Prisons. It is only within recent times that imprisonment has been studied as a scientific process by means of which certain high objects are to be attained, and which therefore ought to be conducted according to a defined system founded on recognised principles. It used to be believed that nothing more was required than to ensure the security of the victim or culprit, by chains and fetters if necessary, unless it were to inflict on him some further bodily pains and penalties, the smallest of which was to feed him with 'the bread of affliction and the water of affliction' ordered by Ahab for the prophet Micaiah. Imprisonment was not mentioned in the Anglo-Saxon laws as a punishment, but was enforced when an offender could not find a surety. In course of time, however, it was authorised by the common law as a punishment, as well as specified by statute for particular offences; nevertheless gaols were actually used more for securing the persons of those committed to them than as places of punishment. Under the common law all gaols belonged to the king, and by 5 Hen. IV. chap. 10 it was enacted that none but the common gaol should be the place of committal for offenders brought before a justice of the peace. But there were many 'franchise' gaols owned by great persons, or by towns and liberties under their charters, which were lawful places for carrying out imprisonment ordered by the persons or bodies to whom these privileges were granted as a part of the criminal jurisdiction placed in their hands. In many cases these bodies had the power of life and death.
In the reigns of Edward VI. and Queen Elizabeth a new description of place of confinement was introduced—viz. the 'bridewells' and 'houses of correction' for vagabonds, &c. By James I. chap. 4, every county was required to provide such an establishment with suitable instruments and appliances in it for setting idle people to work. Another sort of prison is of quite recent introduction—viz. the reformatory and industrial school, institutions which are under private management, but derive the greater part of the funds by which they are maintained from public sources, and are subject to certain general rules and conditions intended to secure efficiency and to prevent abuse, compliance with which is ensured by government inspection. These institutions are for the reception of juveniles whom modern philanthropy has rightly and successfully contended should not be confined in the same establishments as adults, nor treated in the way which is most appropriate for the latter. Reformatories are places of punishment for juveniles under sixteen years of age who are convicted of crime, and sentenced to ten days' imprisonment or more. Industrial schools are not places of punishment at all, but are intended to prevent children becoming criminals through parental neglect or misconduct. A child must be under fourteen years of age to justify his being sent to an industrial school. There are therefore (1) prisons to which
Copyright 1891 in U.S.
by J. B. Lippincott
Company. adults are sent for punishment and reformation; (2) prisons to which juveniles are sent for punishment and reformation, called reformatory schools; (3) prisons or places of compulsory detention to which juveniles are sent as a preventive measure, called industrial schools. To the first of these are sent also persons who are charged with a crime to await their trial, and persons committed by county courts for refusing to pay debts which they have means to pay, or by other courts if they cannot find sureties when ordered for any reason to do so. The course of events has led to the prisons of the first of these three classes being separated into two divisions which have a distinct history. One of these comprises the prisons which are governed by the laws relating to places in which criminals sentenced to penal servitude may be confined; the other comprises the ordinary prisons in which all sorts and classes of prisoners may be confined, but in which, as matters now stand, prisoners under sentence of penal servitude pass only the first few months of their sentences. The former are generally designated convict prisons; the latter are now styled local prisons.
The punishment of penal servitude had its origin in the system of transportation, and transportation itself had its origin in banishment or exile. This was expressly forbidden by Magna Charta, but existed nevertheless as a practice, because a criminal who had incurred the sentence of hanging and had taken sanctuary to avoid his fate was permitted in some cases to escape his punishment if he exiled himself. In course of time the privilege of sanctuary was abolished by law (though its practice existed notwithstanding for some time afterwards), and consequently the system of self-banishment which grew out of it; but before then—viz. in the thirty-ninth year of Queen Elizabeth's reign—banishment had been legally established by the Vagrancy Act, which gave quarter sessions the power of transportation.
Transportation was sanctioned by law in the reign of Charles II. as a mode of dealing with incorrigible rogues, vagabonds, and sturdy beggars, as a punishment for attending an illegal prayer-meeting after a previous conviction of that offence, and to put down the moss-troopers of Northumberland and Cumberland. The transportation was not at first enforced by any direct action of the government, but those sentenced to it were left to carry out their sentences by removing themselves to the West Indies or elsewhere under penalty of hanging if they failed to do so; but in course of time the process became more systematised, and in 1718 it was found necessary to deliver them over to a contractor who engaged to take them to His Majesty's colonies and plantations in America on condition of his having property and interest in their services for a specified term of years. They were given over to slavery in fact, and the contractor at the termination of the voyage put them up to auction and sold their services to the highest bidder. In 1776 it became no longer possible to send these outcasts to America. Some of the colonies had for years past continually protested against the system; but the war of independence left no alternative but to put an end to it, and the government had to find some other mode of disposing of these criminals, estimated in 1778 at 1000 annually. This difficulty originated the practice of confining prisoners in hulks in the Thames or in the harbours of Portsmouth, Chatham, &c.
This was intended only as a temporary expedient pending the execution of an act devised by Blackstone, Eden (Lord Auckland), and Howard, for the building of penitentiaries in England, which were intended to provide a separate cell for each of the inmates, who were during their imprisonment to be employed on useful labour. Chap. 74 of the 19th Geo. III., after reciting that 'the punishment of felons and other offenders by transportation to His Majesty's Colonies and Plantations in America is attended with many Difficulties,' and enacting that such offenders might be transported elsewhere, and that offenders who might be sentenced to be burned in the hand might instead be fined or whipped, proceeds to say that 'whereas, if many offenders convicted of crimes for which Transportation hath usually been inflicted were ordered to solitary imprisonment accompanied by well-regulated labour and religious instruction, it might be the means under Providence not only of debarring others from the commission of the like crimes, but also of reforming the individuals and inviting them to habits of industry, it shall be lawful to appoint supervisors who shall erect penitentiaries where such persons may be ordered to imprisonment and hard labour.' The first hulks were established in 1778; and this fatal temporary expedient serves to illustrate the sarcasm as to the superior permanency of temporary expedients, for the last hulk was not closed until a fire destroyed it in 1857; and in fact they had a perfect representative in Gibraltar prison, which was constructed on the model of a hulk and developed all the iniquities of these establishments, and which was only closed in 1875 after strenuous opposition to its abolition by the local naval and military authorities. Many years were destined to pass before the permanent penitentiary system became a fact. Great efforts were made to revive the transportation system, and in 1787 a new penal colony was founded in Australia. This with the hulks continued to form the punishment next in gravity to capital execution until the last hulk was closed in 1857 and the last batch of convicts was sent to Western Australia in 1867. It is not necessary to describe the hulk system, if system that can be called in which the inmates were herded together in unchecked association, where 'vice, profaneness, and demoralisation' developed, as might be expected, among persons of the basest character, of whom the worst and the most demoralised were likely soon to take the lead, and reduce all down to their own level. They were described by a committee of the House of Commons in 1832 as 'well fed, well clothed, indulging in riotous enjoyment by night, with moderate labour by day, so that life in them is considered "a pretty jolly life."' But the hulks flourished in full vigour for many years after this date; and in fact no attempt was then made to abolish them, which was the only way to put an end to the evils so forcibly commented on.
