt whether  I  was following a sure guide.   The  spirit of our
Reports was so  partial, the praises of the Auburn system were so
warm, and  the  censure of the  Pennsylvania prisons was so se-
vere, that one could not help suspecting the existence of violent
party feeling.  It seemed  most extraordinary that so many wise
and  good  men  in a sister State  should uphold  a system of which
not one word of  praise could ever be found in our  Reports.  A
personal  inspection of the  principal  prisons  in the United States,
and reflection upon the subject, afterwards convinced  me that very
little reliance could  be placed upon  those Reports, cither for facts
or doctrines. 
IV
  My attention being once  called to the subject, its vast impor-
tance soon  became apparent.   The number of human beings
yearly committed to prison in civilized countries is so vast that its
statement would  appear incredible to any  but legal  gentlemen.
Thousands of these are very young; thousands are women ;*tens
and  hundreds of  thousands  are arrested, for the first [time, by the
hand of justice, in their career of crime, and  their temporal and
spiritual welfare must depend very much  upon whether that justice
is tempered with  mercy and guided  by wisdom, or meted out in
the spirit which demands an  eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.
In many  Christian  and civilized  communities, even] of  our  own
country, the prison  is the first and only school provided by  gov-
ernment  which thousands of its hapless subjects ever enter ;  how
important, then, is the question, whether  it is a school of  virtue'or
a school of vice !
  When  a government seizes  upon a person, especially if he[be
young, and deprives him of  all liberty of action, it assumes at once
the offices, and incurs the responsibilities, of a parent and guardian.
How fearful, then, is the  thought, that many governments do, in
fact, administer their trust in such wise as would  condemn an
individual parent  to infamy !  The dungeon,  the  fetter, and  the
scaffold are their common awards, and their tender mercy is only
to prolong the bodily existence of their victims, by herding them
together in loathsome dens, where is engendered  an atmosphere
of crime and  depravity which extinguishes  the life of the soul;
and all this without any view to the good of the prisoner.
  In those countries where the citizens have no part or  lot in the
government, they  may wash their hands of this wrong; but here,
where we boast that our rulers are our servants, and their acts the
expression  of our will, how  shall we  answer for the treatment of
our fallen brothers ? for, even here, many prisons  are'moral pest-
houses, and  the best are conducted mainly with a view to getting
the greatest amount of work out of the convicts.   There is not a
prison in this wide land where any thing like sufficient provision is
made for the moral and religious  instruction and training of those
whom the law forcibly holds under its guardianship.  There is not
a prison where their capacities for improvement and reformation
are  duly cultivated ; not one where  wrong  is not done  to their
spiritual natures.   I became convinced of this  by  observation and
reflection, notwithstanding the  flattering  unction  administered to 
V
our Society by its Secretary, that in the Auburn prison, which he
recommended as a model, every thing was done which could with
propriety be done for the prisoner.
  Finding  that the system and the prisons which  our Reports so
warmly advocated and highly lauded  fell far  short  of what the
prisoner needed  and had  a right  to demand, I examined those
which it so unsparingly denounced, and could  not resist the con-
clusion, that  they were more sound in principle and more humane
in practice.  I wished to induce others to examine the  subject ; but
the bitter partisan spirit in which  the Reports of our Society were
written forbade  the  hope of seeing upon  its pages (and there was
no other publication  of the kind in New England) any arguments
or any facts which went to show  the superiority of the Pennsylva-
nia over the Auburn system, or which would even show the  former
to be worthy of  any consideration.
   I conscientiously believed that those Reports  were upholding the
worst system, thereby standing in the  way of improvement, and
working evil to the  cause  of  Prison Reform.  I  was  then  a
member of the Massachusetts legislature, and when the bill came
up, in Is43,  for making the usual grant for the purchase and dis-
tribution of the Annual Reports of our  Society, I used all  the in-
fluence I could exert to oppose it.   The  bill did not pass.  This
was construed into an act of hostility, on my part, to the Society ;
but, in truth, I did not love  the  Society  less, — I only loved the
good of the  prisoner more ; my sole  motive  was to prevent the
spread of error.  I did not wish  the broad seal of the State to be
used to give currency to false doctrines.  I did not  wish  to vote
away the public money to be used for carrying on a pamphlet war
upon what I  began  to think was  the best system of Prison Disci-
pline then  in operation.
   I afterwards strove  in various ways  to awaken some interest  in
the subject, and  to bring the merits of the Pennsylvania system be-
fore the public.   At that time I had no  personal acquaintance with
a single individual connected with the government of the Pennsylva-
nia prisons, but I knew them to be  gentlemen high in the  opinion
of their community, and I thought that they and their labors had
been misrepresented in  our Reports.   I  thought  that the course
which our  Society had been led by the  Secretary to adopt was un-
courteous and unjust, and  I so expressed myself to him repeatedly.
Still the same conduct was pursued, and, previously to the  last an- 
VI
nual  meeting, the Secretary went about charging the Directors of
the Eastern Penitentiary of Pennsylvania with wilful misrepresen-
tation.   At the annual meeting, in May, 1845, this charge was
publicly and solemnly brought before  a thronged audience, with
the aggravating  addition,  that  the  wilful misrepresentation was
made for the purpose of upholding a  system of cruelty.  If this
charge came not immediately from the Secretary, it was not de-
nied that it was made at his instance, and  in reliance  upon his rep-
resentations.   The gentleman who made it is neither unkind nor
uncourteous.
   After an animated discussion, a resolution was offered for the ap-
pointment of a committee,  " with instructions to inquire whether
any modifications  of the Secretary's Report were necessary, pre-
vious to its publication ;  and that the same committee be author-
ized in  the name of the Society to request permission to examine
the Philadelphia and  other  prisons, and to incorporate a report of
their proceedings in the Annual Report  of this Society."  The res-
olution was adopted by the Society, and a committee  appointed, of
which I was chairman.  The object of the resolution  was not only
to bring  the whole subject before the Society, but  also to pass in
review  the Reports of the Secretary,  to  examine their partisan
character, and  their unfairness  to the  Pennsylvania system ; and
in performing their duty, the committee could not avoid a sort of
verdict upon his official conduct.  Nevertheless, to my surprise, he
was not  only placed upon the  committee,  but persisted  in attend-
ing its deliberations,  and  by his vote  made  the Report which I
drew  up a minority report.
   That  Report was written in  the spirit of independent criticism,
and therefore  seemed very  severe ;  it treated the Reports of our
Society  precisely as though they had been the Reports of a society
in some distant part of the world ; it did not  question the motives
of our Secretary, but it did review his official  conduct, make  ques-
tion  of  his judgment, criticize his  statements, and  disprove his
conclusions.  The  majority of the  committee, consisting of Mr.
Dwight, the  Secretary, Mr. Eliot, the Treasurer, and  Messrs. Big-
elow and Channing, not only disapproved  the draught of the Re-
port, but pronounced  it unjust  to the Secretary and suicidal to the
Society.  I was willing to  have every  line of that Report submit-
ted to the severest scrutiny ; I still  maintain that it was just and
true  in  every particular;  nevertheless,  as  I wished to have a Re- 
Vll
port in which the majority of tho committeo would agree, I con-
sented to prepare a new one, and to confine myself as much as
possible to the general merits of the  great questions at issue.
   When  the second  draught of a  Report was submitted to the
committee, it found  but  little  more favor at the  hands of the
majority than the first  had.  It was in vain that we of the minority
urged that we alone should  be held  responsible for its statements,
and requested that it might be published.  A counter Report had
been prepared by Dr. Channing, and approved by the majority, and
it  was maintained that a minority report had no legal existence.
   We would gladly have  had both Reports spread upon the pages
of the Society's  Journal, but the  Secretary insisted that there was
no authority to  do this; — that the words of  the  resolution (by
which the committee was created),  " to incorporate the result of
their proceedings with the Annual Report of the Society,'" did not
mean to print with the Annual Report.
   I had very good  reason to suppose that such was the meaning,
having prepared the  resolution  myself, but was  overruled.   The
year passed away without our being able to procure the  publication
of our Report, and at last the whole matter came before the Society
at a business meeting in May, 1846,  and it was
   " Voted, that  the Reports of the  majority and minority of the
committee be referred to  the Board of Managers, with  directions
to cause them to be printed as soon as the funds necessary for the
purpose are placed at their disposal."
   At the business meeting of the Society, May 25, 1846, Mr. Sum-
ner offered the following resolution :  —
   " Voted, that the Reports of the committees appointed at the last
annual meeting,  now  on  file, be  taken from the  file,  and  incor-
porated with  the Annual  Report of the Society, in pursuance of
the vote of the Society under which the  committee acted."
   This was sustained by only one vote  besides that  of the mover,
and was negatived, 8 to 2.
   Thus it was determined that our statements and opinions favora-
ble to the Pennsylvania system should  not have the advantage of
appearing in the Annual Report, which  teemed with those adverse
to  it.
   Moreover,  I was  forced to conclude  that the  vote to  print our
Report whenever the necessary funds were procured was equiva-
lent to a decision not to  print  at all, because  the  income of the 
Vlll
Society is large, because there is money enough to print much
matter about lunatic asylums and other  subjects  foreign  to  the
strict business of the Society, and because, whenever the Secretary
appeals to the Society for any favorite measure of his own, the
money is always forthcoming.
  I was further confirmed in the opinion, that it was not desired to
give publicity to any opinions adverse to those of the Secretary, by
the extraordinary course  pursued by that officer at the late annual
meeting.  All the attempts of my friends and myself to obtain a fair
hearing for the merits of the Pennsylvania  system through  the
pages of our Journal having  been defeated by action and by inac-
tion, it was supposed we  might make ourselves heard at the public
anniversary meeting.  On the day before the anniversary, there-
fore, the Society, at its business meeting, consisting of ten persons
only, upon motion of Mr. Nathaniel Willis,
   Voted, that it was not expedient to  discuss the subject at  the
anniversary meeting.
  Notwithstanding this vote, Mr. Sumner obtained the floor at  the
annual meeting, and proceeded to speak,  when the Secretary tried
to stop him, and cried out, " Mr. President, the annual meeting was
interrupted in this  manner last year; there are gentlemen present
who are invited by the Committee of Arrangements  to  address
us----" *  But here he was silenced by Dr. Wayland, the presiding
officer, who maintained Mr. Sumner's right to the floor.  He pro-
ceeded to show how the Reports of the Society had lost the confi-
dence of the friends of Prison  Discipline  abroad  by their partisan
character, and urged the Society to come  back to its proper ground
of neutrality, and to admit free discussions of all  systems.
  Nevertheless, the anniversary  passed  over, and no  vote was
taken to explain or apologize for the rudeness to the Directors of
the Eastern Penitentiary of Pennsylvania; and no resolution was
adopted for admitting full discussion upon the pages of the Society's
publications.  Mr. Charles Sumner did, indeed, succeed in procur-
ing the appointment of a new committee with precisely the same
powers and objects as that of the last year ; — that is, a committee
  *  The editor of the " Law Reporter," commenting upon this remarkable
fragment of a  speech, says  it  would seem that the addresses at the public
meetings of this Society are all cut and dried beforehand, a fact that might as
well have been kept back, under the circumstances, for the credit of all con-
cerned. — Law Reporter, July, 1846, p. IK 
I\
 was appointed  in  May, 1846, to do what the committeo of 1845
 had not done  acceptably.  The composition  of this committeo is
 remarkable in several respects.
   First, parliamentary  usage required  that Mr. Charles Sumner,
 who moved the resolution, should be chairman ;  but, instead of that,
 Mr. Bradford Sumner, one of the warmest of the Secretary's party,
 was put at the  head of the committee.
   Next, parliamentary usaiie required that a majority of the com-
 mittee should be composed of persons known to  be favorable to the
 object of the  resolution; but,  instead of that,  the majority were
 known to be unfavorable.
   Further, not only parliamentary usage, but common impartiality,
 indicated that the Secretary, whose official management was called
 in question, should  not  be on the committee; but nevertheless he
 was placed there.*
   It appeared to me, that, after such inaction and one-sided action, I
 was justified in concluding that  those who  managed the Society
 would never allow the merits of the Pennsylvania svstem to be set
 forth upon the  pages of its Reports.  It seemed that I was mistaken
 in supposing that the Society ought not to be the pledged  advocate
 of any system,  but should set forth all that was good in  each one ;
 for it had been  pledged  by a formal vote to uphold the Auburn sys-
 tem ; it had opened the pages of its Reports to all that could be said
 against the Pennsylvania system;  and it had virtually refused to
 print my Report, which contained what  could be said in favor of
 that system. Therefore, believing that Report to contain many truths
 which would be new and useful to the Society, Messrs. Charles Sum-
ner, Horace Mann, and  myself, resolved to print it ourselves.
  I accordingly applied  to the Secretary for tho manuscript; when,
to my utter astonishment, I  was told, in a written communication,
 that I should not have it.
  This extraordinary refusal to print the document, or to  let us
print it, placed  us in an unpleasant dilemma; I had  no copy of it,
— and the  only alternative seemed to be, to give up the  thought of
publishing  it, or to bring an  action at law for the  recovery of what
I considered to  be my property.   After  several  attempts  to over-
  *  I have not tho slightest suspicion of any intentional unfairness on thr
part of the President, who made the appointments.

                b 
X
 come  the difficulty, it was decided  to let me have a copy of my
 own manuscript.
   I then learned  the reason of the refusal to give up the original,
 and, even if I were not sustained by the  high character of Messrs.
 Mann [and  Sumner, who were associated with me, I  should not
 hesitate to make  it public.  It was the fear and belief avowed by
 the Secretary, that we should remove the objectionable parts of the
 manuscript, and then  print it  as the  document which  the  Society
 refused to print;  thus attempting to throw odium upon the Society
 by a mean  and dastardly trick.  I did not for a moment feel that
 any disgrace attached to me from being so suspected; I hope none
 may ever attach to me from unjustly suspecting others.
   Having  at last got possession of a copy  of my manuscript, I
 caused  it to be  printed, and it would have been published before,
 had it not been for the absence of the Secretary from the country.
 He is about to return, and can take what notice of it he sees fit.
   As my  Report was never  accepted by  the Managers of the
 Society, and as my manuscript was not in such a  state as to go
 to press without careful revision, I was perhaps not obliged to print
 from it literatim.
   That manuscript was hastily written, amid other cares and duties.
 I expected, of course, to revise and correct it  as  it went  through
 the press.  I should have materially altered many forms of expres-
 sion.  I  should have tried to  condense, simplify, and improve its
 style ;  every man who writes  a report under such circumstances
 has a right so to do.
   But, in view of  the peculiar circumstances of the case, I have
 chosen  to  forego  those advantages.   The copy of  my  original
 manuscript which the  Secretary sent to  me  was  badly made,
 but the printers have followed it except where a slight change was
 necessary for making the sense clear.  The form of a few expres-
sions has been modified, and  two or three immaterial sentences
 have been added for greater perspicuity.
   The only material alteration has been the omission of a sentence
or two respecting the Secretary, and the final resolution which
was proposed; they expressed what  was  my  conscientious belief
at the time they were written ;  their existence  in the  original cer-
tainly could have  formed  no  objection to  its publication.  In all
other respects, what follows is in form and substance the document
 which I  wrote in discharge of a duty  imposed by the Society. 
XI
  It will be seen  that the Report does not assume that the prisons
of Pennsylvania are perfect, or that they are even the best in the
world ;  it merely compares  the two great systems  now before the
country, usually known as the Auburn System and the Pennsylva-
nia System, and shows the vast superiority of the latter.
  If the hope (humbly entertained), that it may in some way pro-
mote the improvement of prisons and the good of prisoners, should
be gratified, my object will be fully obtained.
  For obvious reasons, I wished it  to appear where it would  have
been in place, in the Annual Report of the Society ; but since that
cannot  be, I offer it to the friends of Prison Discipline with all  its
imperfections on its  head.   I would fain  give to it all the favor
which  it may deserve,  by  stating  that  my colleagues,  Messrs.
Horace  Mann and Charles  Sumner, who examined the  subject
carefully, did and do still concur with the doctrines and statements
which it contains.
                                               S. G.  HOWE. 
 
REPOnT.
   To the Members of the Prison  Discipline Society.

Gentlemen : —
   It will be remembered that at the last annual meeting the
Secretary offered, as usual, a  manuscript to be adopted as
the Report of the Society, and read from it certain extracts.
   Such was the tenor of these extracts, that a public discus-
sion ensued, in which  the Pennsylvania system of prison
discipline was denounced as an inhuman system supported
by misrepresentation.   Some gentlemen protested against
the seventy of the denunciation ;  upon which, the last Re-
port of  the  Eastern Penitentiary  at Philadelphia was  pro-
duced, and  appealed to as a proof that the Directors of that
prison  had intentionally misrepresented  facts to  support
their  system.   Subsequently to this unpleasant scene, the
following resolution was  adopted : —
   '•Resolved,  That the  manuscript [of the  Secretary] be
committed  to  a committee,  with  instructions to inquire
whether any modification of the same be neeessary previous
to its publication ; and that the committee be authorized, in
the name of the Society, to request permission to examine
the Philadelphia and other prisons,  and to  incorporate  a re-
port of their proceedings in  the Annual Report of the So-
ciety." *

   * The committee consisted of S.  G. Howe, S. A. Eliot, Charles Sum-
ner, Horace Mann, Walter Channing, Louis Dwight, the Secretary of the
Society, and  G. T. Bigelow, by whom the charge was made, all of Uos-
                 1 
2
   The committee so appointed, after having had the sub-
ject many months under consideration,  report as follows.
   In pursuance  of  the Resolution, they  first examined
the  manuscript Report submitted by the Secretary.  Sec-
ond,  they endeavoured to  ascertain  whether there was
any ground for the  grave charge against  the Directors of
the  Eastern Penitentiary of  Pennsylvania.   In  making
these inquiries, and in considering the proper modifications
of the Report of the Secretary, they were  led, in the third
place, to a review of the course of the  Society, and to en-
deavour to set  forth some of the  considerations suggested
by their visit to the Eastern Penitentiary of Pennsylvania,
and  by other researches, in favor of the system which has
been the subject of such severe animadversion.
   I. In  fulfilment of  the first part  of  the  duty, we have
read the manuscript of the Secretary, and  suggested such
modification of its language as would diminish the asperity
of its remarks  respecting the Philadelphia prison, without,
however, interposing so far as to assume any responsibility
for the  statements or opinions, because  that, after all, must
rest upon the Secretary.
   II. With  regard to  the second part of our labors, — the
examination of the charge of intentional misrepresentation
on the part of the Directors of the Eastern  Penitentiary, —
we hesitate not to say that it arose  from misapprehension,
and  is groundless.   We believe those persons to be disin-
terested and honorable gentlemen, and worthy fellow-labor-
ers of the worthiest men  who  have ever  labored  for the
common cause of prison discipline in New England.
  It is, indeed, to be regretted that their last Annual  Report
contained some loose and unexplained statements ;  and it is
not surprising that persons who had not read their  Report
of 1844, and did not understand how their tables of recom-
mittals are made up,  should have been  perplexed and mis-
led by reading them.   But it is equally  to be regretted that

ton, and Judge Edmonds of New York, who, however, has never acted
with the committee. 
3
a more charitable spirit did not pervade the criticisms so
publicly made,  and that those  who intended to bring the
charge of misrepresentation had not  first written to Phila-
delphia for an explanation.
  The charge, as we  said, arose from a misunderstanding;
the existence of which shows how important it is that those
who write or speak publicly about prison discipline should
be familiar with all that is published upon the subject in all
languages.   It appears  that a charge of falsification of the
record respecting recommittals,  similar to the one  made at
our annual meeting, was brought against the Report of the
Eastern Penitentiary of Pennsylvania, in the Revue de Le-
gislation, published in  Paris, in March, Is 11 ; but it was
immediately and satisfactorily refuted by M. Moreau Chris-
tophe. Inspector-General of Prisons in  France.   He gave
precisely the same explanation  which occurred  to  us, and
the same which the Directors of  the  Penitentiary gave to
us when we applied to them.   His impartiality, and his fa-
miliarity with the different modes of  calculating recommit-
tals, enabled him at once to see the truth.*
  It is not our  duty or wish to explain or defend  the Re-
port in question, any farther than to show  that the charge
of falsehood brought against the authors of  it is groundless.
But, from whatever  motive the  charge was made, your
committee are sure that the Society will be ready to do all
in its power to atone for any wrone which may have been
done to the character  of the Directors of the Eastern Peni-
tentiary by any proceeding at its annual meeting.  It owes
this not only to those  gentlemen, but  to  its  own self-re-
spect and sense of justice.f

