profligate waste of life, its ignominious corporal punishments, and its indiscriminate mixture of the criminal, the accused, and the debtor, in the filth, idleness, and corruption of a common jail. The principal reasons why they have failed to answer the high expectations entertained respecting them, are, the insufficiency of the buildings in which the system has been tried, in point of size and construction, to admit the requisite separation of offenders, and the relaxation of strict discipline, with a view to the most profitable occupation of the prisoners. Those have been allowed to unite their skill and labour, who ought to have been kept separate, and indulgences have been granted, to induce them to exert themselves, inconsistent with a wholesome severity.

At the period of the establishment of the system in Pennsylvania, when the prison was sufficient for the accommodation of the convicts, and the principles of the institution strictly adhered to by its benevolent founders, "the prison was a school of reformation, and of the many who received the governor's pardon, not one returned a convict. At a later period, out of near two hundred persons, who had been recommended to, and pardoned by the governor, only four had returned." And the amount of crime in and about the city had greatly decreased. The reasons assigned in the pamphlet before us, for the diminished usefulness of the institution of late years, are fully sufficient to account for the fact, without throwing the blame on the system. These are the changes which the government of the penitentiary has undergone, the division and extension of responsibility; the inadequate size of the prison, which was erected for the city and county of Philadelphia only, but since the reformation of the code, has been the receptacle of all the convicts of the State, thus rendering it impossible to make a proper classification of the offenders; the direction of the prisoner's labour to such branches of industry as would yield the largest profit, without any consideration of their fitness to the purposes of a penitentiary; and the frequent exercise of the power of pardon.

Similar circumstances undoubtedly have operated to diminish the good effects of the system in other parts of the Union. In our State, it has been almost paralysed for many years, by the crowded condition of the prison. In New York, its first results were like those in Pennsylvania, and its subsequent usefulness has suffered from corresponding causes. The prison, which was originally built to hold three hundred persons, afterwards contained more than double that number. A large part of the convicts could not be employed for want of room, and some of

the best of them were pardoned every month to make way for new convicts. This defect has since been remedied by the erection of a large bridewell in the city of New York, and a state prison at Auburn. These are said, by the governor, in his last speech to the Legislature, to be in an excellent condition. Another state prison is now erecting at Sing-sing, in Westchester county. Pennsylvania, also, as we have already observed, is supplying the want of suitable buildings, by the penitentiaries now erecting at Pittsburg and near Philadelphia. These two states have set a noble example to the rest of the Union. In both of them, the system was once fairly tried, with the best results; and their late efforts to restore its purity, and afford means for its operation, prove their conviction of its usefulness. Their example is most encouraging. It shows that the system is most valued where it is best known. We hope that the other states, and our own among the rest, will be roused to corresponding exertions. Wherever the system is pursued steadily, according to the principles which experience has shown to be correct, there can be little doubt of its success. By success, we do not mean that all crimes will be prevented, nor all prisoners reformed; but that enough will be effected to justify the labour expended. The indulgence of extravagant expectations on this point, has been productive of much disappointment; and, what is worse, has rendered men sceptical as to the real advantages of the plan, and relaxed their efforts for its regulation and improvement. It is not contended that it is perfect, but only that it is much superior to the old mode of punishment, and affords the best means at present in our power for the prevention of crime. To effect this object, the old system relied simply on the principle of terror, the modern adds that of the criminal's reformation. And the same means which are used to restore him to virtue, are made instrumental in deterring others from offending. Confinement and hard labour are substituted in the room of death, scourging, branding, and mutilation. And it can hardly be doubted, that the change is for the better, even though we look no farther than to the relative influence of the two modes of punishment, in deterring from crime. As to the punishment of death, it is so abhorrent to the feelings of our community, and consequently the chance of escape, from the scrupulosity of courts, juries, and witnesses is so great, that we cannot believe the fear of it would operate so powerfully, as the certainty of a tedious confinement on reasonable proof of guilt. And as to the other painful and ignominious punishments which we have mentioned, we would

remark, that a criminal is generally a man of unbridled passions, and little sense of character. Pain and shame are less dreadful to him than restraint. His reckless habits generate a brutal hardihood, which bids defiance to corporal punishment, and depriving him of character render him insensible to shame. But restraint he most cordially hates and dreads. The want of selfcontrol impels him to the commission of crime. And this impulse will be most effectually checked by the prospect of confinement and strict discipline.

But greater efficacy in the prevention of crime is by no means the only advantage attending the penitentiary system. It prevents the growth of that savage callousness among the lower classes, which springs from the frequent sight of public executions and corporal punishments. By confining the offender, it relieves society from the fear of his depredations and the pollution of his example; while the old system would have turned him loose, rendered doubly ferocious by the smart of bodily pain. It compels him to labour for his own support, instead of preying upon the spoils of his fellow men, and offers him the means of reformation, which, if properly applied, can hardly fail, in a majority of cases, of dismissing him a better man, than when he entered the prison. It may easily be shown, too, that this system produces a great saving of expense to the public. Our state prison, this last year, has supported itself, and left a balance of more than ten thousand dollars in favour of the commonwealth. And the state prison in the city of New York, Governor Clinton observes, in his last speech to the Legislature, would, probably, under judicious management, pay all its own expenses.