The history of the phases through which the control and supervision of the hulks passed is, however, of consequence, as it explains the present administration of the convict prisons and shows what methods failed, and furnishes warnings against adopting certain suggestions that are made from time to time. The hulks were at first, like all other prisons, placed under the management of the local justices, who appointed the overseer, and the overseer appointed the officers; the justices also made the overseer contractor for the maintenance of the prisoners, and as it was obviously his interest as contractor to cut short the supplies of food and clothing for the prisoners, they therefore by this measure contrived that his interest should be diametrically opposed to his duty and to the welfare of the prisoners in his charge. The supervision of the hulks resided in the Court of King's Bench, who steadily neglected their duty, and the inspector provided for by parliament was not appointed. In course of time and by degrees the Home Secretary usurped power over these establishments, and his action was endorsed by parlia- ment in 1815; and their connection with the King's Bench was severed in 1825. An inspector was appointed, and after that a superintendent; and after some other changes the control and administration of the hulks was in 1850 vested in the Board of Directors of Convict Prisons, with whom it now rests. The control of Millbank Prison, Pentonville Prison, and Parkhurst Reformatory was confided to the same body.
Transportation to Australia, which was commenced in 1787, for many years provided for only a small part of the persons subjected to that sentence or whose capital sentences were commuted for transportation. Until 1816 an average of only 474 prisoners was transported annually to Australia, after that the average rose to 3000, and in 1834 amounted to 4920. Transportation in its most flourishing days was characterised by evils which rivalled if they did not sometimes surpass those of the hulks.
Whilst, however, it was in full vigour a step was taken, feebly and slowly indeed, towards the creation of the penitentiaries intended in 1776 to form a permanent substitute for transportation to America. Millbank Prison (q.v.) provided means for the confinement of every prisoner in absolute separation, according to the modern doctrine, and it was intended that his treatment should be on the most advanced reformatory system; but this experiment went no further at this time. In 1838 the existence of the terrible evils which attended the transportation system were formally established by the report of a commission, who said that the system was unequal, without terrors to the criminal class, corrupting to both convict and colonist, and very expensive, and they recommended punishment in penitentiaries instead.
Various improvements in the Millbank system were introduced after this, and finally in 1842 it took the form of passing the convicts through two stages of discipline in certain prisons at home before sending them to complete their sentences in one of the colonies. The first of these stages was passed in a prison in which each inmate was kept in complete separation and brought under influences by which it was hoped to lay the foundation of a reform in his character; the second in a prison in which he was employed in useful public works in regulated association, but confined in a cell by himself by night and at all times when not at work or in chapel. The complete efficiency of this stage was at first marred by a certain number of convicts being placed in association at night, but for some time past the separation has been thoroughly carried out, the only exception being in the cases of prisoners who on medical grounds cannot properly be left alone. The first stage was regulated according to the system adopted, first experimentally, at the new model prison at Pentonville which had been erected in 1842. When the experiment had been proved to be successful, convicts were sent to undergo it at Millbank Prison and at other prisons of which the construction was suitable.
In those early days of the formation of the convict system the confinement of prisoners in complete separation was regarded with great prejudice. This arose from the reports of its results in certain prisons in America, where it had been some years before carried out with the accompaniments of darkness, absolute solitude, absence of any employment, and unwholesome sanitary conditions. It was therefore decided after some experiments, and as a sort of compromise with the prejudices above referred to, that the period of separation should be limited to nine months. Since the date when this decision was arrived at much greater experience has been gained, and the unsoundness of the grounds on which this limitation was founded has been fully demonstrated (see the Report of the Directors of Convict Prisons, 1887-88, and the accompanying report of an inquiry into the subject by the medical inspector). The whole of the prisons in the United Kingdom where sentences up to two years are carried out have gradually been remodelled on the separate system; and laws enacted recently in several foreign countries, after full investigation, permit of the isolation of prisoners under proper conditions for much longer periods. There is, therefore, no reason why the separate stage of a sentence of penal servitude should not endure for a period equal to that which may be passed in that condition under a sentence of imprisonment.
The second or public works stage was carried out in prisons like Portland, which was constructed for the purpose in 1847. Dartmoor Convict Prison was opened in 1850 for the same purpose, Portsmouth Prison in 1852, Chatham in 1856, &c. In these the convicts have been employed in large public works, in farming, &c. The breakwater at Portland, the fortifications of that island, the large extension of the dockyards at Chatham and Portsmouth, the forts which protect Chatham, and various other military and naval works, besides the construction of large prison establishments, attest the advantages of the system, which also enables the prisoners to gain a useful knowledge of trades by which they can obtain employment on their release, and affords a most useful reformatory influence in accustoming the prisoners to habits of industry.
From 1844, and more rapidly after 1852, the number of prisoners actually transported gradually diminished; most of those who received that sentence being discharged on free pardon in Britain after serving from half to two-thirds of their sentences. In the course of time the opposition of the Australian colonies to the continuance of transportation led to the abandonment of the system altogether, and since 1867 no convicts have been sent to those colonies. The punishment of penal servitude was by various acts passed between 1853 and 1864 substituted for transportation. These acts introduced certain notable modifications in regard to sentences of the next degree of gravity to capital punishment. When transportation was in force a prisoner on whom such a sentence was passed might be treated in any of three different ways. Commencing his sentence in the local prison, where he remained until it was thought proper to remove him, he might be transferred either (1) to Australia, from which in all probability he never returned, whatever the length of his sentence; (2) to Gibraltar or Bermuda, from which he was brought back to England when he had served a certain portion of his sentence, and there discharged; or (3) to the hulks, or to the 'public works' prisons substituted for them. If he went to Australia he was in the early days assigned as a servant to some free settler, and so at once ceased to be actually a prisoner; but in later years a system was established under which all prisoners first passed a certain time in a convict establishment and then were discharged conditionally to find employers for themselves. It also became the practice ultimately to retain all prisoners sentenced to transportation for a certain time in a prison in England, conducted on the separate system, from which they might be sent either to the hulks or to the 'public works' convict prisons which replaced them, or to one of the convict establishments abroad. If sent to the hulks or 'public works' prisons they might either remain there till discharged, or be drafted off to one of the convict establishments in the colonies. Whichever of these modes of disposing of the convicts was followed, in none of them did they pass the whole of their sentences in the condition of prisoners, a most important consideration to bear in mind. Those who were sent to Gibraltar or Bermuda, as well as those who did not leave the country at all, but were confined in the hulks, were released on free pardon after they had passed about half of their sentences or a little more. Those who went to Australia were released even sooner, but in their case only on certain conditions, by which a hold over them was maintained.