  * Beaumont and De Tocqueville, in  their gTeat work on the prisons of
this country, show that they could not  havr so misunderstood the Phila-
delphia Report.  They say (page 72), — " In general, those recommittals
only, which bring back the prisoner to the prison where he was first confin-
ed, are calculated in the J'nitcd Statis.'"
  t The charge above alluded to was brought at the public annual meet-
ing of the Society, in  Park  Street Church, before a vast audience.  It 
4
  III.  This leads us  to  the third  and most extensive
part of our labors; namely,  the  inquiries with regard  to
the alleged inhumanity of the Pennsylvania system, open-
ing, as it does, a review of the course of our Society with
regard to it.
  In pursuance of the resolution under which the Commit-
tee  was appointed, four of them visited  the  Eastern Peni-
tentiary of Pennsylvania in October last,  and  two others
have  since inspected it.  We were  received with a hearty
welcome, and treated with great  kindness and  hospitality.
Every part of the prison was thrown  open to us ; and we
were  permitted, and  even invited, to go into the cells  and
talk alone with the prisoners.   The books were offered for
our inspection,  and every question  respecting committals,
statistics of health, insanity,  expense, &c, was answered
promptly and satisfactorily.
  We found the prison in good  order, and  the prisoners'
rooms, we can hardly call them cells, neat  and comfort-
able.   It is known that each  convict is  kept  in a room
by  himself, during the whole time of  his  imprisonment.
These rooms, which are plastered and neatly whitewashed,
are  warmed by tubes containing hot water, and well light-
ed by a window.   Each one is provided with a  neat water-
closet, with a  bed that turns up against  the wall, a chair
and table, and the loom,  shoe-bench, or tools required by
the handicraft at which the prisoner works.   Some prison-
ers  add a shelf or two for books, a looking-glass, and other
little  articles of furniture which increase their comfort;  and
the women, in the arrangement of their rooms, show the

was such as to affect not  only the official, but the personal, character of
gentlemen who at home are justly regarded as among  the most virtuous
philanthropists of the country.  They have labored for  years, without
remuneration,  for the improvement of prisons ; and it must  have been
grievous to their friends to hear them accused of wilful  misrepresentation
for the purpose of upholding an inhuman system.  The charge was  delib-
erately made, and reiterated ; and we regret to say that another annual
meeting of our Society has passed over without any retraction or apology
having been offered. 
rudiments of that taste which, when fully developed, adorns
and beautifies the world. *
  The rooms upon the lower floor have one door opening
into the common corridor,  and another opening out into a
small yard, to which the  prisoner has  access every day.
Each yard opens into the large space between the wings of
the bunding, where are extensive garden plats, cultivated by
those convicts whose health requires  much exercise in the
open air.   Some of  the small yards  had been  cultivated
during the summer as flower-beds;  and one  poor fellow
had  gathered peaches enough from a  tree planted by him-
self  to enable him  to send one as a present to each officer
and  each  female prisoner.   We mention this as a touching
proof of the  good effect of this  humanizing employment.
While this man was tending  his little  tree, he  was culti-
vating  in his own heart feelings which bore their fruit of
love, and deposited in it the  seeds of kindlier virtues than
had ever  taken  root there before.
   The prisoners were clean, and well clad, and  seemed to
 have been well fed.  They  were quiet and respectful in
 their behaviour, and generally had the look of subdued and
 penitent  men.   They  seemed glad  to  see us, especially
 when we repeated the visit, as this showed that  we felt an
 interest in their condition.  They conversed rationally and
 calmly, and though our interviews with some  were  long,
 we could  not discover any feeling of bitterness against any
 one.  They all wished  for more society than they enjoyed,
 but all agreed  that the companionship of other convicts
 would be injurious to them.
   We could not perceive any feebleness of intellect, nor any
 peculiarity in this  respect that seemed at all general.   We
 propose to speak more at  length  afterward about the mor-
 tality and insanity;  but we may remark here, that tin; pris-
  *The rooms are 11 feet 9 inches long, 7 feet 6 inches wide, and 16 feet
6 inches high in the centre of the arched ceiling; the small  yards arc 15
feet long by 8 feet wide, surrounded by a wall 11 feet high. 
6
oners generally spoke of their treatment in terms of satis-
faction, and sometimes of gratitude.   In our private  inter-
views  with them, they spoke of their  keepers  in a kindly
spirit.
   The  testimony of prisoners in favor of their keepers is
less  liable  to  suspicion than complaint against them,  be-
cause men so situated are more likely to affect a sense of
wrong than a sense of gratitude; nevertheless, the  testi-
mony is to be taken with  caution, because  some  convicts
will  say whatever they suppose to be most agreeable to the
visiter, or that may put their case in a  good  light, or what-
ever, if repeated to their officers, may serve some particular
purpose.  After making allowance for  these  disturbing for-
ces, the testimony of the prisoners in Philadelphia convinc-
ed us that they were generally treated  with great kindness.
   Some of your committee have visited several penitentia-
ries upon the Auburn system,  and have  gathered from va-
rious sources all  the information they could upon the sub-
ject of prison discipline.  They have examined  the Reports
of the commissioners who have been sent  to this country
from abroad to visit our  prisons; they have carefully read
the writings and the speeches  of many eminent men who
have recently been brought forward by the discussions  in
France, Germany, and England ; they have found that a
vast  mass  of  philosophical, practical,  and  statistical evi-
dence has been adduced  in support of  the principles of the
Pennsylvania  system; and that the current of European
opinion is setting strongly in favor of it.
   Finding, therefore, that the result of our  own  examina-
tion and reflection is confirmed by such high authority, we
feel compelled to urge upon this Society a candid review of
the grounds of its past course of condemnation  of that sys-
tem, and a prudent  consideration of its  future one.   Our
Society was formed  for the purpose of improving prisons,
and promoting the reformation and welfare of  their unfor-
tunate inmates.   It employs an agent  whose sole  business
it should be to visit prisons, to collect  information respect- 
ing the modes of prison discipline from all  quarters, and
to embody it in an annual report.
   The agent, or Secretary, is de facto the Society.  He acts
for it, speaks for it, and directs its whole policy.   The So-
ciety was not meant to be,  and ought not  to be, made an
<; Auburn System Society/' as it is sometimes  called  in
Europe ; nor the pledged advocate of any one system, as it
is considered by many in  this country; but its business
should be to gather facts which show the merits and demer-
its of all systems, and  to spread them before the public.
   The Annual Reports, nineteen in number, contain a vast
mass of information respecting the prisons  of this country,
which is particularly valuable as showing the favorable side
of the Auburn system.  If there  had been  as much impar-
tiality as there has been hearty zeal  and untiring labor  in
their  composition,  they  would have been more valuable
still.   They have been stereotyped and scattered over the
country  in great numbers,  and have formed and directed
the public opinion  of Now England upon the  subject of
prison discipline.  We venture to say that few  of the So-
ciety read  other documents upon the subject, and that
many will be surprised by learning that the statements and
opinions therein given are denied and controverted by not
a  few intelligent men in the United States  (out of  New
England), and by an overwhelming majority  of  those who
have given attention to the  subject in the various countries
of Europe.
*   It is known to the Society that two rival systems of pris-
on discipline have been presented to the world, called the
Pennsylvania system, and the Auburn system.
   Now, although, as we shall show hereafter, the only dif-
ference in principle between the  two is that the first aims
at entire separation of each prisoner from  all his compan-
ions in crime, while the second stops short, and is content
with  partial separation;  nevertheless, the dispute between
the friends of the two systems, like quarrels  between rela-
tives, has been all the  warmer because the  ground between 
8
the disputants was so narrow.   This dispute waxed unduly
warm and grew into a quarrel, in which thoughts begotten
of  bitterness were  clothed  in  words  of unkindness, hard
names were called, bad motives were imputed, and recrimi-
nation followed upon crimination, until the  great object of
each, the good of the prisoner, seemed in danger of being
forgotten.  One of the worst effects of this dispute is, that
what seemed to be stubborn facts have become as pliable as
theories;  and statistics, apparently  inflexible  in their  na-
ture, have, like iron, been fiercely beaten upon by the ham-
mers of the disputants, until they seem quite malleable, and
are bent this way or that,  as the  last blow comes from one
or the other party.
  We  question not the motives of either  party; we trust
that the advocates of each have tried to be honest,  accord-
ing to their respective standards;  but it is  unfortunate that
our Society, or  rather  its ^Secretary, should  have taken
either  side in  this  controversy.  It should have acted as
umpire, and opened the pages of its Reports  to the calm
discussion of the merits and demerits of each system.
  Instead of this, the  zeal  and  activity of the Secretary,
supported as they have been by his official connection with
the Society,* which enabled him to devote his whole time
to the subject,  have made him the  great  champion of his
side.
  In the very first Report, published in  1S26,  when as yet
the whole subject  was comparatively in  its   infancy,  he
said, with extraordinary assurance, in  speaking of a certain
plan, — " With this plan of building, and the system  of disci-
  * Out Society numbers among its members some of the most eminent
and able men in the country, but we believe that very few, if any, of them
take any active part in the inspection of prisons or collection of informa-
tion. They seem to think that the wisest course is to leave the actual
business of the Society to an able agent, to whom they pay a liberal, but
not extravagant, salary.  We believe we hazard little in saying that the
vast majority of them form their opinions respecting the merits of prisons
from his Reports. 
9
pline and instruction introduced at Auburn, the great evils
of the Penitentiary system are remedied.  Here, then, is ex-
hibited, what Europe and America have been long waiting
to see. a Prison which may be made a model of imitation." '*
Doubtless, this seemed at the time to be plausible ; but ex-
perience has proved it to be as unreasonable as it would be
in our day to suppose that our railroads are the perfection of
all modes of locomotion, and to  propose them as  a  final
model for the world.  In the same  Report the following lan-
guage was  used : — ,; What  could with propriety be done
for criminals which is not done at Auburn ?  They are. from
necessity, temperate and frugal in their diet: they are busily
employed in some useful business from morning till night;
they are  kept  in perfect subordination, and provided richly
with the means of knowledge  and  of grace,  which  may
make them wise  to salvation."!   Again, our Report  said,
— ': It is hardly necessary to add. that at Auburn there is an
exclusion of all the positive evils of  the old system, which
arise from crowded night rooms, evil communication,"' &c.|
   The ground taken thus early has  been maintained  with
extraordinary  pertinacity ever since.
   The Phdadelphia Penitentiary was then in the course of
construction, and the Second Report of our Society set forth
in favorable array the objections to it.
   The Third Report returned to the  charge, for the twofold
  • First Report of the Boston Prison Discipline Society, 1826, p. 38.
  f Ibid., p. 37. —Those who are familiar with the history of the Now
York prisons will, when thinking of the dreadful abuses which have existed
and do still exist in them, see  how poorly the spirit of party can play the
part of prophecy. Even at this moment the blood of a prisoner is crying from
the ground for vengeance upon officers of Auburn, who arc awaiting trial
for his murder, perpetrated by excessive use of the means by which he was
" kept in perfect subordination."  The reckless and abandoned lives of the
majority of those who have left the prison, after  having so many years
been  " provided richly with the means of knowledge and of grace which
may make  them wise to salvation,"  form an  unhappy commentary upon
the latter part of the prediction.
  % Ibid.
                 2 
10
purpose " of confirming  the  argument  of  our last Report
against the plan of building, and the principle of prison dis-
cipline for which  it was designed, and of contributing all
in our power to prevent the adoption of a system which we
should so  much deprecate." *
   If these remarks were intended to apply to the system of
solitary confinement without labor, there would be less ob-
jection to them ; but our Report says distinctly, — "In re-
gard to labor, it is not yet decided whether it shall  be intro-
duced  or  not."!   Labor  was introduced,  but the tone of
our Reports has never been changed.
   To those who are familiar with the beautiful order, neat-
ness, and  perfect  quiet which prevails  in the Philadelphia
Penitentiary, the following passage, which was given in our
Third Report as the valuable remarks of a practical man, will
sound very strangely: — "By these arrangements, the fami-
ly of the  keeper or warden is literally subjected to impris-
onment, surrounded by impervious walls  and  immovable
grates, and can only enjoy the unobstructed light of heaven
by groping  their way through a passage better fitted for an
entrance into a subterranean catacomb than to the residence
of a civilized  and Christian family.  Yet all this is a trifling
matter, when  compared with the horrors of a hospital with-
in the walls of a family dwelling, where the shrieks of the
insane and the groans of  the dying are mingled  with the
yells and curses of abandoned and profligate  female  con-
victs in adjacent apartments." %
   Notwithstanding all  this, the Philadelphia  Penitentiary
was completed and occupied in  1829.  It was organized
upon the principle of separation of the convicts ; each pris-
oner having a cell to himself, in which he worked by day,
and slept by night.
   During several years, little knowledge  could be gained
 about the operation of the  system; and little was said about
* Third Annual Report, p. 42.
! Second Report, p. 76.
\ Third Report, pp. 43, 44. 
11
it in our Reports until 1S3-1. when, in a few words, the ob-
jections to the system were set forth without any comment.
  The Report  of lS3/> shows evident hostility to it ; and
in ls3fi. when its friends were growing more confident of
its success, our Secretary declared that he was " almost sick
of the experiment ;  it tails  so much in health, in reforma-
tion, in earnings, and in moral and  religious instruction.*' "
  In  1S.N. as  though to wed this Society for over to  our
system, the following resolution was offered at  the annual
meeting, and passed : — - Resolved. That this Society de-
rives great encouragement toperser/ ranrr. in its efforts to in-
trndure the system it has uniformly recommended, by the
facts which experience  has  developed in relation to Prison
discipline."!   Ever since that vote, our Reports  have la-
bored  to  set forth the  advantages of the  Auburn system,
and the disadvantages  of the Pennsylvania  system, and,
unfortunately, it has  been done in a way  to annoy and of-
fend the honest advocates of the latter, and to fix upon our
Society the name of  the Auburn System Society.
  We do not  propose  to justify, or even to discuss, the
mode in -which  the friends of the  separate system  have re-
pelled the  attacks upon their favorite prison, any more
than  the attacks themselves ; but  we  are forced  to say,
in  the discharge of our duty, that  our  Reports have not
given  the  Society or the public the means of fairly judg-
ing between the two.
  We have carefully searched the Reports since 1s3S, and
have  not found a line of unqualified praise of any feature
of  the  Pennsylvania system.   It is remarkable  that  five
foreign governments have sent commissions to this country
to examine  the two  systems : that four of them  have re-
porter! warmly  and decidedly in  favor  of the  Pennsylva-
nia system, and only one of them, cautiously and qualified-
  *  Annual Report, 1836, p. 40.
  f  Annual Report, 1838, p. 1.  This resolution was oiTered by Mr. S.
A. Eliot.  The words are not Italicized in the original. 
12
 ly, in  favor of  the Auburn  system ;  and  yet  the argu-
 ments and statements of the four former have never been
 even noticed in our Journal, while the Report of the latter
 was spread at full length upon its pages.
   A most striking proof of the one-sided  character of  our
 Journal is found in the fact, that, though it spoke of  the
 labors of the foreign commissioners, when they were here,
 it never informed  its  readers that any of them had pro-
 nounced in favor of the Pennsylvania system, except in  the
 case of the commissioners from Lower Canada.  This was
 done in the  Tenth Report,  in a paragraph  of  six  lines.*
 Two years afterwards, in our Twelfth Report, we have  the
 following : — " New Penitentiary in Lower Canada.  We
 publish the following notice a little out  of order, because it
 is so much to the purpose in this  place.   It was  mentioned
 in the Tenth Report of this Society, that the commissioners
 appointed by this province on the subject  had reported in
 favor of the Pennsylvania  system.   This report has since
 been  reversed  by a special committee of parliament, who
 have reported in favor of the Auburn system.  They come
 to this result for,the following reasons."!  The Secretary
 then  gives an  abstract of  the document, which he after-
 wards publishes at full length  in an appendix.^
   Thus it seems that  the facts and the arguments adduced
 by the  commissioners  who examined both  prisons  upon
 the spot were not worthy of notice, because they were in
 favor of the Pennsylvania system ;  but  that  when a legis-
lative committee, in their  private room, for  political eco-
 nomical, or  other considerations, without  examining the
 prisons, make a report in favor of  the  Auburn system then
all  they say becomes important, and must  be reprinted in
 our Journal,  though " a little out of order, because it is so
much to the purpose.'"
   There is another striking proof of the partiality of our
* See Tenth Report, p. 27.
1 Twelfth Report, p. 55.
X Ibid., pp. 94 - 97. 
13
Report, m  summing  up the evidence  in favor of the Au-
burn  system.   The opinions of Mr. Ceorge  Combe ' and
Mr. Charles Dickens are adduced ;  five whole pages of the
Journal are taken up with the pathetic remarks of the lat-
ter, which are all addressed to the  feelings, and  not to the
understanding.   Now, if Mr.  Charles  Dickens's  preference
for the  Auburn system was worthy of so large a space in
our Journal, — if his  opinion was  worth any thing, were
not the opinions of such travellers and personal observers
as  Miss Martineau, Captain  Hamilton, Captain  Marryatt,
Dr. Reed.  Dr.  Cox, Dr.  Hoby. Mr. Buckingham, M. Abdy.
all of whom wrote favorably about the Pennsylvania pris-
on, — were not  their opinions worthy at least of being re-
corded ?   We sav nothing of  the  writings  of Professor
Lieber, by far the ablest and most  philosophical of any liv-
ing American writer on prison discipline, — or of Miss
Dix.  bv far the most active and indefatigable prison visiter
in the United States ; although both of these persons have
borne their testimony in favor of the Pennsylvania system ;
and their testimony is of high authority everywhere but in
our Journal.!
   Thus we think we have shown that  our  Reports have
for many years been drawn up in the spirit of the resolu-
tion passed by the Society in 1S3S. "to persevere in  its ef-
forts to introduce the system it has uniformly recommend-
ed."  and  that no merit has been  allowed to exist in any
other.  This we believe to be unwise and unjust.   If the
system which the Society espoused was really the best,
then the more fully and fairly the  merits of the other were
discussed, the  more  certainly would it appear inferior, and
the more speedily be abandoned by its supporters.  On the
other hand, if the Society by possibility was in error, then

   * We can hardly trust ourselves  to speak of the manner in which the
extracts are made from Mr. Combe's book.
   ■f- We fear that those of our Society who confine their reading to its
Reports are  not familiar with the extraordinary and benevolent labors of
this noble woman. 
14
 it incurred the awful responsibility of using its vast  influ-
 ence to hide the merits  and prevent the adoption of the
 system  of prison discipline which is best adapted to  the
 temporal and  spiritual welfare  of the poor  convicts.  At
 any rate, the  partisan  character which  our  Reports  have
 acquired is,  as we believe, most unfortunate, and we doubt
 not that it will one day be regretted even by  the Secretary
 himself.  Our Society  is not regarded as a high and disin-
 terested tribunal that tries the merits of all prisons, and its
 Reports are not considered as sources of impartial evidence
 respecting the Pennsylvania system.
   We speak not of the  opinions and the writings of the ad-
 vocates of that system in this country, — for some of them,
 too, are often liable to the imputation of bitter partisan spirit,
 — but of the more impartial authorities abroad.  We  have
 been  mortified to find that  some of the most respectable of
 them do not seem to consider our Reports as authority for
 the decision  of the question at issue, and that some openly
 charge them with unfairness.  This  ought not to be; and
 it would not  have been, if the members of the Society  gen-
 erally had been  made  acquainted with  both sides of the
 great  question at issue.
   Error has always  a  prolific progeny;  and one serious
 consequence  of the partisan character of our Reports is, that
 the general principles of prison discipline are overlooked or
 violated, in the anxiety to prove the inferiority of a partic-
 ular prison.  The real  or supposed short-comings of the
 Pennsylvania prison have been thought sufficient  reasons
 for condemning the whole system, of  which that prison is
 but one exponent.
   It seems to have been forgotten, that a prison upon the
 best system may be so badly managed as to be intolerable,
 while another upon an  inferior system may be so well ad-
 ministered by a man of great capacity as to be  admirable.
 If it could be proved that every charge brought in  our Re-
port against the Pennsylvania Eastern  Penitentiary is true,
if it  could be shown  that the Auburn  prison  has been 
                           I")