But, perhaps, it may be said, that this great amount of productive labour can be attained only by a departure from the strict discipline of a penitentiary. Be it so. The illustration is not

essential to our argument. We maintain, that if the public were to pay the whole expense of the prisoners' support, still they would be great gainers in a pecuniary view. It has been truly said, that one thief out of prison costs the community more than ten within it. It is stated in the North American Review for April, 1820, that "in the town of Boston, which is as well governed, and as sharply watched as any city in the Union, it is supposed there are two thousand men and women, who live by profligacy, fraud, and felony; and that they obtain, in one way or another, at least one dollar per day each, making, in the whole, the enormous sum of seven hundred and thirty thousand dollars per annum, the twentieth part of which could be made to support the whole of them in the state prison at Charlestown."

It can hardly be denied then, that the advantages attending the penitentiary system are great. But it is vain to think of securing them without a steady adherence to its principles. Prisons must be erected of sufficient size and proper construction, to allow of the necessary separation of the convicts, during the hours of labour and repose. They must be properly prisons, places of punishment and not manufactories. The main object should not be to make the criminals pay the expense of their support, but the penalty of their crimes. The name of penitentiaries should be indicative of their character. The discipline should be such, as to make the prisoner heartily repent, that he ever committed the offence which subjected him to its rigours. But its strictness will necessarily be relaxed, and a proper separation of the convicts prevented, if the first object attended to, is to induce and enable them to make the most profitable use of their mechanical skill. Another requisite is, that the amount of punishment should be certain. The power of pardoning should be very sparingly exercised. Men should not enter prison, with the hope, that a short period of pretended reformation will strike off years from the term of their confinement.

The state of the county gaols is a most serious obstacle in the way of any system which aims at the diminution of crime. The same indiscriminate mixture prevails in them, which has proved to be so noxious in our state penitentiaries. The convict who is undergoing the sentence of the law, and the accused who are waiting for trial, are allowed to associate with one another, and, in many instances, with the debtors. No employment is furnished, and gambling and drinking are tolerated. So that they prove, as might be expected, schools of vice, and their inmates are soon qualified for admission into the state prisons. When proper measures are taken for their reformation, when the principles of the penitentiary system are strictly pursued in our state prisons, then we may hope to witness a diminution in the number of offences; but till then, they will go on steadily increasing with the increase of our wealth and population.

In the observations which have been made, we have considered confinement, with hard labour and the classification of offenders, according to their different degrees of guilt, as the principles of the penitentiary system. For they have hitherto been its distinguishing characteristics. Lately, however, an opinion has prevailed in Pennsylvania, that solitary confinement without employment has superior advantages. And the experiment is to be tried in the prison now erecting near Philadelphia. We are not

sufficiently acquainted with the details of the plan to form any judgment as to its probable effects. The principal objections seem to be, the danger of producing extreme depression of spirits, and even derangement of mind, by an injudicious excess in the degree of punishment, and the expense of supporting the establishment without any aid from the criminal's labour. If properly managed, it seems likely to become an effectual means of punishment and reformation. It has long been used in prisons, as a means of keeping order and subduing refractory spirits. It appears to us doubtful, however, whether it will prove superior to the former system. That was productive of striking advantages, while the practice accorded with the theory, in the hands of its beneficent founders. It has failed, because it has degenerated, and the reformed system may experience the same fate.

MISCELLANY.

PHILOSOPHY OF LANGUAGE.

(Concluded from page 151.)

It may not be uninteresting to notice some of the causes which have led to this neglect of the early education of children in the import and use of language.

Among these, the difficulty of descending to the true simplicity of the subject is not the least. How few persons of well cultivated minds know how to talk to children. Progress in knowledge depends very much on the power of generalization, and this power, after having been long in exercise, begets modes of thinking and of expression which are far beyond the reach of the infantile mind, that attends mostly to particulars. "Honesty is the best policy" is a proverb, which we, who have acquired maturity of thought and of language, readily comprehend. But what a number of particulars are involved in this short sentence. Follow out the trains of thought which it will, on a little reflection, produce, and see through what a wide field of action and events and circumstances they lead. The child's mind must pass through all or some of these trains of thought before it can arrive at the meaning of the proverb. To excite them, by a proper induction of particulars, is the difficulty which, strange as it may seem, even the philosopher is often at a loss how to overcome. To do this he must for the moment lay aside all the loftiness of thought and splendour of imagination and