When the objections of the Australian colonies to the continuance of transportation thither made it necessary to adopt some other plan for disposing of these prisoners, the Penal Servitude Act, 1853, was passed in order to carry out a system founded on that which had been followed with regard to prisoners sentenced to transportation, but which provided for the large majority being retained at home. Under this act a sentence of transportation could not be passed for less than fourteen years, and a sentence of penal servitude was substituted for all lower terms. But the sentences of penal servitude permitted by this act were shorter than the sentences of transportation assigned to various crimes under the old acts, because it was intended that the whole of the sentences of penal servitude should be passed in confinement; the terms were therefore fixed so as to correspond with the periods which had actually been passed in prison by convicts who had been sentenced to transportation but not actually sent out of the country. For seven years' transportation or less was substituted for four years' penal servitude; for over seven but not over ten years' transportation was substituted for not under four years and not over six years; for over ten but not over fifteen years' transportation was substituted for not under six years and not over eight years; for over fifteen years' transportation was substituted for not under six years and not over ten years. No difference was made in life sentences. Power was taken in this act to release convicts in the United Kingdom conditionally or on ticket-of-leave, instead of releasing them as formerly on free pardon. It was not intended that this power should be exercised in the case of sentences of penal servitude, as they had already been shortened to the terms actually served in prison under the sentence of transportation, but only in the case of prisoners sentenced to transportation who were not actually sent out of the country. The convict prisons therefore contained inmates serving under different conditions: those under sentence of transportation might have a remission of part of their sentences if well conducted, those under sentences of penal servitude could get none.
Before long it was found that great disadvantage in training and reforming the convicts, and in managing them by appealing to better feelings than those of mere fear, arose from the absence in the case of prisoners sentenced to penal servitude of the hope of gaining a remission of sentence; and the comparison in this respect between these prisoners and others in the prisons who were under sentence of transportation gave rise to great discontent among the prisoners. The consequence was that in 1857 another act was passed which made the length of sentences of penal servitude the same as former sentences of transportation, and thus facilitated the application of the system of remission to sentences of less than fourteen years as well as to those above that term. The House of Commons Committee (1856), on whose report this course was adopted, also recommended the introduction of a shorter term of penal servitude intermediate between the highest term of imprisonment then in ordinary use and the lowest term of transportation or, as it had become, penal servitude. Accordingly the Act of 1857 authorised a sentence of not less than three years' penal servitude for any offence which might be punished by seven years' transportation. In carrying out this act prisoners were allowed to gain remission of a portion of these short sentences as well as all the others.
About this time very warm discussions were being carried on on the subject of penal systems, originating partly no doubt in the great change necessitated by the gradual abolition of transportation; and about 1861-62-63 those who attacked the system which had actually been introduced were able to point to a recent increase of crime as a justification of their attacks on it, more particularly on the ticket-of-leave system. Great point was given to this feeling, and it was much intensified, by an outbreak of crimes of violence in the metropolis (garrotting), of which the number rose to eighty-two during the six months beginning June 1862, having been only sixteen in each six months from the beginning of 1860 to June 1862. The result was that a Royal Commission was appointed to report on the Penal Servitude Acts and the system adopted to carry them out. In consequence of the report of this commission in 1864 another Penal Servitude Act was passed, in which the government did not fully adopt the recommendations of the Royal Commission as above set forth, but they raised the minimum term of penal servitude from three years to five years, except in the case of those who incurred a second sentence of penal servitude, in whose cases seven years was the minimum term permitted. This latter provision was repealed by the Prevention of Crimes Act, 1879.
A review by the light of later experience of the grounds on which the recommendation of the Royal Commission was made cannot but lead to the opinion that the experience of the Act of 1857 had been too short to justify the formation of any sound opinion of its effects. As regards the outbreak of violence in the metropolis, this was without doubt, as subsequent events showed, the work of a small number of men who adopted that form of robbery (a very common feature in the history of crime), and when these men were arrested and received exemplary sentences the crime ceased altogether. The remarkable feature of the figures for 1856-63 was not that they were especially high in 1862-63, but rather the extraordinarily low level to which they had suddenly fallen in 1860, and from which they rebounded.
The directors of convict prisons in their recent annual reports had more than once referred to the anomaly peculiar to the United Kingdom by which no sentence was possible between two years—which was practically the limit of a sentence of imprisonment—and five years, which is the shortest legal sentence of penal servitude, and had expressed their opinion that it was desirable to re-introduce the power of sentencing to penal servitude for terms as low as three years, which existed from 1857 until the Act of 1864, and was abolished by that act in consequence of the report of a Royal Commission, founded, as the directors showed, on erroneous deductions from imperfect data. In 1891 an act was passed to allow of the sentence of three years being imposed in future. By the Act of 1857 power was given to the Secretary of State to release convicts conditionally before the expiration of their sentences. This system, known as the ticket-of-leave system, was at the time strenuously attacked, under the erroneous supposition that it first introduced a system of releasing prisoners before they had served their full sentences; but this, as has been already stated, they never actually had done. On the contrary, under the ticket-of-leave system they were in point of fact detained to serve in prison a larger part of their sentences than had been customary before. Moreover, under the new system, instead of being absolutely pardoned when released, they were subject to revocation of their licenses if they did not conduct themselves well, by which their abstention from crime was materially guaranteed.