superior to it in all respects, still it would  not  affect  the
value of the  great principle on which the former is found-
ed, namely,  entire  separation of the  convicts from  each,
other.
   That principle has never, that we can find, been fairly
considered in our  Reports;  we feel bound,  therefore, to
take a wider view, to overlook all petty disputes about the
superiority of this or that prison in mere matters of admin-
istration, and to  consider the fundamental principle which
should govern us in the construction and administration of
all prisons.   If it be objected, that, in doing so. we deal too
much in theoretical reasoning and not enough with facts, we
reply, first, that the  excellence of a prison depends upon the
principle of its admiiiistration being in accordance with the
principles of human nature, as modified by the usual life of
convicts ; and second, that the whole  subject is compara-
tively new, and  the statistics as  yet collected are 'of com-
paratively little value.
   Or, if it excite surprise that we should arrive at conclu-
sions so different from those which  one would  form  from
reading the Reports of our Society, we can only say, that, if
we  are conscious of ever having had any prejudice upon
the  subject, it was certainly in  favor of the  Auburn  sys-
tem, before we  had visited any  prisons upon the separate
system, and  before  we had given any special study to the
great questions  at issue.
   With these remarks, we proceed to notice briefly the his-
tory of prison discipline in this  country.  We shall, how-
ever, spare  the  Society a detailed account of the  horrible
condition of prisons as they existed here  before the reform,
and as they now exist in parts of the country to which  that
reform has not yet reached!   We shall only say, in general
terms, that they were the loathsome sesspools into which
were  thrown all that was foul and corrupt, with  all  that
was tending or suspected  of tending to corruption.  Then;
the  old and  the young, the novice in guilt and the veteran
 in crime,  the mere vagrant  and the highway robber, the 
16
heedless trespasser and the deliberate murderer, were herd-
ed together in close  and dirty rooms, and were left with-
out employment, without instruction, without even the de-
cencies of life, until from the festering mass there were en-
gendered crimes such as of old  drew down the vengeful
fire from heaven.
  The evil at  last became insupportable by the advancing
humanity of the time, and  good men went  resolutely to
work to remove it.  Pennsylvania led the way in the work
of reform, and the Philadelphia Society for the Alleviation
of the Miseries of Prisons * led  the way in Pennsylvania.
The great source of  evil was universally acknowledged to
be, as Howard and  others  had  pronounced it, " the cor-
rupting influence of prisoners upon each other."   The ob-
vious remedy seemed to  be separation.
  The reform was begun in the Walnut Street prison  in
Philadelphia, which had been a pandemonium, made more
hideous by the use of rum, which the keepers sold to the
convicts.  Separation and labor  were  introduced, and  an
immense improvement was the consequence.
  But the reform was delayed by the division of its friends
into  two parties; one of which,  though the smaller, advo-
cated the principle  of solitary confinement without  labor,
and succeeded in having the Western Penitentiary, at Pitts-
burg, organized  upon this plan.   They  even procured a
temporary act of the legislature, directing that the Eastern
Penitentiary should  be organized on the same  plan; but
they were ultimately obliged to yield to the force of  truth,
and the new penitentiary never was permitted to make this
rash experiment.
  Meantime New York followed close upon  her  sister
State in the generous strife  for reform.  Solitary confine-
ment without labor was then deemed to be the panacea for
all the evils of prisons, and  the plan was tried at Auburn,
in 1822, upon eighty convicts.   Prisons were also  organ-
* Instituted in 1787. 
17
ized upon  this plan  in  Maine, in  Virginia, and  in  New
Jersey.   But though  the experiment was tried  under the
most  unfavorable  circumstances, and the prisoners'  cells
were  such as no humane  man would use as cages for wild
beasts, still enough was seen to prove  that the principle
was wrong.  The prisoners became idiots, or maniacs, or
corpses.
   New York abandoned the principle of solitary confine-
ment without labor, and brought the prisoners together in
workshops and  in the eating-rooms by day, while  they
were  confined in separate cells by night.  The value of the
principle of separation, however, was still recognized, and
a discipline was introduced which aimed at  prevention of
all intercourse between the prisoners.  Other  States follow-
ed the example, and prisons were organized upon this plan
of maintaining a  certain degree of separation of the con-
victs.
   Pennsylvania, though abandoning the plan of solitary
confinement without  labor, still clung to the soundness of
the principle of entire  separation of the  convicts  from
each  other, and aimed to carry out  thoroughly what New
York  and other  States carried out but partially.   The
Eastern Penitentiary  at  Philadelphia was organized so as
to combine the advantages of the  Pittsburg and Auburn
prisons.    The men  were kept separate by day and by
night, as  in the  first, and they were employed  at some
handicraft work,  as in the second,—with  this important
difference, however, that each man worked in his cell, and
never saw the face of another prisoner.   Such is the Penn-
sylvania system.
   It will be seen  that the difference between  the  two is,
that one  attempts to do  partially  what the other at-
tempts to do thoroi  ghlv.  The Au burn system stops short
of complete separation,  daunted by the  expense and other
difficulties of effecting it;  the  Pennsylvania  system boldly
carries it out fully, upon the ground, that, if partial sep-
                3 
18
aration of a  convict  from his vicious  associates  be good,
then a total separation must be better.
   It would hardly  seem possible that two  systems appar-
ently differing so little should  be  considered as opposed to
each other, and  that a party should be  formed to  advocate
each with so much zeal and  even bitterness.  Such  has
been the case, however; and it has arisen from the  fact, that
the loudest partisans of each attacked the modes of admin-
istration of the other, as if that affected the  principle.
   There is one great  fact,  however, which to the  unpreju-
diced eye  must  be clear.  The advocates  of the Auburn
system  have ever,  not in words, but in  practice, acknowl-
edged the  soundness of the Pennsylvania principle of sep-
aration ; for,  though they bring their prisoners together dur-
ing the day-time, they try  to maintain a moral separation
by an enforced silence, and non-intercourse  through signs,
and all the details of their  discipline are  adapted especially
to this end.
   It should be remembered  that New York and  Pennsyl-
vania both abandoned the old principle of solitary confine-
ment without labor, for two  reasons, — first, on account of
the evils of idleness, — second, on account of the  cravings
of the social  nature for companionship; both remedied the
first evil  completely  by supplying labor.   New York at-
tempted to remedy the second evil by giving the convicts a
partial society among themselves;  Pennsylvania, by  giving
them the  society of virtuous people only.
   However,  we  will  not  lose  time in  trying  to  show to
others what  is now perfectly clear  to us, that  the Auburn
system is only a partial and imperfect Pennsylvania sys-
tem ;  but since the  public is firmly persuaded that  they  dif-
fer essentially, and as they do indeed differ  in the mode of
administration, we shall consider the effect of each mode.
   It is necessary, however, in this,  as in all  discussions, to
have  clear and  precise ideas of what we talk  about, and
names to express those ideas.  Besides, inappropriate names
have been, and still are, the source of misapprehension and 
10
prejudice on  this very subject.   We are not satisfied with
the names usually attached to either  system, and though
we cannot  hope to change them in the public  acceptance,
we may do so with some readers who  have the patience to
follow us.
   The Auburn  system is practised in many parts of  the
world; it did not even originate in Auburn, and that name
is  therefore inappropriate.  It is sometimes called the Silent
system;  but  it is not silent, as the din and noise of any
prison workshop shows.  It is not a Social system, as some
call it. if it effects what it proposes, non-intercourse among
the prisoners.   Its peculiar  feature is. that the men  are
brought together to labor  daily in companies.   We  might,
therefore, call it the (In various or the  Congregate system ;
but as the  former, though perhaps most appropriate, might
be offensive,  we shall use the latter.
   The Pennsylvania system is not peculiar to that  State ;
it  did not originate there, and the name is therefore inex-
pressive  and  incorrect.   It  is not a solitary system ;  soli-
tude is not aimed at; but, on the contrary, the social  na-
ture of the convicts is gratified every day more than under
the Congregate  system, as we shall  hereafter show.  It is
solitary with respect to the vicious, social with respect to
the virtuous.   It is an unjust misnomer, therefore, to  per-
sist in affixing to it a name which its friends repel as inju-
rious.  Its peculiar and leading feature is separation, be-
cause its principle and practice are to separate the convicts
from each  other: we shall therefore  call  it the Separate
system.
   We  have shown that in principle the two differ but little,
but in practice the difference may be immense; as moder-
ate drinking  and total abstinence may be  in one sense the:
same, but in  the prevention of drunkenness how different!
We hold this comparison to be strictly appropriate.   Mutu-
al  contamination is the  great evil to be cured ; — the Con-
gregate  system  aims to cure by moderate indulgence in
bad  company;  the Separate system, by total abstinence
from bad company. 
20
   With these preliminary remarks respecting principles, we
 shall now consider them as applied practically in prisons.
   The principal  objects  of imprisonment are, — First,
 To secure the person of the  offender, and  thereby prevent
 him from  committing  depredations on society.   Second,
 To show  in  the  prisoner an  example  of such  severity
 of suffering consequent upon crime, as  will  prevent  him
 and  others from  committing it.   Third,  To reform the
 convicts, and  discharge  them better men  than they were
 before.
   1.  The first object, security of the person of the con-
 vict, can  be at least  as effectually gained  under  the  Sep-
 arate  as the Congregate system.   There  has been but one
 escape from   the Philadelphia Penitentiary since it was
 commenced.   But it is  more important to consider which
 system presents the least temptation to try to  escape, and
 which prevents it by the least objectionable means.
  Under the  Separate system, well enforced, there can be
 no cornbined effort  for revolt and escape ;  the men do not
 see each other, — do not hear each other;  each one is in a
 cell by himself, and if he gets out of it, he cannot get the
 other prisoners out of theirs.
  Under the Congregate system,  there is constant tempta-
 tion  to  revolt, because  the  men are  made conscious of
 their strength  by being together  often with  deadly weap-
 ons in their hands, and guarded by a few officers.   Revolts
 have been  not unfrequent  under  this system.  This very
 year witnessed a  partial one  in  the House of Correction
 at South  Boston, a prison not  exceeded  by any in the
 world, perhaps, for the strictness of its  discipline.   A gang
 of men, armed with their working tools, broke away and
 threw themselves into the dock ; and but for the great  pres-
 ence of mind  and activity of the  superintendent, who hap-
 pened to be near, some of them might have escaped in boats.
Not long ago, it is said, even the  female convicts at  Sing
 Sing revolted, disarmed the sentinel  upon duty, and pitch-
ed him out of  a window.  They were driven back to  their 
21
cells only at the point of the bayonet.'   But not to multi-
ply cases of  revolt, let us ask which  system tends to pre-
vent them by the least objectionable means.
  The  Separate system  takes away the power of combina-
tion; it opposes  its walls and grates to the attempts  of
the convict at escape.   These walls and bars restrain, but
do not irritate  by seeming to watch and sus{)ect him.   He
does not personify them, and make them objects of ill-will
and hatred.   His  keepers, having  little fear of his escape,
need not appear to watch him. and, not seeming to be the
immediate obstacle in the way of his escaj>e, are less liable
to be regarded with ill-will on that account.
  The  Congregate system brings  the men together daily,
and furnishes  the temptation  to combination ;  to prevent
which,  the officers are obliged to watch, restrain, and  pun-
ish.  The men, therefore, see in the persons of their officers
the immediate  obstacles to combination or  escape.  They
perceive that they are watched and suspected ;  therefore, if
they are conscious of innocence, they feel wronged by this
suspicion ;  if they are  conscious of evil  design,  they are
irritated; and in either case, the feeling towards the officer
will be  of  a nature to  check the growth of that confidence
and good-will which  are so desirable for a reformation.
This is not mere fancy:  and it  is  not  the  less  real be-
cause some officers in Congregate prisons do gain the confi-
dence and affection of the convicts.   Such  men would ac-
complish more without the disadvantage alluded to.   That
part, then, of the discipline by which the first object,  secu-

  * We  desire to present this Report to  the public as it was offered to
the  Society, otherwise we should omit this passage, and substitute some
other example of revolt in the ("oncn!_cite prisons. The " pitching out of
the window " may have been an embellishment in the account which wo
quoted from.  We have found the Report of the Inspectors, and they say,
— " They [the female convicts] refused to work ; they assaulted the keep-
er, threatened the lives of the matrons, tore off their clothing, disarmed a
guard, and set all regulation and order at defiance," &c., &c. — State of
New York, Senate Doc. No. 20.  Report of the Inspectors of Mt.  Pleas-
ant  (Sing Sing) State Prison, Dec. 1813, p. 30. 
22
rity of the prisoners, is effected under the  Separate system,
seems preferable to that by which  the  same is effected un-
der the Congregate system.
   2.  The second  object of imprisonment is  to deter of-
fenders from the commission of crime.  Let us see which
system seems best adapted to effect it.   We do not believe
that  men who  are  likely to  become  criminals are often
deterred  from crime by fear of the consequences, espe-
cially if  those consequences are doubtful;  or, when  cer-
tain,  if they  are  not immediate, visible, and  tangible.
Countries which have  the bloodiest  codes of laws are not
the most  free from crime, but often  the contrary.   There
are seductions in the path of crime, which to the virtuous
seem repulsive.   Sometimes the mere love of  excitement
tempts the adventurous and the  bold, and
                " If the path be dangerous  known,
                 The danger's self is lure  alone."
It is a mistake to  suppose  that  pure selfishness  is  the
only  incentive to  crime.   The same  spirit  which  makes
the  soldier seek the  "bubble reputation i'  the  cannon's
mouth"  sometimes  makes the  criminal brave the prison
jaws  and  the gallows noose.*
   Nevertheless,  the fear of imprisonment has  its effects,
and they  should be considered with regard to two  classes
  * Captain Maconochie, late superintendent of Norfolk Island, and who
writes more in the spirit of sound philosophy than any man, practically
acquainted with criminals, whose work we have read, and  whose  experi-
ence has been long and intimate, says, — " It is supposed that the fear of
suffering can alone operate as a caution.  But, from mueh experience in
dealing with prisoners, I know that the criminally disposed are rather
stimulated than deterred by  such threats.  They think, that, even if de-
tected, they will be able to endure or evade them : they are prepared, at
least, to try; they are half captivated, in some cases, by the visions of adven-
ture and deception connected with the attempt; and even, on the contrary,
when rather scared, the taunts of their companions engage them to pro-
ceed, in disregard of this.  No one who does not know prisoners well can
be aware how much this is the history of nearly all their minds, in the
course of their descent." 
23
of men; — first, those who are entering  upon a career  of
crime, and have never been convicted; and second, incor-
rigible offenders.   The  first class, as we  know, is compos-
ed of the young, uneducated, and unreflecting.   Such per-
sons have not the  habit or the power  to look at things in
the abstract: they do not reflect upon the horror of impris-
onment  ; but they must  have something in the concrete,—
an actual prison, with its existing privations and sufferings;
— these they can understand.   Let us suppose, that, out of
the six  thousand visiters to the Charlestown  prison last
year, fifty were men who were conscious  that  their  own
course of life subjected them to the danger of becoming in-
mates;— who  came for the purpose of knowing what the
prison really was. — or  to  see an acquaintance who had
been more unlucky than themselves, and had been caught.
They examine  every thing closely : they see  that the  con-
victs are  in full health,  busily working  at cleanly and
healthy  occupations, in large and comfortable shops;  they
see them  take  their full  allowance of bread and meat and
go into  a small but  clean and  comfortable cell to eat  their
meals.   It is very likely that some of  them would say,—
:; Well! after all. this is not so very dreadful! There 's my
old crony, Tom. or Bill, fat and hearty;  he has plenty to
eat, good clothing and lodging, and plenty of company !  If
worst comes to worst. I  can bear it as well as he can."  On
the other  hand, suppose such men are led by curiosity to
visit the Philadelphia prison.   They pass  its gloomy por-
tals, and  walk up  and  down  the long  stone galleries  to
which all visiters are admitted.  On each side are the low
iron doors that  secure the cells, and hide the prisoners  from
the view.    From some  there  comes no sound ;  the; dread
stillness may, for aught the visiter knows, be that of death.
From another cell  is heard a faint noise  of a hammer or a
shuttle ; and it may be  that there is shut up  in it a feeble,
pallid wretch, worn out  with labor, solitude, and suffering.
  We believe that the same principles which operate in the
human  mind, and  make executions in the privacy of the 
24
jail-yard more effectual  in preventing crime than those in
the public square, make the mysterious fate of the convict
committed to a Separate-system prison more dreaded than
the more certainly known amount of suffering of one who
is committed to a Congregate  prison.
   As for the second  class, old offenders, it is well known
there is nothing so much dreaded by them as separation
from  their comrades in guilt.   All their  associations have
been  with criminals, — all their sympathies are  with  them,
— and their companionship is the only solace left to them
for the loss of the world's esteem,—their only refuge from
despair.  They generally dread the thought of being forced
into the company of the good.
   All who are acquainted with the history of the peniten-
tiary system in  this country will recollect, that, when the
Auburn system, with  its immense advantages over the old
prisons, was advocated and introduced, there was the most
abundant evidence  offered to show that the convicts would
have preferred to be whole  years  in  the  old prisons, with
all the abominations consequent upon  free communication,
to being as many months  in  the  new prison, with  its si-
lence, and its  practical  separation.*   Now, it seems  to us
clear, that, if convicts dread the partial  separation of the
Congregate system, they must dread still  more the perfect
separation of the Separate system.
   In  order to judge fairly of this mode  of reasoning, the
reader must bear in mind that the same  motives which
would influence him in the selection of a prison would not be
likely to influence an  old offender.  He would shrink from
the companionship  of, the  bodily  contact with, criminals,
into which he would be daily  forced under the Congregate
system, and would prefer the seclusion from other prisoners
and from the public eye, which he would  find under the
  *  We could offer the most satisfactory evidence on this point, and also
of the greater dread which convicts who have been both in Auburn and
Philadelphia express of the latter. 
25
Separate system.   But  so would not  the  class of  men
whom we are considering.
  In speaking of making an example of men, in order to
deter  others  from crime, we do  not pronounce upon the
morality of the practice, but only as actually being one ob-
ject of imprisonment.   Most certainly, however, those who
maintain the right of society so to make use of a man will
admit  that it should be done in such a way as least to in-
jure the moral nature of the victim.   Now,  the Congre-
gate system, by  exposing the prisoner  to the  gaze of the
public, and to  the daily  sight and companionship  of hun-
dreds of convicts, breaks  down his self-respect (false though
it may be), mortifies his pride, and makes him less inclined
to reform than the Separate system, which shuts him up
from every eye but that  of the virtuous and good.
   The second  object, then, of imprisonment, to deter oth-
ers from crime, imperfectly as it  may be effected under the
Sejiarate system, is still  more imperfectly accomplished by
the Congregate system, the discipline of which is more in-
jurious, morally,  to the prisoner.
   3.  We now come to the third and most important object
of imprisonment,—the reformation of the  prisoner,—
an object which we fear  has never yet been attained in any
satisfactory degree in any prison, under any system.   Many
persons who are  well acquainted with the subject are quite
skeptical about the possibility of reforming any considera-
ble proportion of adult criminals,  and this skepticism is but
too well justified by  the past history of prisons ; we have,
however, the immeasurable  future before  us,  and, with a
conviction of the almost limitless power of the human in-
tellect, when directed by human love, we may hope against
past hope.   Let it be borne in mind, that, long as this sub-
ject has occupied  public attention, great as has been the
amount of intellect brought to bear upon it, and vast as has
been the capital expended to improve prisons,  the main ob-
ject has ever been to secure the interest of  the state, to de-
fend the property of society, and to punish those who com-
                 4 
26
mitted depredations upon it.   The interest of the prisoners
has ever been a secondary object, except where the individ-
ual influence of good  men was felt.   It  is only recently,
and in a few cases, that love for the prisoners has tempered
the execution of the  sentence of justice ; and such has
been the effect of this  new influence, that it is easy to per-
ceive  that all that has hitherto been done for them will be
as nothing, compared to what  can be done.
   The convict should  be made to feel that his reformation
is one object of his imprisonment, and that it  is not over-
looked in the regulations of his prison ; when he enters, he
should  see  the word  hope  written  over  the  portal, and
while he stays, he should hear the words courage and reso-
lution on every side.
   The discipline of the prison should aim at his reformation,
—first, by  cutting him off from companionship with his
guilty companions ; second, by inducing habits of sober in-
dustry ; third, by giving him the companionship of good
men whom he can learn to love and imitate, of good books,
and of good thoughts ;  fourth, by allowing him to exercise
his good resolutions and strengthen  his conscience by the
greatest freedom of action, and the  most perfect self-con-
trol that is consistent with his safe keeping.
   Before considering how these various means of reforma-
tion are carried out in  the two systems now under consid-
eration, we  shall remark, in  general, — that  that  system
of prison  discipline is  the  best, which, other  things being
equal,  is, first,  the  simplest in its nature, and can be ad-
ministered by ordinary persons, and  is least dependent up-
on the  individual character of its officers ; second, which
appeals most to the  moral sense and the affections of the
prisoner, and least to  his fear and selfishness ; and third,
which allows the greatest  adaptation of  its  discipline  to
the different characters of its subjects. 
27
 Which System is simplest, and can be most easily admin-
        istered by Persons of ordinary Character ?
   Which of the  two systems best  fulfils the first requisite
will be seen by a little attention to its daily discipline, es-
pecially with a view to what  both  systems aim at, the pre-
vention of communication among  the convicts.   We have
seen the  importance of this  principle  of separation.   We
have seen that both systems aim  to carry it out, and we
need not dwell upon it here.
   Let  us see how the two systems try to effect it.   The
Congregate system separates the convicts entirely by night.
There is  a building constructed especially with a view to
packing men in  the least possible space, consistent with
their separation by walls.  It is constructed  as compactly
as bees construct  their comb.   Into each one of the cells
a convict  squeezes himself at sunset,  and lies down  in  a
bed as narrow as his coffin;  and  though all around him,
as close as the dead in a well filled graveyard, lie his com-
panions in guilt and in punishment, he must be still as the
dead, and make no sign, for the  officers  are ever going
about,  with cat-like tread, in their stocking-feet, and have
their ears  erect, to catch the faintest sound.   In  the night,
then, the isolation of the convict may be effected very well.
At  sunrise,  the doors are all  unclosed, and,  at a signal, the
men step out upon the platform, all facing one way.  At  a
second  signal, they  close up  and form a line, the  breast of
each in close contact  with  the back of the person  before
him ; consequently, the mouth of one  within six inches of
the ear of another.  At a third  signal, they beat time with
the foot, and then march with slow  and steady tramp across
the yard and into  the  workshops.  Hero they are marshal-
led into their seats, arranged  in parallel  lines, all facing one
way, and commence their daily task.  They work together,
sitting  almost in contact, but they must not speak ; they can
see each other, but must not look at each other; they can
hear each  other sigh, and even breathe, but they must make 
28
no intelligible sound, and give no sign of sympathy, of feel-
ing, or community of thought;  for the restless eye of the
officer is upon  them, and punishment will follow, if they
forget for a moment that they are machines, and suppose
they are social beings.
  This separation and  silence,  however, can be effected
only in a few shops, such as those of tailors or shoemakers;
the others, those  of brushmakers, cabinetmakers, &c, pre-
sent a busy, noisy scene ; the men move about, often have
their heads close together, and may whisper almost without
chance of  detection.  When the bell rings for  breakfast,
the men form again into a  line, and march in lock-step to
the eating-room ; or (in some prisons), as they  march by
the cook-shop, the cans are pushed out of the window, and
each  man takes one in his hand, and, without leaving his
rank,  marches to  his cell, in which he is locked up during
the hour  of repast.   Again  the bell  rings, and the men
march out in the  same order, repair to the shops, and work
until dinner-time, when they are again marshalled to their
cells.
  Now let us see  how the daily discipline of the Separate
system effects its object, and isolates the prisoner.   The
same mode, precisely, is adopted at night as is adopted un-
der the Congregate  system : each  man is  in his cell  or
apartment.  The  walls which separate them are  built with
a special  view to preventing  communication between  the
inmates ; the watchmen are ever on the alert, and no pris-
oner can make a noise or signal of any kind, which will be
heard by any other prisoner, without its being heard more
distinctly by a watchman near by in the corridor.
  Now, if the Congregate system can  prevent communica-
tion between prisoners by night, then, a fortiori, the  Sepa-
rate system can do so by night  and  by day both, for  the
cells are built with an express view to that end.
  It is clear, then, that the first great  object, prevention of
communication, can be carried out much more effectually
and easily by the Separate, than by the Congregate system.
In the first we have to guard against communication by 
29
sound alone:  in  the second  we have  to guard against its
taking place not only through the sense of hearing, but al-
so through the senses of touch and of  sight.
   A moment's reflection, or,  still better, an hour's visit to
the crowded  workshops of a Congregate system,  will con-
vince any impartial man of acuteness,  that it is utterly im-
possible to prevent human beings from  communicating their
thoughts and feelings under such circumstances.  We hold
it  to be as certain as any thing can be  which is not mathe-
matically demonstrated, that  it is  impossible, by any vigil-
ance, or by any  severity of  punishment, to  keep men at
work together, for a year, in a common shop, within  see-
ing, hearing,  and touching distance of each other, and still
to  prevent communication among them.  They will not
only  know the gait, the  attitude, the  lineaments, and the
physical peculiarities of  one another, but the very char-
acter of each  other's minds ; they will devise a system of
signs, and have  frequent and  free communication.   It is
certain, that, if, when sight is extinguished, and hearing de-
stroyed, and smell and  taste  are obliterated, even then the
imprisoned soul can  struggle  out through the narrow aper-
ture of the touch, and beat that into a broad and easy path
for communion with others, — then, when men are close
together, with the speaking eye at command, and the quick-
ened  ear upon the alert, and the dexterous  hand in free-
dom, and the noiseless  lips in motion, then  they can  and
will converse, though they may never utter an  articulate
sound.  Be it remembered, that, for the attainment of their
ends, and the defeat of their officers,  the men will devote
their  whole energies to  the task, and we know that almost
miracles may be performed under such circumstances.
   But it is now too late  to deny the fact, that, in all Congre-
gate-system prisons,  even with the cruel scourge of the cat
brandished in their  sight, the prisoners do  communicate
freely ; for the evidence is becoming  irresistible ; it comes
even  from the keepers of these very prisons, and  not even
the most violent partisans can be long  blind to it. 
30
  The enlightened Mr. Crawford, the British Commission-
er, who visited all our prisons, says in his Report,— " The
effects of the  Auburn  Penitentiary, notwithstanding  the
order and regularity with which its discipline is enforced,
have, I  am  persuaded, been greatly overrated.   Its advo-
cates maintain that the mental seclusion at Auburn is com-
plete, and that the main objects of solitude are in effect ac-
complished.   But vigilant as are the precautions  taken to
prevent communication, the  prisoners do hold intercourse
by signs and whispers.  For this there are at times oppor-
tunities, both in the workshop, and when marching in close
files." *
  We could quote a volume from respectable sources, prov-
ing, that, under the Congregate system, there never has been
any thing like  isolation of the prisoners; but we  prefer to
deal  with general principles, rather than matters of local de-
tail in this or that prison, which may form exceptions to
the rule.  We shall merely give  an  extract from the speech
of the French  Minister of  the Interior, in the late discus-
sion  in the Chamber of Deputies, upon the question of in-
troducing the Separate system into all the French prisons.
  The bill had been drawn up with great care, after  years
of research, and the minister had prepared himself to dis-
cuss  its merits by study, observation, and the immense ad-
vantage which his position gave him.   He said, — "I  do
not wish to deceive myself by  any illusion.  It is not as
the result of theory, but of experience and of practice, that
I submit these views to the Chamber; it is by those means
that  I have formed them.
  " Whatever  improvements we may have  made in our
central  prisons, whatever  exceptions certain of them  may
offer, it is not the less true  that the system is in itself a
vicious  system.  There are no  means of preventing these
great establishments from being manufactories of  crime as
  * Crawford's Report to the Secretary of State for the Home Depart-
ment. — p. 19. 
31
well as of merchandise; and this is the  character of our
central prisons.
  " And how can it be otherwise ?  Can we prevent com-
munication between the criminals ?  Can Ave force them to
observe a continual silence ?   It Ave could force them to be
silent, we should establish between them the most cruel
separation, for silence is moral separation !
   '•• The mere physical separation [that of the Separate sys-
tem, he means] is denounced as cruel;  Avhat. then, must
be a moral separation ?  What! that men shall find them-
selves in  close contact with  other men,  and be prevented
from speaking, — does not that merit the name of cruelty?
   " But this system  is impossible.  What  follows, then ?
I ask all  those engaged in prisons!  There is much said
about the Reports of Prisons; I have not only read them,
but I have conversed with many of the prison keepers, and
they are unanimous in saying that it is impossible to  pre-
vent  the corruption of prisoners in our central  prisons.'-' *
   It will  be  admitted that it is necessary that this separa-
tion should be attempted under each system, and  let us see
how  the two methods compare with each other.