The principle on which the system of punishment is founded is that those who are subject to it should suffer discipline of such degree of severity as may act as a deterrent to them and to others who might be tempted to become criminals, but that they should at the same time be brought under the reformatory influences of religious teaching, good example, and such training in self-control as can be given by offering certain advantages to industry and good conduct, as well as inflicting suitable punishment for the reverse. Every effort is made to prevent that mutual contamination which was such a serious blot on prisons of the old type, and those prisoners who have not been previously convicted and are on inquiry found clearly to be only beginners in crime are formed into a separate body, who, from the badge by which they are distinguished, are called the Star class, and who are kept strictly apart from all others. The mode of carrying out the sentence of penal servitude is as follows: Every convict who receives this sentence is placed for the first nine months in a prison in which his whole time is passed in a separate cell, except, of course, the time devoted to public worship, necessary exercise, &c.; but at all times he is so far as possible isolated from his fellows. The remainder of his time in prison is passed in one of the large establishments in which useful work is carried on in a regulated association, and he is able by industry combined with good conduct to earn a remission of nearly one-fourth of his sentence, besides gaining certain privileges in regard to letter-writing, visits from his friends, and such like indulgences, and a gratuity to be paid to him on his discharge. The practice which existed until 1864 of encouraging industry and good conduct by certain increases in the diet was discontinued from that date, as it was held that to allow a prisoner more or better diet than absolutely necessary led to undesirable contrasts with poor but honest folk who could afford no such indulgences; and it will easily be seen that this principle, which is of course applicable to other things besides diet, makes it very difficult to devise a suitable system of rewards for prisoners while retaining the necessary penal or restrictive conditions of prison life.
At the head of every convict prison is the governor, whose duty it is to administer and supervise all branches of the prison. He is assisted by a staff who have to control and regulate the discipline and employment of the prisoners, and a staff of clerks, who keep a record of all matters relating to the prisoners and their sentences, their conduct, &c.; and also by a steward or storekeeper, with a staff of clerks, who has the charge of stores and accounts. The chaplain conducts divine service, visits and advises the prisoners. He has under him schoolmasters, who conduct their education. A Roman Catholic priest is appointed to some prisons, and in them are collected all the prisoners of that communion. The medical officer has charge of matters relating to the health of the prisoners. The hospital is constructed on the most modern principles, and provides accommodation for some patients in separation and for the association of those for whom the medical officer thinks it necessary. To control and supervise these convict prisons a body called the Directors of Convict Prisons was created for England and Wales by statute in 1850, whose powers unite those of visiting justices of ordinary prisons with those of various bodies which had been created by parliament from time to time to govern the various institutions thenceforward placed under their management—viz. Millbank Penitentiary, Pentonville Model Prison, Parkhurst Reformatory, the hulks, and the convict prisons at Portland, &c., by which the hulks were superseded. A similar body was created for Ireland in 1854, and there a system founded on and closely resembling that which had been developed in England was created; but until 1888 (when a convict prison was established at Peterhead in connection with the convict labour at the harbour-works) all male convicts sentenced in Scotland served the greater part of their sentences in convict prisons in England. The convict prisons are visited frequently by one or more of the directors, whose duty is to see that the governor and the other officers of the prison are doing their duty, to hear and determine reports of misconduct of prisoners of such gravity that the governor cannot deal with them under the powers vested in him, and to hear and determine any reports against the prison officers. To directors also the prisoners can complain or appeal if they consider they are not fairly treated, or bring forward any requests they have to make, but which the governor has no power to comply with. A body of gentlemen from among the magistrates is also appointed by the Secretary of State to act as independent visitors, and so form a further guarantee against abuses in the prison, and a channel by which any grievances felt by any prisoner can be brought forward.
Each day marks are awarded to every prisoner according to his industry, and these marks measure daily his progress towards attaining that remission of about a quarter of his sentence which he is allowed to earn, as well as towards his promotion to a higher class, in which he may enjoy certain privileges before referred to. The punishments inflicted on those prisoners who misconduct themselves consist of close confinement, sometimes in a semi-darkened cell, reduction of diet, and forfeiture of the privileges already earned, such as gratuity to be paid on discharge, periodical letters, visits from friends, &c., and forfeiture of remission, flogging with a 'cat' or a birch, which is awarded only in the gravest cases, such as assaults on warders, &c.
The cessation of transportation in 1867, and the consequent accumulation in the United Kingdom of all prisoners discharged on expiration of their sentences or on conditional license, instead of in a distant colony, might reasonably have been expected to increase the amount of serious crime, by the return of many of them to their former habits of life. As a matter of fact no such result has followed. On the contrary, the various influences which have been at work to check and repress crime, among which a well-regulated prison system may claim its due share, have enormously reduced the number of convicts under sentence.
About the beginning of the reign of Queen Victoria, when the population of England and Wales was about fifteen millions, there were 43,000 convicts in New South Wales and Van Dieman's Land, besides others in the colonial penal settlements, in the hulks at home about 3000 or 4000, several hundreds at Millbank, about 900 each at Bermuda and Gibraltar, or about 50,000 in all. By 1869 this large number was represented by 11,660 prisoners under sentence of penal servitude, of whom 9900 were males and 1760 females, and this number had been further reduced on March 31, 1891, to 4978—viz. 4654 males and 324 females. In Ireland there were 922 males and 403 females in 1869, and 434 males and 26 females in 1891.
The number of persons who have received sentences of transportation or penal servitude has diminished enormously. In the year 1837, 3785 persons were sentenced to transportation, and 4068 actually transported; in 1842, 4481 were sentenced and 4166 transported. In 1869 the number of persons in Great Britain whose crimes were so grave as to justify their being sentenced to penal servitude was 2219; this number has continuously fallen, till in 1889 it was only 1039, and in 1890 only 828; yet during the interval the population of Great Britain has risen from 25,529,184 to (1891) 37,740,283. In Ireland, with a population of about 5,500,000, in 1869 there were 191 sentences of penal servitude, and in 1889, with a population of about 4,700,000, there were 83 such sentences. Of the present convict prison population in England and Wales, 515 have been placed on the Star class. These are found practically to be of an entirely different stamp from the habitual prisoners. They are more easy to manage, more willing and industrious, and experience shows that but few of them come back to a convict prison on reconviction after their discharge.
As regards the health of the prisoners in convict prisons, the statistics show that the favourable conditions under which they are placed on account of the great attention to sanitary requirements, the regularity of their lives, and the constant medical care taken of them result in a low mortality of 10.5 per 1000 in an average of years; and this result is brought about in spite of a large proportion of the inmates of prisons being persons of low type, who have led dissipated and irregular lives. The conduct of the prisoners is, as a rule, very good, the result of a steady system of control under which exact discipline is enforced, and, while good conduct and industry are encouraged, misconduct is surely punished. The greater number of prisoners conform to the regulations so readily that either they do not incur any report or punishment of any kind, or at most commit some trifling breach of regulations; and in fact the great bulk of the prison offences are committed by a few habitual offenders against the rules.
The prisons in which sentences of imprisonment are carried out have a separate history from that of those which have been described. There were so far back as two centuries ago occasional protests against the abuses and cruelties practised in prisons, and a notable parliamentary inquiry into the misconduct of a gaoler named Bembridge was held in 1730; but until the last quarter of the 18th century the idea that prisoners had any claim for humane treatment had hardly made any way beyond the circle of a few philanthropic reformers; any attempt to use the period of imprisonment to improve the nature of the criminal was almost unknown. The way to better things was undoubtedly opened by Howard's visits of prison inspection about 1776, and in following years, and by his reports on the condition of the prisons he visited, followed as they were by proposals for reform and improvements which were enjoined and encouraged by acts of parliament. Solitary confinement with labour and instruction was approved by statute in 1774, and in 1784 general regulations were formed for the treatment of prisoners, among which a proper classification of prisoners according to the gravity of their offences was enjoined. In 1791 justices were enjoined to visit and inspect these prisons three times in each quarter, and to report on them to quarter sessions. In 1814 the appointment of chaplains was made compulsory. But compliance with these statutory reforms did not immediately follow, for indeed it was a long time before they passed into the stage of practical fact. In 1818 there still remained 518 prisons in the United Kingdom, to which more than 100,000 prisoners were committed in the year, and only twenty-three of these had been subdivided so as to enable the above classification to be carried out. In fifty-nine of them the males were not divided from the females (and in fact there was no statutory injunction to this effect until 5 Geo. IV. chaps. 65 and 85). In 445 prisons there was no employment of any kind for the prisoners; in 100 of the gaols overcrowding was excessive; no less than 13,057 prisoners were crowded into the space which, according even to the moderate demands of those days, was fit for only 8545. The prisons were in many cases so ill-regulated that they became scenes of abandoned wickedness. In 1835 and 1839 most important legislative steps were taken. Further rules of administration were laid down in the acts passed in these years, and inspectors of prisons were appointed to see that they were carried out. By the latter act also the vital importance of a suitable design and construction for gaols as an aid to good prison management was recognised by the creation of the office of Surveyor-general of Prisons to advise in these matters.
Howard had advocated the complete separation of prisoners by placing each of them in a cell alone, and this was provided for in the Penitentiary Act, 1778. The practice was adopted in a few county prisons, and it was again enjoined together with daily divine service and the absolute separation of males from females in 5 Geo. IV. chaps. 65 and 85, but the expense of building these cells fortified a prejudice against the 'solitary' system, which was largely increased by the too thorough mode in which it had been carried out in America. A commission which was sent in 1834 to America to inquire into the matter, however, reported entirely in favour of the principle of separation if judiciously carried out. Their recommendation was followed in the construction of Pentonville Model Prison in 1842, and the success of the system led to an extensive reconstruction of county prisons on the same plan, finally resulting in that system being adopted to the exclusion of any other.
Although some progress in other respects followed the Acts of 1835 and 1839, there was still so much imperfection and such want of uniformity in rules, diet, labour, &c. that further reforms and stronger pressure on the local authorities in whom the management of the prisons was vested was urgently called for. These were provided by the Prison Act, 1865, which enacted a code of rules for all prisons, and required that each male prisoner should be provided with a separate cell.
In 1878 a further and most important step was taken by the transfer of the control and pecuniary charge of all the local prisons to the government, represented in each member of the United Kingdom by a body of commissioners appointed by royal warrant. This measure was justified by the impossibility of ensuring due uniformity in the treatment of prisoners in all gaols so long as they remained in the hands of so many independent local authorities, by the great difficulties, amounting to impossibility, in getting some of the local authorities to provide proper prison buildings, and by the unnecessary costliness which resulted from the existence of so many small and independent prisons; for there were still no less than 113 of these establishments in England and Wales, 57 in Scotland, and 38 (besides 95 bridewells) in Ireland. The consolidation which has resulted from them has made a very large saving in the cost of prisons. There are now only 58 local prisons in England and Wales, 15 in Scotland, and 22 in Ireland. In Scotland the geographical conditions have led to the adoption of a system of licensed cells under charge of the police, where prisoners under sentence not exceeding fourteen days may be retained. These are allowed in twenty-eight places to avoid the necessity of sending such prisoners long distances to serve a short sentence. The population of these little prisons is for the most part from one to two. In the years 1876-77, the last in which the prisons were under the local authorities, their cost in England, exclusive of new buildings and interest on loans, &c., was £495,068; in 1889-90 it was £320,381; and it has since fallen still further. The diminution would have been larger but that in various ways the service has been improved. Roman Catholic priests are now generally appointed and paid for their services; the clerical work formerly largely done by prisoners is performed by paid clerks; attention is more generally paid to the schooling, and more money expended on schoolmasters. These acts have also ensured substantial uniformity of treatment throughout the United Kingdom, because all rules are now made by the Secretary of State or Lord-lieutenant of Ireland.
Prisoners before trial form a separate class in the prisons, and are now subjected to no more inconvenience than is necessary to ensure security and due order and discipline in the prison. They may wear their own clothes and supply their own diet if they choose, have full opportunities of receiving visits from their friends and corresponding with them, and are not obliged to perform any unaccustomed or menial labour for themselves if they will pay for assistance.
Debtors also are kept apart from other prisoners. The rules made in the Prisons Act, 1865, with regard to this class of prisoner were no doubt framed in view of the practice of imprisonment for debt which had not then been abolished by law. But the act subsequently passed in 1869 made it possible to imprison only those debtors who refuse to pay when they have the means, and as this is a species of fraud they hardly deserve the consideration which, under the rules, is accorded to them. They are under no obligation to work, are allowed to lounge about in association, may provide their own clothing, bedding, and food, which may include wine and beer, and are allowed more frequent visits and letters from their friends than criminal prisoners.
The Prisons Act, 1865, also allowed the creation of a class of misdemeanants of the first division, who might be put in that class by the sentencing court; and the special sympathy accorded to sedition and seditious libel led to persons found guilty of these crimes being, by the law of 1877, secured in the privileges of this class. They are allowed a specially furnished room, and may provide their own clothing, bedding, and food, the services of an assistant to clean their rooms, and, on payment, full use of books, newspapers, &c., and certain privileges as to additional letters and visits at the discretion of the visiting committee. They are not considered criminal prisoners. Doubts have sometimes been expressed whether the power of making a distinction of this sort in the punishment awarded to different offenders has been wisely exercised. It would recommend itself to most people that such an offender as a clergyman, who is imprisoned for not conforming to the rubric, should suffer little or no punishment beyond the deprivation of liberty, but a fraudulent bankrupt, or one who committed a criminal assault, or who incited others to crime and violence, is not necessarily a proper object for similar consideration on the ground of his social position being higher than that of an ordinary typical criminal.