Mains of keeping up Separation  under the Tiro Systems.
   It should be our daily prayer not to be led  into tempta-
tion beyond our  strength ; and it  should be our  maxim in
managing prisoners with a view to reform, never to tempt
them  too  sorely to break a law of the prison,  especially
during the early part  of their confinement.  But  we act in
direct opposition to this, when, under the Congregate sys-
tem,  we place men in sight of each other, and forbid  them
to look;  within  hearing, and forbid  them  to  speak  or to
listen ; when we excite their  whole social nature to activity,
and then forbid  them  to  attempt any communication of
their thoughts and feelings.
   There  is no tendency in human  nature stronger  than

  *  Speech of M. Duchatel, May 11, 1^44, as reported in the Moniteur. 
32
 that to interchange thoughts and feelings with those imme-
 diately around us;  and we place prisoners, under the Con-
 gregate system, in a more cruel position than the imagina-
 tion of the ancients contrived for Tantalus, — we hold the
 cup to thirsting lips, and brandish a scourge to punish for
 the first drop that is swallowed.*
   The previous habits of these unfortunate men show that
 the fear  of punishment was not  sufficient  to deter them
 from crime;  they were led into temptation, and they fell.
 We put  them into a prison and  present a temptation  to
 break  its laws, which  is almost  irresistible; and  yet we
 expect they will obey them, or we punish  them  if they fail
 to do so.  Is this the kindest course with our fallen brethren ?
 Is it the wisest ?  Do we not lessen our own authority and
 their respect for law, when we attempt to exact obedience to
 rules which we cannot enforce ?  Is not  the Separate system
 wiser,  which diminishes the temptation,  by  keeping the
 convicts apart, and by making the  communication between
 them tenfold more difficult ?
   But  let us consider another  effect  upon the prisoner of
 these  two  different  ways  of keeping  up the separation.
 Bearing  in  mind  the principle, that  he should be made to
 feel that he is to obey the power of the  law rather than the
will of his  officer, and that there should be the least possi-
ble cause for ill-will towards  that officer, we shall see that
the prevention of communication under the Separate is easi-
er and  less irritating than under the Congregate system.
   In the first place, the prisoner does not see the face of the
  * The almost  uniform practice in the Auburn prison has been to pun-
ish immediately by the lash, and this has been defended as a necessary
part of the system, when administered by men of ordinary character. The
commissioners appointed by the government of New York to visit the
Auburn prison, speaking of this, say, in their Report, — « If  instead of
being repressed by a blow, the usual irregularities of prisoners were re-
ported for investigation, we are satisfied that endless litigation before the
Inspectors would ensue, requiring thereby their constant attendance at the
prison. 
33
 other convicts ;  he does not know who is  in the cell next
 to him ;  it may  be  one of those, always to be found  in
 prisons, who are inclined to please the officers by obeying
 the  rules, or who  will betray their  comrades.  Then the
 temptation to talk through  the wall, even  where talking is
 possible, is very much diminished, because the gratification
 is much less, and the risk of exposure is much greater.   In
 these obstacles the prisoner sees not the individual will of his
 keeper, but the Avails, and the system itself;  consequently,
 he is less likely to have any ill-will towards that officer.
   On the other hand, under  the Congregate system, there is
 irresistible temptation and  constant  opportunity presented
 to the  prisoners to look  at each other ; by the eye each
 one  reads the natural  language  of  those  who  will sym-
 pathize with him  ; thus an  acquaintance commences ; sig-
 nals are interchanged, and a correspondence is formed.   If
 an officer interferes to check this, then come disputes about
 his right  to punish men for merely looking at each other;
 or, if he silence all remonstrance by his arbitrary command,
 then are there inward heart-burnings, imputations of petty
 tyranny, and thoughts of vengeance, none  of which would
 have existed, if the prisoner had seen that  it was the stone
 walls and the inexorable law which opposed him.

       Comparative Simplicity of the Two Systems.
   The object of separation  is so  important, and  the means
 used to effect it form so  prominent  a portion of the disci-
 pline of a prison,  that they influence its Avhole character,
 and  make it more  or less complex.
   In a machine, we want simplicity in the  principle, in the
 construction, and in the movement; we want uniformity  in
 speed and force, and the greatest possible power of self-reg-
 ulation, so that it will not be liable to get  out of gear, and
 may be managed by a person of common  intelligence.   A
 prison in full operation is a machine, and its success de-
 pends greatly upon the clearness of  its principle  and the
simplicity of its movements.   Now, a glance at the Congre-
                5 
34
 gate  system and the Separate  system will show that the
 first is the most confused in its principle, the most compli-
 cated in its operation, the most liable to get out of order,
 and the most dependent upon the intelligence and prudence
 of its tenders for the quality and uniformity of  its opera-
 tions.
   One common end which each system keeps in view is to
 prevent communication and acquaintance among the prison-
 ers.   Under the Separate  system, the officers have only to
 see that the men do not  communicate by audible  sounds
 through the walls ;  for there is hardly a possibility of com-
 municating in any other way in a well regulated prison, and
 even this way is nearly, if not entirely, cut off by the mode
 of construction in the new model prison upon the Separate
 system, in London.   Thus far all is simple and easy; the
 prisoner tries to talk, or he does not; if he does, he is to be
 reported and punished ; if he does not, he is free from blame
 on that  score, and there is nothing left to the discretion of
 the officer.
  Under the Congregate system, the officers have  to watch
just as closely, and  even more so, to see that  the  prisoners
 do not talk from cell to cell during  the night  and at meal-
 times ; <md here the decision is equally simple and positive ;
the men talk, or they do  not talk.   But in the  day-time,
how different!   The prisoners come out of their cells and
arrange  themselves  in a  line, their  bodies  touching each
other; and while the officer is engaged in giving the word
of command, or seeing that the line is straight  and the
number complete, how can he distinguish,  amid the noise
of the tramp, the whispers of the men ?  Or, when the con-
victs are in the shop and  bustling about their work, amid
the sound of hammers and tools of all kinds, how can he
either perceive or prevent the conversation ?  The men are
close together, and  may speak so as to be  heard by each
other, but not by him.  And even in the more orderly and
silent shoe-shops  and tailor's shops, where  the men sit  in
one place and face one way, the duty of the officer  is un- 
35
certain, indefinable, and such as no two will perform alike.
It  is  impossible  to  prevent  men from  casting  sidelong
glances, from coughing, hemming, and touching each oth-
er ; and a shrewd and suspicious officer will see and  hear
in  some  of the movements and sounds  intelligible signs,
purposely made, Avhile a credulous or a stupid one will see
and hear nothing but the glance and  the  cough.   A severe
officer will critically note, and severely punish, what a mild
one will indulgently overlook, or mildly rebuke.
   There  are occasions on  which men  must leave  their
seats ; there is work which depends upon some interchange ;
and amid all this, let the officer be as acute and vigilant as
he may, there will  be those among the gang who are more
acute and vigilant still, and he cannot  make his  two eyes
watch effectually fifty pair of eyes.
   Thus we see that the machinery of  the Congregate sys-
tem is more complex, and its efficacy more dependent  upon
the intelligence  and kindness, not merely of the superin-
tendent, but of every officer.   Or, in the  words of the Sec-
retary of  this  Society, which we Italicize as he Italicized
them, -It is obvious that the best security Avhich society
can  have  that suitable punishment  will be inflicted in a
suitable manner, must arise from the character of the men
to whom the  government  of the  Prison, is intrusted."
He says, moreover,  " There are men Avhom no laws would
restrain from  indiscretion and  cruelty, if not barbarity, in
punishment.  There are others whf.se humanity is exces-
sive,  and  they would never punish at all; to men of  either
class,  the  poAver of punishment  and the management of
Penitentiaries  should  not  be  intrusted."!   We want  no
other  authority for  the superiority of the Separate system,
in point  of simplicity of operation and ease of administra-
tion.
   Every body knows that it is difficult  to tell how a man
will administer an office, until  he gets into  it;  and when
* First Report, p. 18.                 t Ibid-> P- 19- 
36
he is once in it, that it is often more difficult to get him
out.   Under  the  Congregate system, the  disrespect, the
disobedience, and the insubordination of the convicts must
be repressed at once, or it would be fatal  to the order and
security of the  place.   Under  the  Separate system,  each
case may be  left  for adjudication,  until  both officer  and
prisoner have grown cool;  for the  latter, being by  him-
self, can do but little harm ;  indeed, the power of inflicting
corporal  punishment  can  be, and has been,  taken away
from the officers.  But under the Congregate system it can-
not ; even our Secretary says, — "It appears that in those
cases where the warden has the power of punishment  the
fewest evils exist,  and the security that they will not exist
is found  in the character of  the officer to whom the power
is intrusted." *
  Now, in the application of these  remarks, it should be
borne in mind, that, under the Congregate  system, the pun-
ishment of most of these attempts to violate the rule must
be immediate; and, unless the system be materially changed,
the power of inflicting it must be left with the warden and
officers.  This makes it so much the more difficult to find
the proper persons.   Under  the Separate system, on  the
contrary, as we  have  seen, it is hardly possible that there
should be an offence the punishment of which may not be
decreed the next day or the next week,  and  by a higher
and cooler authority than the excited officer who witnessed
the offence.
  The Directors of  the Congregate  prison at Sing Sing,
with the enlightened and discriminating Judge  Edmonds at
their head, say, — " There are  many who are continually
struggling against  the  infirmity of their nature, and who
repent  as  sincerely as  they  transgress suddenly, and who
often entertain sincere intentions of  repentance, yet  who
are the most frequent objects of the lash."f  The Board
then allude to the  superiority of moral incentives over the
* First Report, p. 19.         f Report, Jan. 1, 1844, pp. 23, 24. 
37
lash, and add, —;- This  is a matter, however, which the
Inspectors  cannot entirely control.   It must  of  necessity
rest with the keeper and his assistants, whose business is
the daily supervision of the convicts.' *  Again, — "In the
view of the Inspectors, he is not the best keeper who pun-
ishes most, but  who with the least punishment keeps the
best order.   This is a matter which the Board cannot regu-
late, because  it must depend mainly upon the peculiar char-
acter and temper of the persons employed as keepers."!
   Why is it  that at this  late day, notAvithstanding all the
improvements in prison discipline, and all the awful revela-
tions that have been given of the abuses of the Congregate
system in the prisons in New York in years  past, —Avhy is
it  that we hear  of such bloody flagellations  as caused the
presentation of the keepers of the Auburn prison for murder,
within these few days, — while at Charlestown the lash is
used so sparingly ; why, but  on account of the difference of
the individual character of the  keepers ?   We think, then,
that in regard to the first  requisite of a prison,  simplicity of
principle, and capacity of being managed by ordinary per'
sons, the Separate system is  superior to its rival.
   The second point to be considered was, —

 Which System  appeals most to  the Moral Sense and Affec-
   tions of the Prisoner, and least to his Fear and Selfish-
   ness, and  which is best adapted to maintain a Kindly
   Feelinq between him and his Keeper ?
   Under this head may be considered, not only the princi-
ples upon which the prison is founded, but its  daily admin-
istration, so far  as this is  necessarily dependent upon those
principles,  from the day of the convict's entrance  to that of
his discharge.
   Sound Avriters and intelligent practical men agree  that
the prison  should afford the means of reflection, self-exam-
ination,  and repentance.   Indeed, one of the  most critical
» Report, Jan. 1, 1844, p. 24.
f Ibid. 
38
 moments of a convict's life is that in which, bidding a long
 farewell to the world, he  passes the gloomy portals of the
 prison, hears the heavy clang of the doors behind him, and
 prepares to strip off his citizen's dress, and to don the odi-
 ous uniform of guilt.  Often, at such moments, there comes
 over  him the sad thought  of all that he is leaving behind,
 — the  bright world, — his pleasant friends, — his loving
 family, — his sweet liberty; — and, on the other hand, the
 dark  prospect that  lowers  before  him, — years of toil by
 day, — a cheerless cell by night, — hard? fare, — sickness,
 — perchance, death; — all these  things crowd upon  his
 mind, until his stout heart melts  within him, and he  be-
 comes as a little child, choking in  an agony of grief.
   These are painful, but precious, moments; his good an-
 gel is then by  his  side, and his  softened nature may be
 moulded into a new shape.   In a prison upon the  Separate
 system this crisis may be much  prolonged;  and similar
 ones  may  often  be  produced in  the solitude and silence
 of  his cell.  But in a prison upon the  Congregate plan, it
 causes but a passing emotion ; for  the prisoner is soon ush-
 ered  into a shop where  are  scores and hundreds  of men
 busily at work, and pride bids him try to appear like a
 brave man in their  eyes, and to stifle  his emotions.  He
 soon  has a task assigned him which taxes all his energies;
 new objects continually pass  before his  eyes; his attention
 is taken up all day, and when he goes to his cell at night,
 it is to lie down  fatigued,  and to  sleep until the morning
 bell arouses him to a neAV day of toil.
  Thus it is obvious that the discipline of the Congregate
 system is less  favorable to  habits of reflection than that of
 the Separate system.  It is said by the  advocates  of the
 former, that the prisoner has opportunities of  reflection dur-
 ing the first few days after  his entrance, when he is kept in
a solitary cell, during the many unoccupied hours between
 Saturday night  and  Monday  morning, and every night
during the time that he does not sleep.
  But as for  the effects of the " three days solitary,"  it 
39
may be said, that  sudden and sharp shocks of repentance,
brought on by severe suffering, are not Avhat is wanted, for
they do not produce any radical change.   As for the oppor-
tunities for reflection on Sundays, it may be ansAvered, that
the prisoner under the Separate system has the same, Avith-
out the  disadvantage  of having  had his good resolutions
disturbed every  day by associating with evil-disposed per-
sons.   And with regard to the night meditations, it may
well be doubted whether many are profited much by them,
fatigued as they are by labor; at any rate, under the Sop-
rate system, the  prisoner may meditate by night and by day
too.
   AVhat is  necessary for reformation is daily and regular
opportunity for  reflection, aided by  the  company  and ex-
ample of the virtuous, and undisturbed  by the  influence of
the bad.  It is impossible for ordinary mortals to resist the
silent influence of those in whose society they live.   This
is true of vicious and of virtuous influences.   Criminals in
masses support  and encourage each  other.   Even if they
do not speak, the sight of each other in such  great  num-
bers confirms and  hardens them in their evil thoughts.  A
sixpence held close to the eye will  darken the disk of  a
distant planet;  and the  three or four  hundred convicts
present to  the eye of each  inmate of a Congregate prison
shut out from him the great public  beyond; indeed, they
form  to  him the  public  whose  good  opinion he would
gain,  by excelling in those things  which they admire:
Avhose ridicule  he Avould  fain avoid, and with whose tone
of mind he would  always keep his own  in concert-pitch.
   The tendency  to imitate,  and  the desire  of approba-
tion by excelling in what  others think excellent, are  in so-
ciety  what  attraction is among  the particles  of  matter;
and they act, too, in the same way, inversely as the square
of the distance.   To the child, it is  glory enough to imi-
tate sounds and  movements, and be applauded therefor;  to
the savage, it is  glory enough to excel his tribe in feats of
strength; to the peasant,  his  village in  skill; the  petty 
40
politician is gratified by the huzzas and votes of his imme-
diate  neighbours and countrymen;  and it is only a higher
and  wider range of the  same feeling which makes the
great  man  look for  the world's applause, or,  looking for-
ward, sigh for a continuance of the approval  of unborn
generations.
  Now, the ordinary inmates of our prisons are  like child-
ren and  peasants;  they  imitate only those  immediately
about them, and regard only the  public opinion of the lit-
tle society  in which  they move.  That society, in a Con-
gregate  prison, is  the  mass of convicts  by  whom  they
are  surrounded; the officers and  the  chaplains are  only
three or four individuals; while the criminals are the public,
— they are the public,  held close to the eye, which  hides
from the feeble vision  the great public beyond the walls.
But in a prison on  the Separate system, the  only persons
with whom the convict comes in contact are the officers,
teachers, and  visiters ;  and the principles of the human
mind to Avhich we have just alluded will force him  to try
to imitate them, and  to gain their approval.
  It is a great mistake to regard convicts as forming a class
apart; it is a worse one to treat them as  such.   It is not
for man to  draw the exact line  between degrees of  guilt;
and many whom the law calls guilty are better than some
Avhom it considers innocent.  The convict class is a con-
ventional, and not a  natural division, and it has no precise
boundaries.  As human virtue has never  soared so  high
that  the good may not  aspire to mount above those who
have gone before them, so vice has never sunk so low but
the vicious may go yet lower ; in the lowest depth of deg-
radation, there  is yet a lower deep.  The convict is still a
man, and, like  the rest of men, subject  to all those influ-
ences, for good or for evil, which make the rest of us what
Ave are.   He has forfeited his liberty to society, but nothing
more; he must stoop to pass the prison portal, but then he
has a right to  stand erect and say, In the name of justice,
do not surround me  with  bad associates and with evil in- 
41
flucnces. do not subject  me to unnecessary  temptation, do
not expose me  to further degradation ;— but, for humani-
ty's  sake,  help vie to form  good resolutions;  remove me
from my old companions,  and surround mc with virtuous
assoriatis.
   The prison should  not be the place whore the guilty man
sees and knoAvs others as  guilty  as himself, nor the pillory
in which he is exposed to the public gaze ; but it  should
be  like  the dark  valley of the shadow of death, through
which  he can  walk  safely, leaning on  the  kindly arm of
humanity.
   The  Separate  system  secludes  the  convict, not  only
from the world, but  from  the influence  of the  presence of
other convicts : it removes him  from  temptation, and sur-
rounds him with virtuous  associates.
   But  the Coiigiv-.-ito system oilers  no such  seclusion to
the unfortunate inmate ; he must march, and sit. and work
with other convicts.  New, Ave appeal  to every humane per-
son, whose sensibilities have not been blunted by the fre-
quency of the  spectacle, to  say  whether the sight  of the
long lines of convicts, paraded in  the prison-yard,—marched
up and down in silence like  ••' dumb driven cattle,'' — tak-
ing in their hands their night-tubs, or their supper-cans, as
the case may  be.—wheeled  into their cells  byword of
command, — treated  in everyway as a I'li^ian corporal
treats his slaughtering-machines called soldiers, — whether
such  a sight is not  most  painful to  him.   There are, in
those closely serried ranks, men of all ages, of all capacities,
and of all degrees of degradation  ; —the beardless boy, a no-
vitiate  in crime, who scans Avith  timid glance the group of
spectators, fearful  of  recognizing in it a brother, sister, or
friend ; he has his hand,  perhaps, on the shoulder of the
hoary-headed  lecher, who  whispers to him  words of pol-
lution ;— the  man of education, who has committed  for-
gery, is in lock-step with the  poor  Avretch  whose  only
teacher was his animal appetites,  and avIio is a brute in hu-
man form. 
42
   Now, what is most painful to the spectator, — what is and
ever must  be an  objection to the  Congregate  system, —
what is and ever must be unfavorable to the reformation of
the convict, — is, first, the exposure of the  men to each
other (and  to spectators), and, second, the necessity of treat-
ing them as irresponsible machines.  Such discipline may
be borne by boys, and by soldiers who voluntarily incur it,
and who are at times relieved from  it;  but for grown men,
for moral  agents, for men whom we intend  to reform,
whose feeble moral nature should have some exercise, that
it may be  strengthened, it must be humiliating,  and end
by breaking down all self-respect, or engendering feelings
of ill-will or hatred to those who subject them to it.
   We know that  it will be said, we do not understand the
convict, that  we  ascribe to him a feeling of shame which
he does  not  possess ;  but Ave are sure,  not only from a
knowledge of human  nature, but  from acquaintance with
convicts, that some do commence  their prison life with a
painful sense of their shameful degradation, that they would
fain shun every eye, — and that they finish by holding up
a brazen front, and almost exulting in the  convict garb.
It is true that such cases may be rare ;  but it is a principle
in law that it is better  for ninety-and-nine guilty to escape,
rather than that one innocent man  should suffer;  so let it
be in  prison ; let us adopt a system, which, while it cannot
injure the  hardened and shameless offender, shall give to
the novice, to him whose sense of  shame  is still vivid, the
means of avoiding acquaintance and familiarity with other
convicts ; where he may not lose  all his self-respect, and
not feel that he has lost all  hope of  enjoying the respect of
the world.
  It will be said that  this exposure forms a necessary part
of the punishment, and that the  system contemplates it
as such.  We know it does, and therefore do we protest
against it as unwise, ineffectual, and unfavorable to reform.
We believe that this system of exposure,  aggravated as
it is, by forcing the men to wear a uniform which is pur- 
13
posely contrived to be so grotesque as  to be an unmistaka-
ble badge of degradation, is  foimded upon the same error
which once made us work convicts in chain-gangs about
the streets, and which avc iioav abandon to the nations be-
hind us in civilization, because  it is  unkind, unjust, and
pernicious.
   It is unkind, because it is  an unnecessary aggravation of
the legal sentence.  It is unjust, because it  falls with the
greatest severity upon the best prisoners.  The old convict
or the shameless  Avretch may  don his prison dress, and
march out Avith defiant exultation ;  but to a sensitive nov-
ice in crime, that dress must be the poisoned shirt of Nes-
sus, which he can never strip off until  his  pride and all
his self-respect have been torn  aAvay by it.  It  is perni-
cious, because, while it destroys the self-respect of the con-
vict, it seems to go upon the principle that  degradation is
a part of  the system of punishment.  This,  indeed, is as-
sumed by many who advocate the exposure of the  prisoners
in the Congregate prisons ;  but this doctrine is as unsound
as its effects are injurious.   The prisoner degraded himself
by his vices  and crimes, and it should be the object of his
prison discipline to elevate  and purify, not  to shame and
degrade him more.   It is a fatal  error to connect  any un-
necessary degradation with punishment; the  righteous God
will not break the bruised reed, and shall unrighteous man?
It is said  that  the degradation of exposure is inflicted as a
means of  deterring others  from  crime ;  but we  have no
right to do evil that good may come out of it ; we have no
right to degrade  one man   that another  may be  elevated,
much less have we a right  to injure one man's moral  na-
ture that other men's goods and chattels may be safe.
   Make  the prison  and its  discipline so  painful  as to  be
dreaded and'shunned, as God makes sickness and suffering ;
but make them, as He does,  curative in their operation, and
not destructive.  To suffer  punishment as the natural con-
sequence  of  sin or  crime is  not in itself degrading ; and
though we may not expect   to make convicts look upon it, 
44
as did Socrates, as a thing to be sought rather than shunned,
still  we ourselves, and all who have any thing to  do with
the administration of penal justice, ought to be ashamed if
we view it less wisely than did the noble old heathen.
   But a great change is to be wrought in society, before the
public, or even legislators, will look upon prisons with suf-
ficient interest to understand  their importance, and to estab-
lish them in wisdom.   The  confession of the  Directors of
the Congregate prison at Sing Sing, in  their  Report  of
1844, may be applied to most prisons upon that system : —
" One object of a Penitentiary, that of punishment, is well
provided for here ; the other  object, and one equally impor-
tant, that of reformation,  is not." *
   We look with  interest  upon  the reformed drunkard and
the reformed gambler ; and  he who in his religious refor-
mation confesses  to a multitude of sins gains our respect;
but the poor convict, the prison-bird, is a Pariah  for life.
Now, when we reflect upon  the multitude of  sins that go
unwhipped  of justice, and  the multitude  of  men  who
go at large, though  they violate all  the laws  of morality,
it  seems  strange to  find how certainly  and  swiftly the
arm of the law arrests those  who sin against our property.
It  may  be right that nine tenths  of  penal  legislation
should be for the protection of property, and Ave vvould not
weaken  the barriers of stone and iron by  which  society
protects  its material interests.   But Ave  would not stop
there :  the prison should  be sanctified by the  high ends
which  it  proposes, the saving of human souls :  and every
one of its regulations should have in vieAv the reformation
of the prisoner, as far as is consistent  with his safe keeping.
Like our lunatic asylums, they should be considered pla-
ces of cure for all the curable, and of safe keeping for the
incurable.
* Report of the Directors of Sing Sing Prison, 1844, p. 23. 
l.-i
Evils of the Severe Labor exacted in Congrt gate Prisons.
  The evil effects of thus laboring in common, in the Con-
gregate prisons, are aggra\rated by the severity of the labor
which is requisite in order to prevent, as much as is possi-
ble, communication among the workmen.
  How many a  hapless  convict, after  a day  of severe
drudgery, when he is  locked up in his narroAV and cheer-
less cell at  night, must, as he wipes  the  sweat  from  his
brow,  curse the  labor which to him is  productive only
of fatigue, made  more painful by the thought that all  the
profits go  to a sordid contractor  or a sordid  government!
Urged to  labor by the dread of the lash, and deprived of
that which sweetens  it, he  will be apt to detest it;  and
there are  many who will firmly believe that  the courts, as
the organs of government, purposely gave them long sen-
tences that more  might be made out of them.
  Contrast  the situation of  men, thus drn-en in gangs to
work, exposed to the  gaze of every visiter, with  the condi-
tion of a prisoner under the Separate system, who is shut up
in a room as large, perhaps, as the one he was accustomed
to at home.   He has  his loom or his shoe-bench at hand ;
he is at liberty to work as long as he  pleases, to rest when
he is tired, to  lay down his  hammer and  take up a book ;
he knows, that, if he does more than a fair day's work, the
over-stint will be added to the small sum already placed to
his credit, and be at his disposal when he goes out.  Such
a man learns to prefer work  to idleness : he forms habits of
voluntary labor ;   he sees in  the Avork provided  for him a
proof  of the  kindness of  his keepers; and, knowing  that
the  government  makes  nothing out of him, will not  sus-
pect it of cupidity or  cruelty.*