To pass from these special classes to the ordinary prisoners, the general rule is that after sentence every prisoner is permitted to raise himself progressively by industry, combined with good conduct, through four stages, in each of which he gains some amelioration of his treatment. Commencing with penal or first-class hard labour—with sleeping on a wooden bed on which there is no mattress, and with great restrictions as to books, letters, and visits—he gradually gains an improvement in each of these matters, and in each stage accumulates a small sum, larger in the higher stages than in the lower, which is either given him or laid out for his benefit on his discharge. If in spite of these encouragements he still fails to conduct himself in conformity with the regulations, he may be subjected to punishment by deprivation of diet, confinement in a cell which is nearly dark, and in case of violence corporal punishment with a birch or a cat-of-nine-tails. The necessity for these punishments has, however, very largely diminished—a result of the system of progressive stages; for if ill-conducted or idle his progress into the higher stages is delayed, or he may be degraded into a lower stage after attaining to a higher. Comparing the number of dietary punishments in 1877 (the last year before the prisons were brought under the government) with the number in 1890, it is found that while the prison population has diminished by one-third, this form of punishment is less by one-half. Certain powers for the infliction of punishment reside with the governor, but corporal punishment or heavier sentences than he is empowered to award can only be inflicted by order of the magistrates who form the visiting committee of each prison, or by a commissioner.
The visiting committee are appointed every year by quarter sessions, about twelve to each prison. Their duty is to visit the prison periodically, to hear any complaints of the prisoners, to deal with reports made of the misconduct of any prisoners, and to fulfil certain other functions more particularly laid down in the rules made by the Secretary of State; but they have no authority over the officers. In fact, whereas up till 1878 the local authorities managed the prison, and the government inspected it, the position is now reversed, the government manages and the local justices inspect. A cardinal principle of the prison system is that every prisoner under sentence should be fully employed, but the description of employment varies in the different stages of the sentence. On first reception, and for a month at least, hard penal labour is exacted from everybody sentenced to hard labour, according to their strength and capacity. The tread-wheel or crank is the typical form of this 'first-class hard labour,' as it is called; stone-breaking, oakum-picking, and some other forms of labour are enforced in the case of prisoners who are unfit for the tread-wheel. After this industrial labour is allowed, according to the capabilities of the prisoner, and forms a relief from the dull monotony of the first-class hard labour. A large proportion of the prisoners supply the wants of the prison population by weaving, tailoring, &c., and the list of trades followed or articles made in the prisons enumerated in the annual reports reaches to about 150; but, as may be imagined, there is a large number of prisoners who know of no industry which can be followed in a prison cell, and great difficulty is found in providing them with work, for they do not generally stop long enough to learn a trade to any good purpose. Mat-making and matting-weaving, which was, it is believed, introduced many years ago as a prison industry, is a trade which is very easily learned; but the same reason which recommends it for prison purposes makes it appropriate for many charitable institutions, such as blind schools, &c., and enables free persons who are incapacitated for other work to find employment at it. These latter are naturally anxious to diminish the competition of prison labour in their trade, though it forms now an exceedingly small part of that which they have to contend with, for the product of machinery and foreign and colonial labour, besides the introduction of rival materials to serve the same object, far exceeds the output from the labour of prisoners in this country. The number of prisoners employed in this industry has, however, by the efforts of the prison authorities, been diminished from nearly 3200 to 747, whose work is, for the reasons given above and because of the necessary conditions of prison labour, probably not more than that of one-fourth or one-fifth the same number of free labourers.
Every prison has its medical officer, and a well-regulated and well-constructed infirmary. The death-rate has decreased from 10.8 per 1000 to 8.2 per 1000 in prisons in England and Wales. The absence of all diseases due to insanitary conditions is the main reason of the healthy condition of the prisoners; and no doubt the strict temperance—for no alcoholic liquors form part of the dietary—and the regular life contribute to this result.
In order that the standard of efficiency may be maintained in all the prisons, and that opportunities may be given to both officers and prisoners to communicate any complaints they may have to make, inspectors are appointed to visit each prison at least monthly, and to report to the commissioners on any point which may require their intervention. From the time when the prisons were taken over by the government in 1878 there has been a very large and almost uninterrupted diminution in the number of prisoners, who form the prison population. In June 1878 there were 21,030 prisoners, and the average number during that year was 19,818; in the prisons in England and Wales in June 1890 there were 14,122, and the average number of prisoners during the year 1890 was 13,495. It would be absurd to claim this result as all due to any change of prison management, but there can be no doubt that this has had its share in the result, just as in former years bad prison management was a potent cause of the increase of crime.
The indication of the diminution of crime which is afforded by these prison statistics is fully corroborated by those which are derived from other sources. It is found that during the fifteen years 1875-90, while the population has increased by about 25 per cent., the number of convictions for what is in ordinary language considered a crime—i.e. offences involving dishonesty, violence, &c.—instead of increasing in proportion with the population, has progressively diminished considerably. In England and Wales from 1880-85 there were 149,046 summary convictions annually, and from 1895-1900, 146,143 annually, a reduction of 16.9 per 100,000 of population. In the same periods there were 9962 and 7766 convictions on indictment respectively, showing a reduction of 33.8 per 100,000 population. But for the increase in the number of commitments for technical offences, which are rather offences against social discipline than crimes, the total number of commitments would have very largely diminished. The police returns show too that the number of the criminal classes has decreased by about 22 per cent., and the number of disorderly houses has shown a corresponding diminution.
The design and construction of a prison is, as may be supposed, a feature of the very first importance. Security is of course one of the essentials, but there are others almost as important. In looking over old prisons one cannot but be struck with the massiveness of construction of many of them—the huge bars and bolts, the large clumsy locks, the ponderous grated doors, and, sometimes chained to the wall, the heavy fetters with which the prisoners were loaded. In the old prison at York, built under the inspiration of the Rev. Sydney Smith, part of which still exists, security is provided for by making the walls of the cells of a rough stone, some 6 feet square and 2 or 3 feet thick, and grated windows of massive iron exclude the light. By such means as this it was intended to ensure the safe custody of the prisoners without constant personal watchfulness and supervision by the prison staff. All this is changed in the prisons of more recent date, but the security is even greater than before, because in a prison of modern construction the supervision can be more thorough. In a prison of modern construction the site is surrounded by a wall about 18 feet high, outside of which, unless a road or street runs along the boundary, a margin of about 20 feet is left unbuilt on as a precaution against the facilities which buildings against a wall may give for scaling or breaking through it.
The prison is entered through two pairs of double gates, having a space between them sufficient for a wagon to stand in, so that the solid outer gate may be shut before the grated inner gate formed of iron bars is opened. At the side of the gate is the porter's lodge, and perhaps certain waiting accommodation and rooms in which the prisoners may, under supervision, receive visits from their friends. These gates give admission to the outer court of the prison. Opposite the gate is probably the entrance of the main building; the offices of the governor, chaplain, &c. are placed here. After passing these the buildings occupied by prisoners are arrived at.
Every prisoner occupies a cell measuring 13 feet by 7 feet, and containing 800 cubic feet of air, with a grated window, part of which is made to open; in the wall are inlets from a channel for fresh air, warmed when necessary by hot water pipes, and outlets for foul air drawn out through flues which communicate with a furnace and tall chimney in the roof. On shelves in the wall are the books and the small utensils provided for the prisoner's use. The furniture consists of a stool to sit on, a fixed table, a wooden bed board and a coil pillow, sheets, blankets, and rugs, and a mattress for the prisoners who have passed the first stage. In some cells a crank, or a loom, or such other fixed means of employment, is provided, and a bell-pull, by means of which a warder's attention can be called when necessary, and an eye-hole in the door through which the warder can inspect the prisoner.
Rows of cells such as this are arranged alongside each other, and on opposite sides of a corridor about 16 feet wide, which is open to the roof; and there may be above the ground-floor two or three tiers of cells, access to which is given by iron stairs and a gallery off which the cells open. There are possibly some cells on a lower level, where usually the heating apparatus and sometimes the cook-house, bakehouse, workshops, and stores are situated; but in the most recent constructions it is thought better to place these latter in separate buildings outside the block of cells. A hospital for sick patients is provided, and a separate block of cells in which prisoners are placed on first reception, and where they are cleansed and examined by the doctor, and their private property and clothes taken from them, the latter being replaced by a prison suit if the prisoner is convicted, or if before conviction he prefers not to wear his own clothes. There is a tread-wheel house in many prisons, and often a mill, which is worked by the tread-wheel, and which supplies flour or water for the prisoners' use. The department for females is put distant from that for males, and no male officer is allowed into the female division unless he is accompanied by a female warder or matron. Storerooms are provided where it may be most convenient, for the provisions, clothing, materials for manufacture, &c. The chapel is a prominent feature in the prison, for prayers are read before all the prisoners who can attend every morning, and on Sunday there are morning and evening services. In prisons built on this model towards the middle of the century the chapel was divided into little boxes, so as to isolate prisoners completely from each other. This construction has for some time been abandoned; it failed in its object, and in fact helped to prevent detection of an offender, while it was thought to diminish the influence of the minister and the effect of the service.
In connection with the offices is a library of selected books for issue to the prisoners, which is under the control of the chaplain. In some part of the cell block is a bath-house, where prisoners are required to wash themselves periodically; and in connection with the female side of the prison is a laundry for the washing of the prisoners' clothing, sheets, &c., and in which also sometimes washing is done for people outside on payment. There are also workshops in which carpenters, smiths, &c. can carry on their trades for the benefit of the prison. Large airy yards surround the blocks in which the prisoners live. In these they take their daily exercise under supervision of warders, pacing round and round a ring, separated by such an interval from each other as may prevent oral communication. Part of the space inside the walls is often cultivated for vegetables for consumption by the prisoners.
Since 1869 a new feature has been developed in controlling the criminal class. By an act passed in that year and revised in 1871, the latter being called the Prevention of Crimes Act, any person convicted on indictment a second time may be subjected to 'supervision' by the police for seven years after the expiration of his sentence. During this period he is required to report himself to the police once a month, and to keep them informed of his residence; he is also required to prove his innocence if certain suspicious circumstances are brought against him. If he fails to comply with the obligation to report himself he may be imprisoned for a year with hard labour. The convict released conditionally before the termination of his sentence is subject to similar obligations, and if there are reasonable grounds for believing that he is leading a criminal life, or showing himself unworthy of the freedom conditionally granted him, or if he should be actually convicted of crime, he may be returned to prison to undergo the whole of that part of his sentence which was remitted.
To aid in the work of detecting criminals a Habitual Criminal Register has been established, in which the names, descriptions, photographs, and criminal career of all persons who are proved to have been twice convicted on indictment are recorded. This register is printed and circulated to all police forces and prisons, and thus these authorities have at their command means of establishing the identification of any prisoner who comes into their custody, who is suspected to be an habitual criminal, and can ascertain what prison should be applied to for further evidence on the subject. In order to supply means of ascertaining whether any person in custody is on the register of habitual criminals, in cases where no special identity is suggested, a Distinction Marks Register has been established, in which all the peculiar marks, or other remarkable personal peculiarities of those who have been registered, are classified and recorded.
It will readily be understood that it would not accord with the modern theory of punishment combined with reformation to turn any prisoner adrift at the prison gate on completing his sentence, to seek for means of earning an honest livelihood with all the disadvantages which his connection and imprisonment obviously entail upon him. The first statutory recognition that it was right and expedient to make some provision for prisoners on discharge was in 32 Geo. III. chap. 45, by which justices might convey any such person by pass back to his parish; and at the opening of the chapel of the New House of Correction for Middlesex, the chaplain, the Rev. Samuel Glasse, pointed out that, the discipline and training of the prison having it might be hoped supplanted the prisoners' habits of idleness and profligacy by habits of industry, the magistrates might be able to speak of them according to their merit or demerit to the parish officers. He observed, however, that this would not provide for the cases of Irish delinquents who had no settlement in the United Kingdom, but who were not few in number, as indeed they are not at this present day, when they furnish to British gaols an entirely disproportionate number of inmates. He thus showed the necessity for doing what in more recent times has been undertaken by societies for the aid of discharged prisoners. In 1823 the Gaol Act enabled a moderate sum of money to be paid for the benefit of discharged prisoners out of the rates, or from public benefactions belonging to the gaol, in order that they might resort to any place of employment or honest occupation. In 1862 societies for the aid of discharged prisoners received statutory recognition, and the money awarded by the justices for the assistance of any prisoner, to an amount not exceeding £2 per head, might be handed over to these societies for their benefit. This act was obviously a recognition of societies which already existed, but it afforded a great stimulus to the formation of others. The earliest of the existing societies, according to the list published by the Reformatory and Refuge Union, was the Hampshire Society, which dates from 1802; Dalston Female Refuge dates from 1805; the Sheriffs' Fund, which deals with City cases, from 1807. When the prisons were handed over to the government in 1878 there were about 30 discharged prisoners' aid societies acting in connection with the prisons, then 113 in number, and still numbering 66, even after the reduction which took place in the first two years.