  * In some of these remarks uc have spoken of the Congregate  v-u in
rather as it is actually administered, and must allow that it admits of ben-
eficial modifications without departure from its principles. 
46
Exhibition of the Prisoners under the Congregate System.
  In  connection with  this subject we would mention a
practice  common  in  the Congregate prisons,  which  has
never been denounced in our Reports, but which ought to
be, and indignantly, too ; — we mean the exhibition of the
convicts to the public gaze for a fee!  Even  Massachu-
setts receives $1,500 a year for the exhibition of her pris-
oners to any visiters, at twenty-five cents a head !
  This we hold to be not only unnecessary, but unfavora-
ble  to the reform of the prisoner  and discreditable to the
State.  We are aware that the primary object is not to make
money; and that the practice is defended by high authority,
and even by the Secretary of the Society; but much as we
are disposed to defer to such authority, we cannot do so in
this case.   There are few men so lost to a sense of shame
as not to blush when first convicted of crime ; and doubtless
many a poor wretch, who has been agonized by the expos-
ure upon his  trial, half welcomes his sentence,  because he
hopes to hide his head and his disgrace in the privacy of  a
prison.   But  he is sorely mistaken ;  when  once there, he
must  sit all day long  immovable, and bareheaded, in  the
open hall, surrounded by convicts,  and bear the  scrutiny of
thousands of visiters ; * and if in his stealthy  glances he
meets the curious gaze of a former acquaintance, brought
by morbid curiosity to  see  him in  his  disgrace, — or the
scornful looks of a more cunning and sanctimonious rival,
— or  the moistened eye of a pitying relative,—he  may
not turn away to the right side nor to the left; he may not
raise his hands to hide  his  blushes, or hardly to wipe the
tears from his swimming eyes; for he is a State  convict, —
he is  in a State pillory, — the visiters  have paid the price
of the exhibition, and have a right to scan him from top to
toe!
  * There were over six thousand visiters to the Massachusetts State
Prison the last year. 
47
  It is a mockery to say that  this shame will  he felt by
few, — that the  great  majority  of convicts  care nothing
about it, — nay. that  they even like it;  for it is  this very
system of exposure that has helped to harden  them.
  Nor can it  be urged that  the spectacle  is necessary to
serve  as a warning to others, for  all experience shows the
contrary.   It used  to be said that  the  heads and limbs of
convicts  should  be exposed upon the  city  walls, — that
their bones must be hung to bleach in chains, — that their
faces  must be exposed  in the pillory, — that  they must be
executed  before  the  multitude : and all for the poor peo-
ple's  terror and  reformation !   Governments in  civilized
coimtries  have been gradually dri\'en. reluctantly enough,
from  such abominations ; but we of  Massachusetts still
cling  to our prison exhibitions,  as little doubting their excel-
lence as our fathers doubted the excellence of the cuttystool,
the pillory, or the whipping-post.   As for the common ar-
gument, that  such exhibitions are  very useful, because the
public eye prevents the officers  from abusing their power; in
the first place, they do not do so, as the  late murderous in-
fliction of lashes at Auburn proves; and in the second place,
if they did prevent abuses, the government has no right to
perform an imperative duty by adopting  a method which is
profitable to itself, but degrading to the prisoner, if another
can be found which will be beneficial to him. though it be
more expensive.   But the fact is, that this practice of expos-
ure to the public, though not an absolutely essential  feature
of the Congregate system, has  become part and  parcel of it,
because the system is so liable to be abused  by those who
administer it.   This liability, in fact, perpetuates other prac-
tices which are contrary to sound reason and true humanity.
   How different is  the situation of a prisoner under the
Separate  system !   There the remaining sense of  shame,
or self-reproach,  or pride, call it what you may, is carefully
cultivated as an  element of reformation.   Upon first enter-
ing the prison, he is led along, with his head covered by a
hood, until he  reaches  the cell  assigned to him, without 
48
seeing or being seen by another prisoner.  He now receives
a number, and his name is mentioned no more, — it may
be that his very officer does not know it.  He is supplied
with  food, and, when  he is tired of idleness  and asks for
work, work is given to him.  He is furnished with books,
and he is visited several times every day by the keeper, the
warden, the instructer, or the physician.  But he goes not
out of that cell, except into his  little adjoining yard, or to
work alone in the garden, during the long years he may be
confined, nor does he see the face of a prisoner in all that time.
The public are freely admitted, without fee; but they can
only walk  up and  down the corridor betAveen  the cells j
they see no prisoner, unless they be persons of known  char-
acter, — nor even then, if the prisoner exercises his right,
and objects to receiving the visit.
  Will  any one say that this is  not better for an unfortu-
nate criminal than our system of exhibition ?  has he  not a
better chance to save  himself from perdition ? should we
not prefer  such a system for an erring but beloved son or
brother, — and  are not the  convicts at  Charlestown our
brethren ?  As  for  the effects upon the  public,  none can
doubt that the seclusion is better, except those wTho suppose
that the moral  effects  of public executions are good, and
prefer that men should be hanged upon the open common
rather than in the privacy of the jail-yard.

The  Separate  System prevents the  Convicts from being
                  known to each other.
  In contrasting the moral  effects of the  discipline of the
two systems, the Separate  system has one advantage over
its rival, so great and  so obvious, that we hardly need to
allude to it; it is the fact, that a prisoner may  pass through
the whole time of his probation, not only unspotted * by
contact with other convicts, but personally unknown to
THKM.
  *  We may learn much by the cant words whose  force and truth give
them currency. The class of men who live by dishonest means have many 
49
   There is one fact, among hundreds of others, which can-
not be too often repeated.  The late Warden of the prison
in Philadelphia saw one day three laborers at work togeth-
er upon the public quays, in Avhom  he at once recognized
three of his former prisoners ; and he ascertained afterwards
that no one of them kneAv the fact of the other's imprison-
ment.
   The advantage of this is felt by the convicts in Separate-
system prisons.   Those with whom we  have conversed
have all admitted, that, much as they longed for  society,
they knew that  it would  be disadArantageous for them  to
have the company of other prisoners.  But how does this
accord (cry the advocates of the Congregate system) with
what  you before admitted, that  these  very prisoners will
try to talk through their  walls  writh each other?  It  ac-
cords  perfectly,  for men  will often do Avhat their sober
judgment  tells them is injurious to their best interests.
   Hoav much  more fortunate is the situation of those three
discharged convicts above alluded to than  that of  many
a  man who has  passed through a Congregate prison, and
fled far away from its neighbourhood, determined  to lead a
new life !   He sought some  secluded village, and  tried  to
earn an honest livelihood and an honest name ; but, just  as
he was rising in the general esteem and in his own, there
came  along  one  of his prison comrades, who  threatened
him with exposure, extorted money  from him, went away,
but returned again, like his evil genius, again to fleece him,
and finally drove him to despair and crime.
   This is not fancy, it is an oft recurring fact; and yet the
adversaries of  the Separate system  make light of it, and
say that  the exposure of a man in court, upon his trial, ]ire-

words current among them, by which much light is thrown  upon the real
value of prison discipline.  Among others, they have the word spotted,
to  signify  one who is known to have been  a convict in a state prison.
This they consider a misfortune, not only on account of the loss of charac-
ter, but because it gives the unspotted rogues a great advantage over them.
A spotted thief is  more easily made a tool of  by others than an  unspotted
one.
                 7 
50
eludes all possibility of his remaining unknown.  But this
mode of disparaging an  unquestionable merit  shows how
violent has been the party feeling which has characterized
the discussions of this subject.
  Let us contrast  the situation of two young men  who
are  arrested for the first time by the hand of justice, in the
commencement  of  their  career of vice.  One is tried in
open court  and convicted, and his person  becomes known
to fifty or  even a hundred individuals.   He is then  shut
up in a prison  upon the  Separate system, and for  ten or
twelve years, perhaps, is seen no more by any one but his
keepers,  and persons  of  virtuous character, who take an
interest in his  fate.   At last he leaves the prison, changed
in outward appearance at least, and if he is changed in his
inward  character and resolutions,  he naturally will strive
to conceal,  even from his own  eyes, his identity with the
convict sentenced so many years  ago.   He may begin life
again, and  gradually win a character, without  fearing that
it will be destroyed, or his yet feeble virtue  shaken by the
taunts or the temptations of his prison companions.
   Another young  man   is  tried,  with  equal publicity,
in open  court,  and condemned  to  a Congregate prison.
There he is to spend  ten or twelve  years, exposed  to the
gaze of thousands  of visiters every year, and  he  is to be
in company with  five hundred convicts, most of  whom
will see  him  every day, and  at  last become intimately
acquainted  with his person, and  familiar  with every line
of his countenance, so as to be able ever after to  recog-
nize him under any garb, or in any circumstances.   Now,
suppose the average sentence of the  convicts is four years,
there  will  have been fifteen hundred convicts in  prison
with the young man, during the twelve years of his con-
finement.  We say nothing here of the natural and al-
most  irresistible tendency which  our young  man  would
feel to yield to despair,  and consider  himself as one of
them  for ever; but we will suppose  that  he resists  these
evil influences,  and leaves the prison  determined to lead an 
51
honest life.  Is there not a fearful odds against his  remain-
ing unknown and  unmolested by  those  fifteen  hundred
keen-eyed rogues, whose  wandering and  predatory nature
leads  them  to every corner of the  land ?   Is it not a well
known and a fearful thing, that the spirit  of proselytism is
very strong  in vice ; that  criminals love to pull down oth-
ers, and especially their  old  companions,  to their  oavh
dreary level ?  And could our young man escape them?  If
he should bury himself in the Western wilds, he Avould be
afraid  to light  his  cottage fire, lest the smoke should at-
tract  towards his  dwelling  one of those vultures,  who
scent their prey from afar, and Avho might rob him of his
hard-earned gains,  or, what  is worse,  of  his  hard-earned
name.
   We are  aware that some  advocates of the Congregate
system not only deny that it is a disadvantage to the  con-
vict to be known, but they inculcate  upon him, Avhen he
leaves the  prison,  never  to  attempt  to conceal  the fact
of his imprisonment.  This, it appears to us, is not  only
submitting the convict's virtue to an over  severe trial, but
it is expecting a moral heroism which  few of  his counsel-
lors themselves possess.   Is there not among his  Sunday-
school  teachers and  preachers some  one,  Avho,  when  a
youth,  indulged  in hidden  sin, or practised  some secret
vice, known only to  God and himself, for  which  he ex-
pects Heaven's  forgiveness, and of which be longs for his
own forgetfulness ? And does he come fonvard and avow
to others his former sin ?  does he confess it to the convict
whom he is advising never to conceal the  fact  of his being
a  '; prison  bird " ':  If he does not, then  he is not true to
his doctrine.  It would be a  higher and nobler morality to
disregard  the world's prejudices, and to scorn all conceal-
ment ;  but  it is a morality  which we should preach in
vain to most prisoners.   We would inculcate upon them
perfect openness towards any person  Avho  might be dis-
posed to confide any trust to them, Avhich would  be with-
held if their imprisonment were knoAvn; but we would 
52
not require, especially of the weaker, a useless proclama-
tion of their  former  guilt.   The time may come when
the morality of convicts and the charity  of society shall
both be so far  advanced as to render this course advisable,
but it seems  to us that as yet it is  not.  Be that  as  it
may, however, there still remains to the prisoner under the
Separate system the advantage of being unknown to  other
criminals, and of remaining so if he chooses.

Comparative Value of the Habits of  Industry under the
                     Two Systems.
  Another most important instrument in the reformation of
a convict is  the instruction which he receives in  some
handicraft, and the habits of industry which he forms.
  It is clear, that, under each system, the prisoner receives
a great advantage from the  knowledge of a trade;  but  in
order  to  profit by it after he leaves the prison, he must
have formed industrious habits to which he will cling  in
after life.  Now, there is this important difference between
the two systems, that  under  the one the labor is compara-
tively voluntary, under the other it is compulsory.
  It is usual to condemn a man to solitary confinement dur-
ing a few of the  first  days of his imprisonment in  a Con-
gregate prison; he is  then  led out to the common shop,
and required to work industriously all the time from  sunrise
to sunset.  He cannot be left in his cell, because it is not
large enough for a habitation during the day; and he can-
not be  left idle a moment, in  the shop for obvious reasons.
In fact, many of the boasted advantages of the Congregate
system arise from the enforcement of hard and constant
manual labor.  The discipline, the security, the economy in
the number  of officers, the amount of the  earnings of the
prison, all depend upon the fact of the convicts' being busily
employed all the time; it is  by this means that it earns so
much money, and wins so much favor.  Under the Separate
system, the  labor  may be  voluntary;  the prisoner may
work, or may be idle j  he may put down his tools, and take 
53
up a book; if he  is idle, he injures  no one but himself.
The  beauty of the system, hoAvever,  is,  that all prisoners
call for work within a few days  after  their entrance;  and
there is never any  difficulty in keeping them industriously
employed.  In the Eastern Penitentiary of Pennsylvania,
they  have a certain sum allowed them  for all the work
they  do over a certain task, and this  is placed to their cred-
it, and paid when they go  out. If any one reads too much
and Avorks too little, his books are taken away, and  this is
a punishment; if he is still idle,  his officer and instructer,
and other visiters, may deny him their company, and  this
is usually found sufficient to excite him to industry.
   Thus we see,  that, if  it should become  necessary to en-
force labor under the Separate system, it may be done leis-
urely, and by privation of certain privileges ; \vhile under
the Congregate  system  it must  be  done at once, and  by
positive infliction of some penalty;  for, be  it remembered,
the men working together must be kept busily employed, or
they  will  talk and  be in mischief; while men confined in
separate rooms may safely  be left in  idleness until they  are
sick of it.
   Under the Separate system, then,  men have an opportu-
nity  every day of  knowing how much pleasanter labor is
than  idleness, and  will  in time  form  a voluntary habit of
work.  Under the  Congregate system, a man  is made to
desire labor only during the first feAv  days of his " solitary,"
and Avhenever he is condemned to  it  for any misdemean-
our ;  every other day of  his  prison  life he  feels that he is
coerced to labor,  and he is naturally less inclined to it  on
that account.
   As far as the moral effects of labor contribute  to a man's
reformation,  the  Separate system, then,  seems to  us  far
superior to the Congregate.   In treating of the other moral
effects of the discipline of the two systems, we shall consid-
er,— First,  Which requires the  least  forcible interference
with  the prisoner's actions, — which  can best dispense with
corporal punishment, and allow him  to form habits of self- 
54
control.  Second, Which is most capable of adaptation  to
his individual character.   Third, Which is best adapted to
cultivate kind relations between the prisoner and his keep-
ers and teachers.

Which System requires the least possible Interference with
   the Prisoner's Actions, and leaves him the greatest De-
  gree of Self-control ?
   This is  a very important  consideration.  There is  in
every human being a tendency to separate individuality, —
to a certain degree of independent moral existence.   As he
emerges  from childhood, this  tendency begins to manifest
itself by his instinctive reluctance to yield blind obedience
to others; it grows stronger every day, as he grows older;
he aspires more and  more to be a free moral agent, and an
independent man.  The child's desire to stand erect, to quit
the apron-string,  and finally to walk firmly without sup-
port, is not stronger in his physical  nature, than is the ten-
dency to independent individualism in his  moral nature ;
and one of the  most difficult things in education is to cul-
tivate this tendency in a due degree. If a child be allowed
to walk before its bones are sufficiently hardened, its limbs
will  afterwards be crooked, and its body rickety; if it be
carried too long in arms, its muscles will be weak, and its
system undeveloped.   So  in the  training of this tendency
to individualism;  if it is encouraged  too  soon and too
much, then  early self-assurance follows, unaccompanied by
the power of self-guidance;  if it  is repressed  too much
and too long, then diffidence and want of self-reliance are
the consequences.  This difficulty is  much increased  by
the fact, that the tendency  to individualism,  though  in-
herent in every child, is not alike in any two;  hence the
superiority of private over public moral training ;  and hence
the superiority in this respect of a prison upon the  Separ-
ate system, where the moral treatment may be  adapted to
the individual character,  over one  upon the  Congregate
system, where the men are treated in masses. 
55
  But,  however  it may have  been trained, we find  this
independent  individualism, with its desire  of self-control,
fully developed in the inmates of our prisons; and though
it is  a common maxim, that we must " subdue this stub-
born  spirit," we must "break  the man's will," we must
'enforce  obedience," it will be found that all attempts to
do so by direct force and  by physical pain are unwise and
unavailing.   They either crush all manliness, and destroy
the very feelings on which we  must rest our hope of re-
form, or they excite grief, anger, hatred, and thirst of ven-
geance, according to  the  strength and activity of the ani-
mal  nature of the individual.
  People generally admire the strict discipline, the military
precision of manoeuvres,  and the instantaneous obedience
to every order, which are seen in some Congregate prisons;
but it seems to us that these are obtained at the  convict's
expense,  and rather  improve  the  character of the prison
than the character  of the prisoner.  The whole of this
daily discipline, from  the moment  when the  prisoners are
paraded before their cell-doors in the morning, through  all
their marching and countermarching to the  shop and to the
chapel, and back again, with all its precise details, up to
the moment when the convicts ha\re entered their cells at
night, and stand  with their hands thrust through the grated
doors, that  the  officer may know that every one is safely
caged, — all  these  enforced evolutions  of grown-up  men
tend to destroy the individuality of character,  to lessen self-
respect, and to degrade responsible beings  into irresponsi-
ble machines.   Be it remembered that these arc full-grown
men, and that all the details of their evolutions, and all the
discipline of the shops, must be intrusted to subordinate
officers, who must require  implicit and immediate obedi-
ence.   Such a course may break  down the  proud spirit,
subdue  the  stubborn will, and enforce obedience; but it
will, in ordinary hands, do  so  by extending the same  iron
rule  over all, Avithout regard  to the peculiarities of  their
character, by cmshing much  that is good, and  by with- 
56
holding what is of more consequence than  any thing else
to the prisoner, the  advantage of voluntary exercise and
culture of self-government and  self-elevation.   Under the
head of forcible interference with the prisoner's actions, we
must consider the kind of punishment used  under the two
systems ;  and in this respect there has been, and is, in this
country, at least, a vast difference between the two systems.

Kinds of Punishment used and  admissible under the Two
                       Systems.
   It is not our wish to draw  comparisons between the
practical working of different prisons, except where  they
depend essentially upon the principles of the system ; but
the fact is too  notorious  to be  passed over without  com-
ment, that, while the Pennsylvania penitentiaries have been
for years administered without the use of corporal punish-
ment, those of  New York, and most others  upon the Con-
gregate system, have  been governed by the lash.  There
is evidence  that an improper and cruel  instrument of tor-
ture was once used in Philadelphia, but it is beyond ques-
tion, that, for many years, every thing of the kind has been
disused, and only the mildest restraint imposed; while, on
the other hand, the Congregate prisons have ever resound-
ed with the lash; the bristling  bayonet at Sing Sing still
proclaims the  reign  of terror within, and  the  verdict of
murder from the grand jury at Auburn is still  ringing in
our ears.
   These are not solitary cases ; there is incontrovertible evi-
dence that the  most  shocking flagellations have been very
common in the great majority of Congregate prisons; the
Directors of the Sing Sing Prison, in their Report for 1844,
candidly admit  that in that prison " no other mode of pun-
ishment seems  to be contemplated  than the lash." *   We
could harrow up the  feelings of every humane  reader by a
narration of the cruel and degrading discipline to which
hundreds and thousands of our unfortunate  brethren have
—■-------------•---------------------------------------------------------------------—-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------__
     * Report to the Senate of New York, Doc. No. 20, 1844. 
57
been and are subjected  in  the Congregate prisons of the
country.   Nay, Ave  could show from  the  reports, and
writings, and declarations of prison officers themselves, that
the free  and frequent use oi  the lash Avas considered essen-
tial to the  discipline of the Congregate  system.   We can
show from the Avritings  of  our Secretary, that it  is neces-
sary to  give the power of immediate punishment to  the
officers, and  then shoAv from all history the strong tendency
of this poAver to abuse.
   But we are not disposed to do this; we are not disposed
to go as far  as many officers of Congregate prisons do, and
to say that the use  of the lash is essential to their adminis-
tration ;  we  have more confidence in the  force of  the prin-
ciple of love ; and we have the evidence of the Charlestown
prison to show us, that, in  the hands of benevolent men,
the authority to punish corporally will not be abused.
   But AA*e do say, and most confidently, too. that a peni-
tentiary  filled with  such convicts as are usually  found  in
our State prisons cannot be administered  upon the Congre-
gate system without  the free and frequent  use of  corporal
punishment  in  some form, unless the  great advantages
which its friends claim  for  the system be abandoned.   Is
this  questioned? and are Ave referred to Charlestown for an
answer ?  We reply, that, in the State prison of Massachu-
setts, the distinguishing features and the  grail advantages
of the ( ongregate system are abandoned, and avowedly so !
What are its distinguishing  features and great advantages ?
Let our  Secretary speak.  In his Third  Report, when try-
ing to correct some misapprehensions about the true nature
of the  Auburn  prison, he says, Avith a vieAv  to  precision,
— " The definition [object] is. first, to  seclude the crimi-
nals  from their former  associates, and  to  separate  those
of whom hopes might be entertained from those Avho are
desperate.    This is  done  in  both prisons  | Auburn and
Ghent] by solitary confinement at night, with unbroken si-
lence during  the day."  '   Now, if the words,  to seclude
                * Third Annual Report, p. 56.
                8 
58
 and separate the men from each  other by "unbroken si-
 lence  during the  day,"  be  taken in their literal sense,
 namely, that the men do not talk, even then  they cannot
 apply to the discipline of the Charlestown prison ; but if
 they be taken in their ordinary sense, simply that the men
 do  not communicate by any signs, it would be  absurd  to
 use them in speaking of that discipline.  We have the evi-
 dence  of our own senses,  and the evidence  of  more fre-
 quent  visiters  than ourselves, and the  evidence  of  pris-
 oners,  to prove that the men are not only perfectly famil-
 iar  with each  other's persons  and  characters,  but  that
 they  communicate  daily and  hourly with  each other.
 Nay, we have  been told by the Warden himself, that he
 considered  it impossible to prevent the men from commu-
 nicating  with  each other while  they work together, and
 that he should  not consider  it desirable to do so,  even if it
 were  possible.    We say, then, that  in  the  Charlestown
 State prison the distinguishing features and the great moral
 advantages of the Congregate system  have been abandon-
 ed,  and we believe that they have  been abandoned because
 it was found impossible to retain  them without  a severity
 of discipline, and a frequency of flagellation, which would
 have been too cruel to be  permitted  in a community like
 ours.
  In saying this, we intend not to detract from the merits
 of the present Warden; we  have known the prison during
 the last twelve years, and we consider it  to be in  a far
 more satisfactory condition, in most respects, than we have
 ever known it  before.  Nay, we believe it to  be  superior,
 in most respects, to any Congregate prison in the United
 States.  This superiority arises, as far as we can perceive
 from the spirit of kindness with which the Warden regards
 the prisoners, which spirit has pervaded the corps of officers
 and begotten more of  the confidence and good-will of the
 convicts.  The discipline is  lax, but, if it can be continued
without danger  of revolt, it is vastly  better than that of
 Auburn or Sing Sing, or  any Congregate prison in the 
59
country, because it  is administered by  appeals to higher
feelings than base fears.
  In bearing this voluntary testimony in favor of  the  offi-
cers of the CharlestoAvn State  prison, we cannot help ex-
pressing  our  regret  that they have  not  an opportunity of
exercising  their skill and  kindness in the reformation  of
good prisoners, without the disturbing influence of the bad.
There are in that  prison second, third, and fourth comers,
who may therefore  be considered almost incorrigible ;  and
though we will not  say, in the language of our Society's
Second Report, that --in this community of villains inter-
course is tcithout restraint," * — for we do not like the harsh-
ness of  the term, —yet we do  say. in the language of  that
same  Report, that there are  many veterans in  crime Avho
form acquaintance with young  convicts.   " Of course, they
readily commimicate the history of years to their young ad-
mirers, and through  them this deadly poison to the extremi-
ties of the State.''   "Many of these men have been associ-
ated with gangs of counterfeiters, and are acquainted with
their names,  residence, principles of trade, language,  and
mode of operation.  They can,  of course, introduce  their
young pupils, when they leave the prison, to this  Avorld of
iniquity.  Many of  the men  living in society, Avho are en-
gaged in this traffic, are not suspected, —they deal in  this
article on a large scale, and employ trusty runners Avho are
more  likely to  be detected  than their  employers."!  The
Report then went on to prove, Avhat was undoubtedly true,
that about seven hundred  convicts in Maine, New Hamp-
shire, Vermont, and Massachusetts, about nine  hundred
in New  York,  about  twice  as  many more in the States
south and  west, were  admitted to an  uninterrupted  in-
tercourse with a community  in  which were  teachers thor-
oughly acquainted with  the art of counterfeiting money. J
Now, if this was true in  1*27, — if we consider hoAv much
* Second Report of the Boston Prison Discipline Society, p. 10,
f Ibid., p. 13.         X lbl(1' PP- 13> 14- 
60
the  community  of counterfeiters  has  extended, — if  we
consider  that  the same  is true  of thieves, housebreakers,
and criminals of various kinds, we cannot but  wish that
the  kind and  efficient officers of our State prison had  the
means of guarding the young and comparatively innocent
prisoners from the evil eye and contaminating presence of
old and professional criminals; that is to say, we  wish they
had the management of a prison upon the Separate system.*
   But to return  from  this digression, and to resume  the
subject of  intramural punishment.  To  say nothing of
the  admitted  fact,  that  the punishments in the  principal
Congregate  prisons have always been very severe, and
sometimes bloody,  while those  under  the  Separate sys-
tem have been comparatively light, — it  is  clear, from
the very  nature of  things, that a single helpless man, shut
up in a cell,  is  less  apt to feel  rebellious  than  one at
work in  company  with  hundreds  of comrades  in crime.
It is clear that he  may  be reasoned with, that his  pun-
ishment  may  be  delayed,  that  it  may be omitted if  he
repent;  but in a  Congregate  prison,  insubordination,  or
a violation  of any rule,  must be punished upon the spot,
while the officer and the  offender are still under  the influ-
ence of excited feelings.
  * We speak not here of the House of Correction at South Boston, be-
cause it does not usually contain prisoners of such desperate character as
State prisons.  The sentences, too, are short, and the temptation to insub-
ordination consequently less.  The discipline, order, and neatness of that
establishment are equal to those of any prison  in the world.  They are
not, however, and cannot be, maintained by an appeal to so high motives,
nor by such reformatory treatment, as could be adopted were it a Separate-
system prison.  The assertion that has so often been made, that this prison
has heen  managed many  years  Avithout  corporal punishment, conveys a
wrong impression to many  minds.  Until quite recently, a shower-bath, or
water-holt, was in common use as a mode of punishment; and so tremen-
dous was its shock, that it  was more dreaded than the lash.  We do not
think that its physical effects were as bad as they have been represented;
and we believe that its disuse was demanded rather by fear of public cen-
sure, than by a conviction  of its impropriety ; still, it was a very  severe
form of corporal punishment. 
61
  It seems manifest, then, that, under the Separate system,
there may be less forcible interference with the prisoner's
conduct;  corporal punishment may  be more easily  dis-
pensed Avith, and the prisoner be left to form habits of self-
control.   We would  not  be understood as saying that the
Eastern Penitentiary of Pennsylvania does alloAV the prisoner
sufficient  opportunity of  self-control,  or such  training and
exercise  of his  moral nature as will  enable him to resist
temptation when he  goes out, for Ave  do not believe it can
be said of any prison  in the Avorld.   This is the great ques-
tion which as yet remains unanswered, — How shall  we,
consistently with  the security  of the prisoner,  allow  him
such opportunity of  freedom of action as will enable him,
by  actual exercise of self-control, to prepare for resistance to
the great  temptations that  will assail him when he leaves
the  prison ?   Experience  tells us that  sincere  resolutions
are formed, and that  unaffected religious feelings are enter-
tained by many a prisoner, while his animal  appetites are
lessened by the temperance and continence of a prison life,
and his moral sense is unobscured by temptations ;  but  that
the moment he  goes  out, and his system is  excited by stim-
ulating diet and drink and by vicious company, he breaks
through his cobweb  morality and his fancied religion, and
returns to his wallowing.
   But it is not our duty here to suggest the means of solv-
ing this great question ; we have only to compare the  tAvo
systems which are in actual existence, and before the Soci-
ety ; and Ave are  constrained  to say, that, few and inade-
quate as are the opportunities for self-control and the ex-
ercise of good resolutions,  under the  Separate sytem,  they
are far greater  than  under its rival.

 Which System offers the  best Means of adapting its Disci-
    pline to the Individual Character of the Prisoner ?
   This is an important question, and  avc shall  consider it in
regard  to its bearing, first,  upon the physical  well-being of
the prisoner, and, second, upon his moral and religious na-
ture. 
62
   The Congregate system treats its prisoners in masses;
 the Separate system treats them as individuals.   Labor is
 unquestionably good for all men, but no two need precisely
 the same degree of it.   One man may work advantageously
 twelve hours in twenty-four; another, not more than eight.
 One man may work very hard from sun to sun; another can
 bear only light work.   One may be able  to give close and
 undivided  attention to his work;  another, from the  very
 constitution of his mind, may be unable to  do so.
   Now, under  the Separate  system, each  individual  may
 be allowed to work a longer or shorter time, with greater
 or less severity, with  more or less closeness of application,
 as will best promote his  real good.  But  under the Con-
 gregate system, all must march out to the shops at the same
 time, all  must work the whole day, all must give undivided
 attention to their  tasks.  There  is no departure  from  this,
 without a departure from the principles of the system ; the
 men cannot be sent back to their cells when fatigued, for the
 cells are constructed with a view only to being dormitories,
 and  the discipline of the prison  is arranged with  a view to
 their being unoccupied all the day.

 Which System can best adapt itself to the Prisoner's pe-
   culiar  Character, in its Appeals to his Moral and Reli-
   gious Nature ?
   Under the Congregate system, the principal direct means
 of moral  and religious influence over the prisoners are, hab-
 its of sobriety and labor, morning and evening prayers, Sun-
 day sermons in the chapel, and reading the Bible and  oth-
 er good books ; in all these, except the last, it acts upon men
as masses, and not as individuals having each one a pecu-
liar character.   The Separate system treats them as indi-
viduals, and allows opportunities of addressing to each one
such appeals  as will  be most likely to affect his peculiar
mind and character.
   The labor and cost of moral and religious teaching are far
greater under the Separate than under  the Congregate  sys- 
63
tem, but they are likewise more  efficacious.   A moral and
religious instructer can do more in ten minutes in a private
interview with a criminal whose  confidence he has gained,
than by an hour's preaching at him in a congregation, —
especially if the criminal  feels, as he is apt to do in a con-
gregation of convicts, that he is  not a particularly wicked
sinner.
   Great credit has been claimed for the Congregate system
because  it affords the opportunity  of chapel and  Sun-
day worship in common, while  the  Separate system does
not.  But, in  the first place, this is not strictly true ; the
model prison  at Pentonville has a chapel,  in  which the
prisoners assemble, but it is so contrived that each man sits
in a sort of sentry-box, or small upright pew, so  that he
can see no one but the chaplain ; and in the Pennsylvania
Penitentiary there is preaching every Sunday in one of the
corridors, and, by additional expense, there may be in all.
In this, as in many other respects, then, the Congregate
svstem obtains its advantage only by a sort of labor-saving
process, —acting upon masses, not upon individuals.
   In the second place, the advantage of public worship in
prisons, great  as it is, has been much overrated.  The good
to be obtained by grown men from attendance on any pub-
lic worship depends very much  upon its being voluntary.
Compulsion is always disagreeable, even when it forces us
to do the very thing we might have liked to do if left free.
A man who is forced to go into a chapel or a church is very
apt  to feel that the doctrines taught  in it are forced upon
him.
   We confess, therefore, that we much  prefer the mode of
public worship adopted  in the  Separate-system prisons  to
that which is enforced under the Congregate system, A-vhere
the men are brought out of their cells by word of command,
and marched  in military order to the chapel, whether they
wish to go or not.  In the former, the preacher begins his
address  at one end of the corridor, and  the prisoners are at
liberty to approach the doors of  their cells and listen to 
64
 what he says, or to keep away and occupy themselves with
 reading.  It is at their option to join the  worship or not;
 they exercise in this  the power of  self-control;  and it is
 most delightful to find that  they almost always do hearken
 very attentively,  and that, when the hymn of  praise is
 sounded from one end, the air is taken up throughout  the
 corridor, and out of almost  every cell there  issues a strain
 of voluntary music, from the softened heart of an unseen
 chorister.
   Is it reasonable to suppose that  merely seeing the face of
 other criminals would increase the devotional feeling of
 those hermit worshippers ?  And  has the  system of Con-
 gregate worship any other advantage ?  Will the miserable
 one  of economy be used here, too ?  Economy of the bread
 of life !  Economy of words  of comfort  and joy !   Sup-
 pose there must  be six preachers, would they not be found
 in Boston ?   If  the  consecrated teachers could  not  leave
 their other duties, to stand upon the stone floor and preach
 to caged convicts, why, the very laymen would do it; and
 if enough of  them were not  found,  there are laywomen,
 ever ready with their unobtrusive benevolence to make  up
 for man's short-coming.  One of  the pleasantest sounds that
 ever greeted our ears was on a Sabbath day, while sitting
 and. conversing with a convict in  his cell, at Philadelphia.
 There was at first a low and gentle sound, as of an iEolian
 harp, which presently gathered  strength and distinctness,
 and  in a moment took the form  of the beautiful words  of
 the  twenty-third  Psalm; and as it floAved on,  the  air
 seemed  filled with the religious music of an unseen spir-
 it ;  and when the sweet  strain was ended, the  prisoner
 looked up and said, — " It is Miss Dix ! "
  Far be it from us to deny  the  good  effects of public wor-
 ship as it is practised in the Congregate prisons, for we have
 sometimes witnessed in their  chapels an earnestness of atten-
 tion, and a devotional appearance, that would befit the most
pious congregation.  We know also, that, Avhen the preach-
er once creates a glow of feeling  in his hearers, the effect is 
65
increased  by secret action of sympathy among them ;  and
that piety, like panic, may be heightened by a crowd.   But
it is only the gifted preachers who can carry aAvay such an
audience by their earnest eloquence, and  they only for a
feAv  moments.    Such  excitements  are  unfrequent  and
short-lived ;  and be  it  not  forgotten,  that all the rest of
the time  this very activity  of the social nature,  this very
sympathy among the hearers, operates, with a great many,
directly against  any feeling of  penitence.  Many an ad-
dress, Avhich Avould  go  home  to the  conscience  and the
heart of a solitary man. convincing him  of  the peculiar
enormity of his sin. and melting  him to penitence, will fall
unheeded on his ears when  he looks around and  sees the
Avhole audience  made up of criminals, each of whom he
supposes to be more guilty than himself, because he does
not make for their crimes the same excuse  as for his OAvn.
   Who can doubt that the vivid descriptions of the horrors
of hell, which usually produce so little impression upon a
crowded church, would carry terror and despair to each in-
dividual, if the enormity of his past guilt were not lessened
in his eye by consciousness of community in sin with those
about him, and his dread of the  future diminished by the
thought  of  their society  in  his place of  punishment ?
Would  he not more surely repent of the past, and more
carefully avoid the future, if he felt that he was cut off in
this  life from all  sight, and  hearing, and knowledge of his
fellow-sinners, and that in  the next  his hell would be one
of solitary confinement ?
   We would not be understood  as expressing an opinion
about the propriety of addressing  this class of feelings, even
in convicts,  but we maintain that these observations are not
irrelevant to the subject.   Indeed, this  feeling of sympathy,
of community in guilt, among the convicts, is one of the
strongest obstacles to reform in the Congregate prisons, and
one which the Separate system avoids almost entirely.  We
know that this is denied and will be denied  by  the advo-
cates of the Congregate system;  but we confidently appeal
                9 
66
 to every one conversant with the philosophy of mind for its
 truth.  It  is said that  the men know that there are hun-
 dreds of criminals like  themselves in a prison on the Sep-
 arate system, and that the effects of sympathy and commu-
 nity in guilt will be the same ; but this  is contrary to phi-
 losophy and common sense.   Few minds, and least of all,
 those of the class  from which criminals  usually come, can
 put themselves in relations of sympathy with others, un-
 less  they are aided by  the senses, — unless  they see and
 hear them.  Who is more lonely than the hermit in a city,
 though he  may live in a block of houses, and be  conscious
 that  only  eight inches  of brick wall separate  him  from
 scenes of social mirth on either side of him ?
  We will  not,  hoAvever, argue a point which is so clear,
 but we would, while upon this subject, urge strongly upon
 the friends of the prisoner one advantage which the Sepa-
 rate system offers for his reformation, which  is far greater
 than  weekly  sermons  and daily   chapel  services ; — we
 mean the frequent and almost hourly intercourse which he
 may have with his keeper, and teacher of work,  who may
 be kind,  intelligent, and religious men.
  This, indeed, is a peculiar and  great  advantage of the
 system, that religious and moral instruction, adapted to the
 peculiar  nature of  the  individual, may  be  instilled into
him, not  by an open  attack upon  his sins, not  by formal
discourses and sermons,  but in the  natural and ordinary in-
tercourse of every day ;  and this may be, not  only through
the influence of the keepers or teachers of work, but of oth-
er visiters.  This advantage cannot be had in the Congregate
prisons ; the rule of the shops is silence, and the officers and
master-workmen say nothing more to the men than is neces-
sary for the performance of the work.  General communica-
tion cannot be allowed there ; and if the men are summoned
away to their cells to talk with an  officer or visiter, it looks
at once like a premeditated lecture, and loses its effect.
  The difference in this respect will be more apparent, if
any one will divest  his  mind of prejudice, and  consider,
Avhat  Ave shall try to prove, that 
67
 The Separate  System  is, for all Moral and  Intellectual
  Purposes,  more  truly Social in its  Nature than  the
  Congregate System.