The transfer of all prisons to the government in 1878 had a most important effect in adding to the number of those societies. The Prisons Act had been passed partly to ensure uniformity of treatment of prisoners in all localities, and those who advocated the claims of the discharged prisoner were not slow to perceive that the same principle might be made to apply to the system of helping them to obtain honest employment on completion of their sentence; and, further, that the difficulty they had met with in inducing many of the local authorities to provide funds, or in raising private subscriptions, might be overcome, now that the government was responsible, because they were virtually bound to continue the grants which had been made by many local authorities, and could not refuse to make similar grants in places where the local authorities had hitherto failed to do so. In connection with this the Commissioners of Prisons took action with a view to securing the proper appropriation to this purpose of many charities and benefactions devoted in former times to the assistance of prisoners, but the exact objects of which were no longer applicable to existing circumstances. These funds were more or less within the cognisance of the Charity Commissioners, and some of the largest of them had already been diverted to objects quite disconnected from prisons or prisoners; but by means of an act passed in 1882 steps were taken by which most of these funds have been appropriated for the benefit of discharged prisoners through the agency of the above-named societies. Since 1887 every prison in England and Wales has had a discharged prisoners' aid society working in harmony with it. The work carried on by these societies was found so satisfactory that in 1898 the Prison Commissioners issued a new scheme for their guidance, reorganising the system on which the grants in aid were given. At the same time the scheme did not in any way interfere with the voluntary work of the societies, beyond giving advice and grants of money. Male convicts who have served long sentences do not share in these grants, as the gratuity they can earn during their sentence is supposed to give them all the money aid they require if they wish to reform on being released. Two societies in London—the Royal and the St Giles Christian Mission—specially look after them. Female convicts share in the grant, and special provision for them is made at Aylesbury prison, on the same lines as the aid societies at local prisons. In 1899 further steps were taken, in the appointment of lady visitors to all prisons, by the sanction of the commissioners. These ladies co-operate with the prison officials and chaplains, and spare no trouble for the reformation of discharged prisoners or to find them employment. In 1900 the number of discharged prisoners who passed through the hands of the sixty-two aid societies was 39,413. These were assisted with money or clothes, provided with new employment, restored to former employment, sent to homes or other institutions, or aided in other ways; 2000 were unworthy of help, and 1100 refused assistance. The aid societies also take juvenile offenders under their special care. They are taken from the prison gates to the homes, are restored to their parents, provided with employment, or in some way or other helped into the paths of respectability.
United States.—In the early part of the 19th century the most advanced examples of prison discipline and construction were to be found in the United States, and although in the second half of the century this prominent position has not been maintained, the importance of the improvements initiated in America cannot be forgotten. Following closely on Howard's report, the 'Philadelphia Society for Assisting Distressed Prisoners' was founded in 1776—the first of the kind in the world; and, though dissolved during the war, it was reorganised in 1787, and is still at work. Large measures of reform were quickly secured: by 1790 the principle of separation was recognised, and in 1794 all convicts were separated and secluded; in the latter year, also, capital punishment was abolished in Pennsylvania for all crimes but murder in the first degree. It thus became necessary to devise some substitute for capital punishment. At the Eastern Penitentiary at Philadelphia, opened in 1829, the so-called 'Pennsylvania System' of permanent seclusion of convicts was carried out; the evil effects arising from the rigorous application of this principle have been already referred to in this article, and even at Philadelphia the system is not now strictly enforced, whilst in all the other American prisons what is known as the 'Anburn System'—silent labour in association by day, and separation by night—has been adopted. In the southern states prisoners are leased out to the highest bidders for the term of their sentences; but this system, which condemns the convicts to a slavery that is not modified even by considerations arising from personal ownership, is gradually being abandoned. The first place of detention for juvenile delinquents was opened at New York in 1825; the first reformatories on the cottage or family system were established in Ohio—for boys at Lancaster in 1858, for girls at Delaware in 1878.
In 1877 the Elmira (New York) Reformatory was opened, at which a new famous system has been adopted for the treatment of first offenders under thirty years of age; the principal features are indeterminate sentences, the classification of prisoners into three classes under the marks system, and discharge upon probationary parole, under supervision. The prisoners enjoy a luxurious dietary, and many indulgences are granted to induce them to work, so that the penal element of a sentence of imprisonment is entirely absent.
A grave defect alleged by American critics is that in the county gaols and other places of detention for those awaiting trial all such prisoners are compelled to associate in a common hall, with all the evils which follow as a necessary result. It is said also that politics to a large extent determine the selection of prison officials, many of whom are appointed simply for services rendered to their party; and that the interference of labour organisations has had a considerable effect in the direction of putting a stop to contract labour—in New York, to labour of any kind—in the prisons. It may be added that crime has increased in the United States in a ratio far in advance of the growth of population; in 1850 the prisoners represented 1 in 3442 of the population; in 1880 they were 1 in 855. In a country where so many earnest and capable penologists are at work, however, there is every reason to hope for an ultimate return to better methods.
See the articles BECCARIA, BENTHAM, CAPITAL PUNISHMENT, CRIMINAL LAW, EXECUTION, FRY, HOWARD, POLICE, REFORMATORIES, ROMILLY; those on crimes such as ARSON, ASSAULT, BURGLARY, FORGERY, MURDER, RAPE, THEFT, &c.; also works by such as Pike, History of Crime in England (1873-76); Farrer, Crimes and Punishments (1880); Perry, Prison Labour (Albany, 1880); Wines, The State of Prisons in the Civilised World (Cambridge, U.S., 1880); Havelock Ellis, The Criminal (1889); Punishment and the Prevention of Crime, by the present author (1885); Major A. Griffiths, Secrets of the Prison House (1893); the Bulletin de la Société Générale des Prisons; and German works by Holtzendorff and Jägemann (1886), Genzmer (1881), Aschrott, Prins, &c.