  There never  Avas a greater misnomer than to call  the
 Separate system a solitary system, and it  is a  misnomer
 which has created and Avhich still keeps up a strong preju-
 dice against it, as its enemies A'ery well knoAv.
  What constitutes men social beings ?  Is it  sleeping at
 night packed away in cells as closely as young bees in  the
 comb, but  as much separated ?  Is it marching together in
 silence, working in silence, eating  in silence, and  sitting
 close together in silence at devotions ?   Then Avere the si-
 lent ascetics of La Trappe more social  than the prisoners
 at Auburn; for they  were alloAved,  in passing  each other,
 to break their dreary  dumbness once in  the day, and utter
 the words, •'• Remember death ! "  Then is  the uneducated
 deaf-mute  a  more truly  social  being :  for the inmate of a
 Congregate prison may not greet Avith a smile and a token
 of  friendly regard his  fellow-prisoners, while  the poor
 dumb  sufferer  may show his  feelings upon his speaking
 countenance.
  No, it is not  sight, but speech, that is the  organ of social
 communion ; it is not through the eye, but through the ear,
 that our social  intercourse is  carried  on ;  and, though a
 man  had as many eyes as  Argus, it were  better to have
 them all put out than to seal up his ears, if his object in
 life  be  intimate social  communion and sympathy with
 those about him.
  There is just enough social communion in a Congregate
 prison to assure the  men of a community in  guilt and a
 community in  punishment, Avithout enough for  any good
 moral  purposes.  Indeed,  the  social intercourse which is
 permitted is  not for any good effects upon the moral char-
 acter of the prisoner, but partly Avith a view to  the pecun-
iary advantage  of labor in common, and partly with a view
to preventing insanity. 
68
   There has been a false issue made upon this point in the
 public discussions, and the  advocates  of  the Congregate
 system have obtained credit for the advantage of an arrange-
 ment which was made  as  a matter of necessity.   It is a
 disadvantage and an evil for criminals to associate together.
 We have quoted the words of the Secretary of this Society,
 and other eminent friends of the system, to prove it; and, as
 we have said, it is resorted to in order to avoid  what they
 consider greater  evils, — insanity from solitude,  and ex-
 pense of providing separate  workshops ; and yet  this evil
 is paraded as in itself a good thing !   They claim for this
 community of labor the advantage which would certainly
 accrue to a criminal, if his companions in labor Avere kind,
 moral, and religious men.   But if this social union of crim-
 inals be good, why strive so hard to confine it to the inter-
 course of the eye, why suppress the  friendly signal, why
 choke  the  rising word, why forbid the only kind" of lan-
 guage  through which moral  and religious  impressions can
 be conveyed, namely, speech ?
  The  answer is plain.   This  social communion among
 bad men is bad ;  enough of it only must be allowed to pre-
 vent certain worse evils ; and the only distinct interchange
 of thought and  feeling Avhich the  men have, by  signs or
 words, is made vicious by the very fact that it must be
 done by stealth, and in violation of the law !
  Thus we see that the Congregate system aims at prevent-
ing social intercourse among the men, and it provides for no
other, because at  night they  are locked up in their narrow
cells.   On the other hand, the Separate system  checks no
impulse of  the social nature ;  it encourages the prisoner to
talk, — it only takes care that he talks not  with bad men ;
it invites him to  give confidence  and to indulge affection,
but it  introduces into his  room  such  persons only as will
have a good influence  over him.
  This leads us  to another very important consideration,
that of the 
69
Moral Influence of Visiters in bringing about a  lit form
                    of the Prisoners.
   We have  frequently visited prisons upon both systems,
and Ave appeal to others who  have done so to say whether
their visits Avere not more truly social, so far as regarded the
convicts, in prisons upon the  Separate, than in  those upon
the Congregate system.
   The visiter to a Congregate prison goes into the shops
and sees  the prisoners at work, by scores  and  hundreds ;
but he  must  see only their outAvard forms : he must  not
speak to them, not  even to give the courteous  salutation
with which every man should ever be ready to greet every
other man ; he may not even  exchange a glance of intelli-
gence and sympathy, for non-intercourse  is the  law of the
place.   But  Avhen  a  person  of known character  visits a
Separate-system  prison, he may be  introduced into  the
room of  any prisoner  who chooses to receive him,  and,
without the  appearance of any particular  effort, may carry
to him comfort and encouragement.   We say, without the
appearance of special effort ; — and  this is very  important ;
for in this way good men, even if they be reformed drunk-
ards or repentant convicts, may be made  important instru-
ments for the reformation of the prisoner.
   A little reflection will show that even the visiter will be
more  likely to become interested in the  fate of prisoners
under the Separate than under the Congregate system, and
that an efficient  corps of regular  pnson-visiters, for moral
and religious instruction, will be more easily found for the
former.
   This  is not  mere fancy : it is  in accordance  with  well
known principles of the human  mind.  The interest and
the sympathy of the visiter are not so likely to  be  enlisted
in any individual prisoner, by seeing a hundred of them
working together, as it would be by close and familiar ob-
servation of one or two.   Pity for the mass may be  but a
vague feeling, productive only of pain to  the visiter, who 
70
sees an amount of suffering too great for him to relieve ;
while, if he should  meet one individual of the mass, he
might feel that to him he could be serviceable.
  When Sterne would  figure to himself the  miseries of
confinement, he was going to begin with the thought of all
who were suffering under it; but, says he, " Finding, how-
ever affecting the  picture was, that I could not bring it near
me, and that the multitude of sad groups in it did but dis-
tract me, I took a single captive ;  and, having shut him up
in his dungeon, I then looked through  the twilight of his
grated door to take his picture."
  Considerations like these will not be pronounced useless
by those who reflect that one of the most important instru-
ments for the reformation of prisoners is the number and
character of the unofficial prison-visiters, who, living in the
neighbourhood, may  be  induced  to  come  regularly and
periodically  to converse with  the  convicts.   Such per-
sons will sometimes have far  more influence over certain
prisoners than the official visiters or the regular chaplain.
There is sometimes a mysterious but certain influence of
sympathy between particular individuals, which  shows that
nature leads us to the formation of attachments by other
means than  the intellectual perception of the worth of the
object.  The  power of inspiring confidence and  forming
friendships is not given  to any particular class of men, nor
is it to be attained  by a diploma of divinity.   A visiter
may go into a dozen different cells of  a prison on the  Sep-
arate  system,  without finding an individual  in whom  he
takes especial interest; but as soon as he  enters the next, he
may exclaim, Here is one who interests me, whom I know
I shall like,  whom I can understand,  and Avho will under-
stand  me !   And, on  his part, the prisoner may experience a
corresponding attraction  toAvard the visiter, and  feel an im-
pulse  to open to him a heart Avhich he has kept stubbornly
locked against all  the appeals even of  his religious teacher.
  It may be said that the same good  may be produced  by
such a regulation in the Congregate prisons as will allow the 
;i
prisoners to be taken from the  shops  into a private room,
when any visiter comes;  but it will be seen  at once  that
the very preparation for such an intervieAv would be likely
to prevent its good  effects.   There  is that  perversity in
some men which leads  them to suspect and  to resist  any
direct and apparent attempt  to reform them.   But the  visit
to the convict in a prison on the Separate system  may be
as a matter of course : the man  is in his own room, — the
conversation may take any turn  that it will, and. if the vis-
iter prolongs his stay, his host sees in that a compliment to
himself.   This is not mere theory ; some ot' us have visit-
ed, again and  again, the most prominent Congregate  pris-
ons in  the country, Avithout having had an opportunity of
knoAving any  thing of  the individuals in it; but in  one
short hour in one  on the Separate system,  we  laid the
foundation of  friendly interest which may last for life.
   Among the great number of  visiters to the prison, there
would be some who would take  an interest in one prisoner,
and some in  another :  they could reneAv their visit at any
time most convenient to themselves, for they cause no in-
terruption to the regular routine of the prison.  We cannot
help thinking  that  such visits would  be a most useful aid
to those of the regular religious instructer ;  indeed, they
might be made more important than his, for, unless he  be a
man of extraordinary powers of persuasion, he will always
have to contend with the  disadvantage of being considered
by some prisoners as a. paid agent. Avho preaches to them,
and teaches them, as much in the discharge of a mere duty
as from love to them.

   Such are the general considerations which have led us to
prefer the Separate  to the Congregate system.  But it  may
be replied, that, although  in  theory it  seems best, in prac-
tice it is found to be inferior to  its rival.   We shall, there-
fore, examine  some of the  leading objections that  have
been made to  it.
   First, it  is said  to be more prejudicial to the health of
the prisoner.   Let us look at this, and  consider 
72
 Which System is most conducive to the Physical Health of
                      the Prisoner ?
   Prisoners are generally of an age when men should be
 in  good health ;  if they are  not, their  illness  must  arise
 from, first, physical causes,  or, second, from mental causes,
 or, third, from both combined.  Let us suppose the prison-
 ers in  two prisons to  be equally cleanly, equally well fed
 and clad, and engaged  in healthy mechanical occupations;
 in what other physical respects do they differ ?
   The  Congregate prisoners pass the night in very narrow
 cells, and the day in close  Avorkshops,  traversing  the  yard
 several  times, and being in the  fresh air perhaps an  hour
 daily.   The  convict in  a  Separate-system  prison  passes
 both night and day in a comparatively large room ; he has
 a yard  adjacent to it, in which he  may spend a portion of
 the time in  the fresh air ; and there are gardens in which
 he may pass as much time  as is necessary for his health.
 With the modern improvements in ventilation, the air  may
 be, and we think  is, kept as pure as it can be in the AArork-
 shops of the prison, where  so many men are congregated.
 Indeed, from a rough calculation, we infer that there  is a
 less  number of cubic  feet of  air for each prisoner in  the
 workshops at  Charlestown than for  the prisoners in Phila-
 delphia ; but this  affects not  the principle, for we suppose
 the ventilation to be perfect in each case.
   The  physical causes, then, are  the  same.  Hoav  is it
 with the mental ones ?  The prisoners  under the Congre-
 gate system  have a little less of monotony in their daily
 routine  ; they pass from their cells to their shops, and their
 attention is  more occupied by change of  scene and of ob-
jects ; but if the recent  improvements in the Eastern Pen-
 itentiary of Pennsylvania, by Avhich a feAv prisoners are al-
 loAved  to labor daily in  the gardens,  should be extended to
 all, and if  the same improvements should be adopted in
 other Separate-system  prisons, then the  balance would be
 greatly  in their favor.   It may be said that the Congregate 
73
prisoners do receive considerable mental stimulus, and con-
siderable gratification of their  social nature, by marching
together and  Avorking  together.   This may be, and un-
doubtedly is so;  but be it remembered that it is at the sac-
rifice of the principle of non-intercourse among the prison-
ers, on  which the whole system is based.
   We have seen that there is nothing in  the Separate sys-
tem Avhich prevents the prisoners from having  as much so-
cial communication with virtuous persons  as is necessary for
their mental  health ; if, therefore, it be true, as it is urged,
that the per centage of mortality and insanity in the Amer-
ican Separate-system prisons is greater than in the Auburn
prisons, it must be the fault of the administration, and
not  of  the  system.  We doubt very much Avhether it is
so ; but one thing is certain, — that, where  there  are so
many honest men engaged on each side, and where the ad-
vocates of each  system claim  the superiority of their re-
spective prisons  in these points of health and  sanity, and
where each party so confidently appeals to statistics in con-
firmation of its claims, there cannot be any great difference.*
   The  truth is, so high has party zeal run in this matter,
that it  is difficult to ascertain the true result of the exper-
iments  Avhich have been  tried  in  the  different  prisons.
There are a few  general facts, hoAvever, Avhich  are beyond
cavil.   The Congregate system is favorable to the physical
health of prisoners ; — the animal man thrives under it.  It
is equally certain, that, under the Separate system, as it has
been administered, a tolerable degree of health may be en-
joyed for many years,  and better, probably, than the same
men would enjoy out of its walls, while leading their usu-
al life.  If the system, as it  has been administered in this
country, does not keep up  to so high a degree  of health as
the Congregate system, it certainly admits of such modifi-
  * It is  only for argument's sake that we admit that the mortality and in-
sanity in  the prisons in this country upon the Separate are greater than
in those upon the Congregate system.   It certainly  has never been fairly
shown in the labored attempts of our Society's Reports to prove it.
                 10 
74
cations as will enable it  to do so.   The cultivation of gar-
dens, recently introduced into the discipline of the East-
ern Penitentiary of Pennsylvania, and the airing-grounds of
the new model prison of London, will  certainly be benefi-
cial to the prisoners' health.
   But it will be said, the statistics of the two systems, as
administered in this country, are favorable to the Congre-
gate system.  We are constrained to say that very little re-
liance is to be placed upon the statistical tables which have
appeared from  time to time  in the Annual Reports of our
Society.   There is irresistible evidence of undue partiality;
and  we know  that  zeal for a favorite  system  will warp
even an honest mind.  But besides the absence of strict im-
partiality of feeling, the statistics given in our Reports want
that breadth of view, and the comprehensiveness of facts,
which are essential to any correct inference.
   There is no subject about which partial knowledge is
more apt to lead one astray than that of criminal statistics.
For instance, we find, upon consulting the Compte General
de VAdministration  de la  Justice Criminelle, that  in one
year, recently, there were over 160,000 persons arraigned for
various crimes and offences, of which only fifty-seven were
for adultery. Now,  if we look at  the criminal statistics of
some of our own States, we  shall  find there were as many
cases of adultery in about two millions of people as in the
thirty  millions of  France ;  ergo, according to statistics,
adultery is fifteen  times more common in New England
than in France, which is an absurdity.  Or, if we find that
the trials  and convictions  for adultery  are  now twice  as
common in  France as they were fifty years since, shall we
infer by statistics that the crime is tAvice as common,__or
by common sense that it is growing more rare and is more
detested,  and that a man does not now take his  wife's infi-
delity as a matter of course, but carries the matter to a court
of justice ?  So it  may be with the  statistics of recommit-
tals to different prisons; suppose we find, that, of one thou-
sand convicts discharged  from the penitentiaries of Pennsyl- 
75
vania, only fifty are recommitted during the ten years subse-
quent to their discharge, while of one  thousand  discharged
from the  Ncav York prisons  there are sixty recommitted
in the  same  time, shall Ave infer from such  facts that  the
Pennsylvania discipline is the best calculated to deter from
crime ?  By  no manner of means, unless Ave first  ascertain
that all the other circumstances are equal ; perhaps the po-
lice in New York is more vigilant, and arrests more of the
old offenders ; perhaps the laAvs against second offences are
less severe in that State, and  therefore less dreaded;  per-
haps the  business of thieving was particularly flourishing
there during  those years, while it was  suffering under a de-
pression in Pennsylvania.  Then we need to knoAv wheth-
er the  convicts came from a population of the same  race of
men, of the  same general intelligence, of the same general
moral character ; all these and many other things are to be
taken  into consideration,  before we can draw any valuable
inference  from statistical returns about recommittals.
   We  fear that the Society has not been accustomed to do
this, and  that  it has often flattered itself that  its favorite
system was  going on  well, without any better  foundation
than sentences like this, taken from its Fourth  Report: —
'• There is another  class of facts, proving the same thing
concerning the reformatory character of the  Prison  at  Au-
burn.  The recommitments in 1S27. out of 427 [discharged
prisoners], were  only  nineteen; and  in 1S29. out of  570,
only seventeen.'' *
   Now, if one  should draw  any inference  respecting the
value of any system from a fact like this, he would  be just
as liable to make a wrong as a right one.  It would be very
difficult to ascertain the real value of the different elements
of the calculation ; but if one could do  it, he might take the
very statistical tables which have been annually published
in our  Reports as proof that the insanity and  mortality were
greater in the Philadelphia than in the Auburn  prison, and
* See Fourth Report Pris. Disc. Soc, p. 24. 
76
show from them directly the reverse.   We do not say that
this would be the case, but it might be, because we are cer-
tain that due consideration has not been given to all the el-
ements of the calculation.
  A large, a very large allowance  should be made for the
fact, that so great a proportion  of the Philadelphia prisoners
are drawn from the mulatto  race, who cannot bear confine-
ment like men of pure Saxon blood ; that the colored pop-
ulation  whence they are  drawn is a very degraded one,
and  addicted to those sexual  excesses  which lead partic-
ularly to cerebral derangement.   Then there is  the com-
parative duration of the sentences, the effect of the climate,
the quality of the water,  the nature of the occupation, —
these and  other elements must be accurately ascertained,
before we can say what is the  comparative  insanity or mor-
tality.
  But, allowing for a moment that all  the inferences from
the statistical tables  given in  our  Reports  are correct, and
that the insanity and mortality in the prisons upon the Sep-
arate system in this country have been much greater than in
those on the Congregate system, still this would not decide
the question of the comparative salubrity of the two systems.
There are  many prisons  in  Europe upon the Separate sys-
tem, and if we  should embrace them in our circle  of statis-
tics, it might show a balance the  other way.  We  have
consulted many European works upon  the  subject, and the
conclusion seems to be irresistible, that the Separate sys-
tem is at least as salubrious,  for  body and mind, as the
Congregate system.  We  shall not go into  a detail of these
noAV, but  refer those who take an interest in the subject to
the valuable Reports made to  the British, the French, and
the Belgian governments, in all of which  the assertion of
the  French Commissioner,  De Metz,  is confirmed.   He
said, after examining  both  systems in  this country, — "I
may safely declare, that,  even  in  this  respect [effect upon
health and temper],  the  discipline  founded  upon perfect
separation  of the prisoners  can bear comparison  with any
system whatever." 
77
  Against all the reasonings of  the  respectable medical
gentlemen of this Society Avho attempt to prove that the
Separate system must  be injurious to physical and mental
health, we would quote the Report of a Commission of one
of the highest  and most  scientific medical establishments
in the world, namely, the French Academy of  Medicine.
At the request of the Inspector-general of Prisons in France,
that Academy  appointed as commissioners some  of the
most  philosophical and experienced  men in the medical
profession.   On that commission Avere such men as Louis,
Yillerme, Pariset, &c. ;  and the Report, which Avas made
by  the illustrious Esquirol, closes Avith these remarkable
words : — "If  the Commission were  to express its  opinion
upon  the preference Avliich should be given to any peniten-
tiary system, it would not hesitate to pronounce  the Penn-
sylvania system  the  most favorable  to  reform.   But the
Commission  is  to pronounce only upon the salubrity of dif-
ferent systems  ; and it is convinced that  the Pennsylvania
system, — that is to say, solitary and continuous seclusion,
day and night, with  labor, conversation with their officers
and inspectors, — does not shorten their lives, and does not
endanger [ne compromet pas] their reason ! "
   But let  us waive all these high authorities, and reduce
the matter to a bare appeal to common sense.   The Separ-
ate system allows the prisoners to have as much social inter-
course as is necessary for their physical and mental health,
only  it  decrees  that  none of  it shall  be Avith convicts.
Now,  is it  not  absurd to  argue, as some would seem to do,
that, unless this social intercourse is with convicts, the men
will die or go  mad ?   It  really amounts to this ; and if all
the medical  authorities in the Avorld, and all the statistics
that have ever been gathered, should assert that the Separ-
ate-system prisons have made men mad by too much seclu-
sion, we should  simply reply, the system  has been  badly
administered, and the remedy is easy, —give more society
to the prisoners, — but let it be the society of the good.
   If,  then, as  Ave firmly believe, the  Separate system is 
78
sound in its principles ;  if it presents great advantages over
its rival; if, as seems to  have been proved, it can be carried
on with safety to health and reason ; then it is idle to dis-
pute any longer about  such questions as whether men do
or do not talk through a wall, whether this or that particu-
lar prison  is well administered or abused.  We have  had
such disputes, and smaller ones, usque ad nauseam:  they
are distasteful,  and they affect not  the general principles;
they depend merely upon the administration.  We have
tried to avoid such incidental circumstances, and to exam-
ine principles and see how far they are reduceable to prac-
tice.
  But, finally, it will  be asked,  If the Separate system is
really so much  superior  to the Congregate system, why has
the latter obtained such general  favor ?  This question
will, however, no longer be asked by those who know the
real state of the case in the most enlightened countries of
Europe.  There, as we  shall show presently,  the Separate
system has found favor, and is rapidly gaining ground.   If
the question is asked with respect to the  United States, we
answer,  that the  causes of the  greater  prevalence of the
Congregate system are  these : — first, it is supposed to be
cheaper ; second, it has been advocated  by the only Soci-
ety in the country which has funds, and an  agent of zeal
and ability, namely, this Society ; and, third, because  it
really is such an immense improvement  on the old prison
system which it superseded.
  First, as  to the expense.  The original outlay of capital
for  the  edifice  must be greater in the  Separate system ;
that cannot be denied.   The mechanical operations can be
carried on to more profit where the men work in common.
The officers and overseers and instructers may be less nu-
merous and  less expensive in the Congregate system ;  less
numerous, because they oversee  companies, and deal Avith
masses; less expensive, because, having little moral relation
with their men, they need not be persons of  so high char-
acter.  On the other hand, if, as we believe, the Separate 
79
system inflicts a more  severe punishment, — if it operates
more  quickly to deter from crime  and persuade  to virtue,
then a A'ery material diminution of  the length of  sentences
may be made, and this would  turn  the tables at once in its
favor.
  But we  are not  inclined to press this point far, because
the whole  tendency of the discussion about the compara-
tive economy of the tAvo systems has had, among its other
evil effects, that of tempting  legislatures to decide in favor
of the Congregate  system, on the ground that it is cheaper.
Such a motive is an unworthy  one, and our Society should
not appeal  to it.   Grant  that  the Separate system is more
expensive : nay, that the Congregate system may, and dots,
prove a source ot  income to the State  !   What then r   One
great object of prison discipline is to  reform convicts ;  and
what should we say. if the directors of a hospital refused
to give to  patients the medicine  most  likely to  save their
lives, because it costs more than poorer drugs? — and is the
soul of less import than the body ?  If a musket or cannon,
or any warlike implement of a novel  and more destructive
quality, be adopted by one government, do not the others
straightway throw aside the old one, and take up the ucav ?
— and is it of more importance to destroy than to save ?
   Shame upon such sordid arguments !  Thousands of  con-
victs  are made so  in consequence of a faulty organization
of society, — in consequence of ignorance and temptation ;
many are made so  in consequence of almost  inevitable he-
reditary  propensities, too  strong  for their control; some
ought, doubtless, to be considered as victims, and moral pa-
tients, rather than responsible beings ; they are thrown u]>-
on  society  as a sacred charge : and that society is  false to its
trust, if it neglects any means for their reformation, especial-
ly if it  refuses the necessary funds, while it has money to
throAV away  on any pomp or pride, be it of peace or Avar.
   We hold that the moment the earnings of a prison come
up to its expense, then the severity of labor should be di-
minished,  and more time be given  to  the convicts for intel- 
80
lectual  and  moral instruction, for which  extra teachers
should  be  provided, until there be  one for every ten or
twelve  men, if the funds will allow it;  and if the profits
still increase, they should then be appropriated in some oth-
er way  to the convict's improvement, and not tempt the cu-
pidity of the State, and excite  the prisoner's distrust of the
motives of his imprisonment, by making his earnings seem
a bonus upon legal convictions and the prolonged sentences.
   Some may maintain that the  State has a right  to require
of the convict to pay back, as  far  as possible, the expense
to which he has put it by his depredations and by his trial.
As a matter of abstract right, this may be so; but it should
be considered, that to require entire repayment would be to
exact the pound of flesh  which would draw with it every
drop of blood from the body ; for, Avere a convict to live to
the age  of Methuselah, he could not pay back his full pro-
portion  of the cost of the vast machinery of justice.   If
this principle be acted upon at all, it should be administered
in the spirit of the neAv dispensation, which forgives sev-
enty times seven, and not in that of the old, which requires
an eye  for an eye and a tooth  for a tooth.   The convict
should,  at any rate, be able to lay up something for the day
of his departure from the  prison.
   But to return to the subject, —the preference in this coun-
try for Congregate prisons. When a new prison is to be es-
tablished,  the edifice and the system of discipline are to be
discussed  and selected by a body  of men who, however
unfitted they may be  for understanding any  other merit of
a system, can all appreciate that of economy.  When, there-
fore, it  is proved, as it can be, that a prison  upon the Con-
gregate  system will pay its own way, the  strongest argu-
ment has been urged in its favor; and when  it is  added, as
it  may be with truth, that some State prisons pay several
thousand dollars per annum net gain into the State treas-
ury,  what chance is there for the adoption of another sys-
tem, which, however favorable it may be  to the reformation
of the prisoners,  may require a tax for its support ? 
81
  The next reason why the Congregate system  has  found
favor in this country is, that  this Society has strenuously
advocated it, and  by its pecuniary resources, and by the
whole moral influence of the  names o( its members, been
instrumental  in its propagation.   When it  is  considered
that this Society is the only one of its kind in the country
that has the disposal of any considerable funds.—that  its
Reports  have  been the only regular publication upon the
subject  of Prison  Discipline,  until quite recently. — that
those Reports  have been prepared and the  whole  poAver
of the Society directed by its  agent,  who has zealously ad-
vocated  the Congregate system,  and as zealously decried
the  Separate system. — it will be evident that  Ave  do not
underrate the  efleet upon the public, some of Avhoin know
little, and many  of  whom  care less,  about  the  whole
subject.
  Far be it  from us to disparage the merits of that officer.
He has  been a most important agent in a great work of ref-
ormation and  improvement.   He has helped to introduce
the order, the  sobriety, and the industry of the Congregate
system  into prisons which were once  foul dens of corrup-
tion.  But while we recognize the importance of his labors
and the honesty of his  purpose,  Ave are constrained to say
that he  has been led by zeal for a favorite system to  under-
rate and decry a rival one. which, in our view, is vastly su-
perior.   Like  all of us, he is liable to err; and, having once
engaged in a partisan  strife (for such has become the con-
test among  the advocates of the two systems), his very
zeal for the side which In- espoused  has made him blind  to
the merits of the other.   It must be apparent to  any impar-
tial  person who reads  the Reports of our Society, that, in-
stead of discussing the merits of  the two systems upon the
high ground of principle, they have harped upon the imper-
fections and short-comings of the penitentiaries of Pennsyl-
vania, as though failures in their administration Ave re deci-
sive of the gTeat question at issue.  It  is very probable that
a want  of familiarity  with what has been done in Europe
                11 
82
 has caused an undue importance to be given to the trial of
 the two systems in this country.
   However we may dislike the principle of concentration
 of  the whole power of a people in the hands of a few, we
 must confess, that, when that power is brought to bear upon
 great questions of science or humanity, its effects are as
 brilliant  and satisfactory as they are rapid.   When we re-
 flect  how much has been done towards collecting facts by
 this Society, with an income of $3,000, and the agency of
 one man, who devoted  his whole  time to it, we can  con-
 ceive what a great government, with immense funds at its
 disposal,  can do, with the agency of scores of men of tal-
 ents,  learning, and  zeal, whom it  sets to work in every
 country.   It is scarcely ten years since the governments of
 France and Great Britain  began to bestOAV close attention
 to the subject of Prison Discipline.   They selected as their
 agents men already distinguished for talent and learning,
 and,  giving them ample  means, bade them visit all the
 countries where any knoAvledge could  be gained upon the
 subject, and, in their own  time, give the result of their per-
 sonal observations, Avith Avhatever valuable knowledge they
 could collect from the experience of others.
  In  Central Europe, the  Prussian government, and some
 of the smaller German States, and even some of the Swiss
 Cantons,  took measures to collect  information  upon the
 subject.  In the  North, SAveden began  to  demand light
 upon  a subject \vhich had long been discussed in Holland,
and her king himself compiled a Avork upon it; and the
young kingdom of Belgium has already discussed it thor-
oughly.  Several  of these  governments sent commissioners
to this country, to examine closely all our prisons ;  all of
them  obtained the most minute information  that could be
had, and  it is undoubtedly true that at this moment there
are  more  men in Europe who have a thorough knowledge
of the condition  and merits of the various prisons  in the
United States, than there  are in this country.  As an in-
stance of the attention of the government of  France to the 
83
subject, it caused the question to be put to the Academy of
Medicine, whether there Avas any tiling  in the Separate-
system  discipline that Avould be peculiarly injurious to the
bodily or mental  health o( the prisoners.   That body, per-
haps the most learned and scientific in the world, employed
some of its ablest  heads in the solution  of the question,
and  they (as we have said), after mature examination, pro-
nounced that  there Avas  not.  After the return of the vari-
ous commissioners  from this country to  Europe, the  sub-
ject  of their mission  was taken  up in  England,  France,
and  Belgium, and  made the topic  of animated  and pro-
longed  discussion,  especially  in the  French Chamber of
Deputies.
  Now. it  is very remarkable, that, while  this Society has
been resting  in the assurance that the system which it ad-
vocated was the best, ail  the  foreign commissioners  who
have  been sent here reported  it  to be very defective,  and
far inferior to  its rival.  While Ave  were reading pages upon
the superiority of the Congregate  system, the people of the
five most enlightened countries in  Europe were reading the
conclusions of their impartial, scientific men, upon its infe-
riority ; and Avhile Ave  were rejoicing  in the erection of tAvo
or three new prisons upon the Congregate  system,  as a
proof of its  final  triumph  and prevalence, the people of
Europe Avere  witnessing the erection of  scores  of prisons
upon the Separate system.
  The history of this revolution of opinion is Avell Avorthy
of notice.   The  first French commissioners,  Messieurs
Beaumont and De Tocqueville, after careful comparison of
the prisons in the l/nited  States,  pronounced decidedly in
favor of the  Separate  system, as administered in  Philadel-
phia, and against the Auburn system.  In  the recent debate
in the Chamber of Deputies. M. De Tocqueville expressed
himself thus, in answer to the assertion, that the  preference
manifested in  France  for the  Separate system  was owing
to his exertions : — "I defy any one  to name a single sub-
ject which has been so long studied, by  so many dill* rent 
84
persons, in so persevering  and practical  a manner, as the
question before us.  Did the government, after having sent
us to the United States, in 1831, rest there ? Did it not, two
years afterwards,  send two other  commissioners upon the
same errand ?  Did not the British government, likewise,
send commissioners with this object ?  Has not the Prus-
sian government done the same thing ?  Is it not true, that
all these commissioners, without exception, even those who
left Europe opponents to the Separate system, after having
examined the different systems  upon the spot, brought
home to their governments  views  precisely similar to ours ?
Have not the governments since then entered upon this
course with all the knowledge they possessed, with all the
experience they have gained, with all the light which could
be furnished from every quarter ? "
  Again, this eminent statesman, who has such a rare com-
bination of clear insight into principles, and practical knowl-
edge of facts, who, without party feeling, and with a view
only to truth, studied so long  and intimately our prisons,
says, —" Most of those who  have  gone to  the United
States to study prisons upon  the  spot have returned warm
advocates of  the  Separate  system, although  before  their
departure they had conceived and even expressed opinions
unfavorable to it;  all have acknowledged its powerful ef-
fect upon the prisoners."
  De Tocqueville  alludes to  a  second  commission.  It
seems, that, to make sure that all was right, the government
sent M. De Metz,  a few years later, and  on his return he
reported  in these Avords : — " We declare that  our  prefer-
ences and our sympathies are for the system of  Pennsylva-
nia.   In this  system there  are positive advantages for soci-
ety, and positive advantages for the convict.  Under  it cor-
ruption is impossible ;  amendment is probable, and, in  a
great number of cases, certain."   He goes on to enumerate
many other advantages, and  closes with  these words : —
" Such are the principal motives which have inclined us to 
S;5
the system of Pennsylvania, which iioav has the sanction
of time and experience.' '
  The  Report of the  Prussian  commissioner is still more
remarkable, for he had been an advocate o\  the Congregate
system.  He says of the Philadelphia Penitentiary : — '  I
declare  frankly, that,  after  the  knowledge which I have
gained  of  the different prisons  oi' Europe and  America,
none  appears  to  me to alhnv so much  equity and justice
in the  infliction  of pimishment, none  presents  so many
chances of  amendment of the  criminal,  as  the Separate
system, combined with the  regular visits  o( the keepers,
inspectors,  preachers,  teachers,  and  physicians.   I  say
chances of amendment, — for all human efforts are limited,
and ought as  much as possible  to ward off obstacles  that
may prevent the action of divine  grace, which  can alone
effect a complete reform ot the guilty.  This  opinion  is
the result of my observations during my sojourn in Amer-
ica, as well as of my  studies and  reflections since  my re-
turn,  although I Avent  to America entertaining a preference
for the  Auburn system." f
   The  British commissioner, Mr.  Crawford, made a  most
valuable Report, in which he advocates the  Separate sys-
tem.   He  says of the Eastern  Penitentiary of Pennsylva-
nia : — " Upon a careful review of every part of it.  after
seeing the whole, and examining a considerable  number  of
the individuals confined in it,  I have  no hesitation  in de-
claring  my conviction, that  its  discipline  is a safe and effi-
cacious mode  of prison management; that it has no inka-
VORABLE EFFECT  UPON MINI) OR  HEALTH," O-C. %   Again, he
says,  — "In  America, the opponents  of this system  have
produced very erroneous impressions by the  publication  of
certain  experiments, made a few  years since,  of solitude
without labor; statements which have  been widely c ire u-
* Rapport sur les Penitencn ns de& Ki;ii.-. I'nis, p. 11, <t suiv.
f Die Amenk;inischen Bes-serunge Systcmc.  Ijeipy.it;, I)rockh:iu8, in.'tT.
X Crawford's Report, pp. 14, 15. 
86
lated in England, to the great prejudice of solitary impris-
onment of every description."
   Another official Report may be cited, — that of the Com-
missioners appointed by the government of Lower Canada,
who, after visiting our prisons, became convinced of the
superiority of the Separate  system, and close their Report
by saying, — " Such are the considerations which have de-
termined us to give the preference to the Pennsylvania sys-
tem, although it is not  so economical, and may even require
considerable outlay in the beginning." *
   These,  we  believe, are all the official Reports that have
been made, except one to  the government of Upper Can-
ada, which we have not yet been able to procure.  Now,
when Ave  consider that the  commissioners  of four govern-
ments, without any concert of action, some of them  even
opposed to the Separate  system, have all come to the con-
clusion that  it is superior to the  Congregate system, we
cannot help considering it  most remarkable and important
evidence  upon the great subject for the  consideration of
which our Society was formed; and we cannot help regret-
ting that it has not been spread upon the pages of our Re-
ports.
   Is it fair in our Society to assume, as it has done, that
the  Separate system is in every respect so inferior to the
Congregate system, that it will not even consider the argu-
ments in its favor ?  Is it modest to do so, when that sys-
tem  is advocated  by another Society in this country, much
older than ours, and comprehending among its active mem-
bers many more  men  practically acquainted with the sub-
ject of prisons than does ours, and whose experience  leads
them to opposite conclusions ?   Is it Avise  to do so, Avhen
enlightened and  disinterested  foreigners,  who  are lifted
above  the disturbing forces of sectional or party feelings,
all pronounce  us wrong, and others right ?
  * Not having the oriainal document, we retranslate it from the French
translation. 
87
  Besides the mass of evidence furnished in favor of the
Separate system by the sj>eeial commissioners of the  Euro-
pean  governments, there is a vast  amount of testimony in
its favor given by unofficial travellers, mid by authors who
have written on the subject.  Should we cite all the  philo-
sophical and practical writers  upon  the  subject, who give
their testimony in favor of the Separate system, we should
frame a long catalogue ; but, after  naming Professor  Mitte-
mair,  of Germany, and Lucas, of France, Ave  should not
knoAV where to find another author of note  who has writ-
ten in favor of the Congregate system.   We will not even
give a list of the names of the first ; but there is one cir-
cumstance  so significant  oi the imjxirtance  m which the
subject  is  held,  so honorable too  to humanity, that we
must allude to it.   The young king of Prussia, an absolute
monarch of immense  power, has paid great  personal  atten-
tion to  the subject.  He closely examined the model pris-
on  upon the Separate system, in England, and other pris-
ons, and was so impressed with the superiority of the first,
that,  after  consultation, he ordered  four prisons upon the
Sep.-irate system to be erected  in his dominions.   The
king of Sweden, too, a man of clear head and  kind  heart,
gave very close personal attention to the subject;  collected
all  the  evidence  he could from this country, and finally
himself wrote a book upon it, — a book  breathing a beau-
tiful spirit of humanity, full of sound wisdom, and Avhich
warmly advocates the Separate  system.   But Europe fur-
nishes other and stronger evidence in favor of the Separate
system, than the written opinions of philosophers, practical
men, and monarchs ; —there are, and have for years been,
many prisons in  full  operation  upon both systems ;  those
upon  the  Congregate system  have  been tried, and  found
wanting ; those  upon the other have had great success.
  We have  thus presented  some  of the reasons  which
have inclined us to prefer the Separate  to the  Congregate
system.  If they are not  as satisfactory  to other  minds .as
to our oAvn, Ave trust they will  have weight enough  to ob- 
88
 tain  for that system, what it never  has had, a fair hearing
 before  the Society.  We are far from  supposing  that that
 system is perfect; on the contrary, we admit that no sys-
 tem yet adopted fully satisfies us.
   The most important problem connected with Prison Dis-
 cipline yet remains to be solved, namely, — How shall we
 give  the  prisoner sufficient opportunity for cultivating his
 moral and religious nature, by actual exercise of it ? — how
 shall we  strengthen his conscience, by giving such liberty
 as will really call it into action by resisting temptation ? —
 how, in a word, shall we give him such free moral agency
 as will train  him to self-command, without defeating  the
 other great end of his confinement ?  It  is very clear that
 we do not do it now ; it is very clear that we cannot do it
 by merely increasing, ever so much, the present system of
 preachings,  and exhortations, and denunciations : as  well
 might we try to strengthen the muscular  system by teach-
 ing physiology, by setting forth the importance of health,
 and by denunciations of the  sin of neglecting it;  the mus-
 cles will  ever be feeble Avithout actual exercise, and good
 resolutions will  yield to the  first strong temptation, unless
 conscience has first been trained to resist weak ones.   The
 chaplains and religious visiters of prisons are  very apt to
 build false hopes upon  the  appearance of penitence, and
 the expression of good resolutions by  the  prisoners ; for,
 though these  may be real and  unaffected, they are  rarely
 enduring.
   While  in confinement, the convicts  are removed  from
 temptation ; and  the simple  diet and regular life of a pris-
 on lower  the tone of their physical  frame, and reduce the
 violence of their animal  appetites and passions.  In this
 condition  they are more  susceptible of moral and  religious
 impressions, and they often become unaffectedly  penitent.
 Those who have common  sense Avill see that crime is poor
 policy, and form resolutions of  amendment;   those  who
are more  imaginative  have  their feelings wrought  upon,
and pass  through what is called a religious  conversion. 
s'.i
But when they go out into the world, and are stimulated
by excesses,  then the  dormant  passions are aroused, like
Avild beasts from  their lair, and the first temptation too of-
ten witnesses their fall.  The exceptions to this are so rare,
that  prison-keepers, and persons  most acquainted Avith con-
vict-life, seldom have confidence in the reformation of adult
criminals ;  and, to a fearful extent, their skepticism is well
founded.  God is a righteous God, and will not reward a
neglected childhood, an abused youth, and a criminal man-
hood, by after years of peaceful and religious enjoyment ;
these cannot be bought by a compulsory course of good be-
haviour, nor by sudden pangs of remorse.   But is the poor
criminal to be abandoned, and left  a prey to passions which
will destroy him, body and soul ? By no means ; for, where
the blind can be made to read, and the dumb to speak, and
idiots  elevated to the platform  of humanity, it would be
cowardice to despair of these who  have all their senses and
faculties in perfection.
   It is not our duty to point out. in this  Report, the mod-
ifications which are necessary in all our prisons, before they
can  hold out a reasonable prospect  of reforming their unfor-
tunate inmates ;  but we may remark, in general, that what
seems to be most wanted is  the means of adapting the na-
ture and duration of the  punishment to the character and
conduct of the criminal ;  of exercising his  power of self-
control by a certain degree  of independence of conduct;
in a word, of training as well as punishing.
   When  those means are amply  provided.—Avhen  men
shall be disposed  to extend to the poor convict that  forgive-
ness which they  ask for their own daily sins, — when they
shall show towards him a  tithe  of  the  charity and love
which the Great Judge of all ever manifests towards them,
— when there shall be a little of  that joy upon earth over
the  sinner  that  repenteth, of which  there is  so much  in
heaven, — then, indeed, may we hope for the real reforma-
tion of many of the  noAv despised and neglected  inmates
of our prisons.
                  12 
90
   Finally, we would respectfully recommend the adoption
 of the following Resolutions : —
   Resolved, That this Society, being strictly a Prison Dis-
 cipline Society, the whole  of its efforts should  be directed
 to the improvement of prisons, and of penal administration,
 to the exclusion of every other subject.
   Resolved, That this Society is not, and ought not to be
 considered, the pledged advocate of the Auburn system, or
 of any other system now in existence, and that the pages
 of its Reports should set  forth  the merits and  demerits of
 any and all systems of Prison Discipline.
   Resolved, That we recognize  the Directors of the East-
 ern Penitentiary of Pennsylvania as high-minded, honora-
 ble, and sincere fellow-laborers in the great cause of Prison
 Discipline.
  Resolved, That, if any expressions of disrespect have ap-
peared in our Reports, and  justly given pain to our  breth-
ren, this Society sincerely regrets and  apologizes for them.
  All which is respectfully  submitted.
                                      S.  G.  HOWE.
.   •  3577 
 
IV I I I ▼ I
I U 9 W 1U A a 1
iuiitn INOIQiN JO UVIIIl IVNOIIVN


Y OF MEDICINE NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE

Bflll IVNOIIVN 3NI3IQ3W JO ABVBBI1 IVNOIIVN ] N I } I a 3 W JO A «V KB I 1 IVNOIIVN
^3§?4 |
x^i \
*V I  V* i  &s/
i  &%/
YOFMEDICINE N A T I O N A L I I B R A R Y O F M E D I C I N E  N A T I O N A I I I B R A R Y O F M E D I C I N I

w
■ 111 IVNOIIVN iNDIOiW JO A B V « 9 I 1 IVNOIIVN JNI3I01W JO ABVBBI1 IVNOIIVN
*
i   \/5 I
Y OF MEDICINE NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE
Y OF MEDICINE NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE








sail ivnoiivn 3 n i d i o i w jo a a v a a 11 ivnoiivn in i d \a 3 w jo nvign ivnoiivn
  rr
t&r\
^P^\\ :
Y OF MEDICINE NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE
 
NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE NATIONAL LIBRARY
3 N I 3 I 0 ill JO klVIIH IVNOIIVN INDIQIK JO A» V II I 1 IVNOIIVN IN D 101W JO »l»ll


NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MfDIClNI NATIONAl IIIRAIT




 \n i ^/ ;  \Xi X,- \ \r- s
INDIOIH JO tllllll IVNOIIVN INDIOIH JO i I V B B I 1 IVNOIIVN INDIOIH JO IIYII





NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEOICINE NATIONAL IIIRAIT OF MEDICINE NATIONAL LIBIAIT
IN I 3 I a 3 W JO AIVIBI1 IVNOIIVN IN I 3 10 I H JO AIV IB II IVNOIIVN INDIOIH JO AIV»I



  -^K  - JU-  J  --"X.  "•- >9-s  ?    ~°V t
 N4TIONAI lllllll OF MIDICINi NATIONAL IIIIAIT Of MEDICINE  NATIONAL LIBRARY











 INDIOIH JO llfllll IVNOIIVN INDIOIH JO A ■ V I B I 1 1 V N O I I V N  INDIOIH JO A B V I I









'   ^  =      -      6      *     =*

 NATIONAL IIIIAIT OF MEDICINE NATIONAl LIBRARY OF MIDICINI  NATIONAL IIIIAIT











 INDIOIH JO 11*1111 IVNOIIVN 1NI3I0IH JO 11*1111 IVNOIIVN  INDIOIH JO AIVII
nA.MSM  !   * .....
IIDICINI NATIONAl LIBRARY 
MEDICINE
NLM
\\
NLM032037164