PRISONS. (E. REVIEW, 1822.)

1. The Third Report of the Committee of the Society for the Improvement of Prison Discipline, and for the Reformation of Juvenile Offenders. London, 1821.

2. Remarks upon Prison Discipline, &c. &c., in a Letter addressed to the Lord Lieutenant and Magistrates of the County of Essex. By C. C. Western, Esq. M.P. London, 1821.

THERE never was a Society calculated, upon the whole, to do more good than the Society for the Improvement of Prison Discipline; and, hitherto, it has been conducted with equal energy and prudence. If now, or hereafter, therefore, we make any criticisms on their proceedings, these must not be ascribed to any deficiency of good will or respect. We may differ from the Society in the means -our ends, we are proud to say, are the same.

In the improvement of prisons, they consider the small number of recommitments as the great test of amelioration. Upon this subject we have ventured to differ from them in a late Number; and we see no reason to alter our opinion. It is a mistake, and a very serious and fundamental mistake, to suppose that the principal object in jails is the reformation of the offender. The principal object undoubtedly is, to prevent the repetition of the offence by the punishment of the offender; and, therefore, it is quite possible to conceive that the offender himself may be so kindly, gently, and agreeably led to reformation, by the efforts of good and amiable persons, that the effect of the punishment may be destroyed, at the same time that the punished may be improved. A prison my lose its terror and discredit, though the prisoner may return from it a better scholar, a better artificer, and a better man. The real and only test, in short, of a good prison system is, the diminution of offences by the terror of the punishment. If it can be shown that, in proportion as attention and expense

have been employed upon the improvement of prisons, the number of commitments has been diminished, this indeed would be a convincing proof that such care and attention were well employed. But the very reverse is the case; the number of commitments within these last ten years having nearly doubled all over England. The following are stated to be the committals in Norfolk county jail. From 1796 to 1815, the number averaged about 80.

In 1816 it was

134

223.-Report, p. 57.

In Staffordshire, the commitments have gradually increased from 195 in 1815, to 443 in 1820-though the jail has been built since Howard's time, at an expense of 30,000l.—(Report, p. 67.) In Wiltshire, in a prison which has cost the county 40,000l., the commitments have increased from 207 in 1817, to 504 in 1821. Within this period, to the eternal scandal and disgrace of our laws, 378 persons have been committed for Game offences constituting a sixth part of all the so much for what our old friend, persons committed; Mr. Justice Best, would term the unspeakable advantages of country gentlemen residing upon their own property!

When the Committee was appointed in the county of Essex, in the year 1818, to take into consideration the state of the jail and houses of correction, they found that the number of prisoners annually committed had increased, within the ten preceding years, from 559 to 1993; and there is little doubt (adds Mr. Western) of this proportion being a tolerable specimen of the whole kingdom. We are far from attributing this increase solely to the imperfection of prison discipline. Increase of population, new statutes, the extension of the breed of pheasants, landed and mercantile distress, are very operative causes. But the increase of commitments is a stronger proof against the present state of prison

discipline, than the decrease of recommitments is in its favour. We may possibly have made some progress in the art of teaching him who has done wrong, to do so no more; but there is no proof that we have learnt the more important art of deterring those from doing wrong who are doubting whether they shall do it or not, and who, of course, will be principally guided in their decision by the sufferings of those who have previously yielded to temptation.

There are some assertions in the Report of the Society, to which we can hardly give credit, not that we have the slightest suspicion of any intentional misrepresentation, but that we believe there must be some unintentional error.

The Ladies' Committees visiting Newgate and the Borough Compter, have continued to devote themselves to the improvement of the female prisoners, in a spirit worthy of their enlightened zeal and Christian charity. The beneficial effects of their exertions have been evinced by the progressive decrease in the number of female prisoners recommitted, which has diminished, since the visits of the Ladies to Newgate, no less than 40 per cent.'

That is, that Mrs. Fry and her friends have reclaimed forty women out of every hundred, who, but for them, would have re-appeared in jails. Nobody admires and respects Mrs. Fry more than we do; but this fact is scarcely credible; and, if accurate, ought, in justice to the reputation of the Society and its real interests, to have been thoroughly substantiated by names and documents. The ladies certainly lay claim to no such extraordinary success in their own Report quoted in the Appendix; but speak with becoming modesty and moderation of the result of their labours. The enemies of all these reforms accuse the reformers of enthusiasm and exaggeration. It is of the greatest possible consequence, therefore, that their statements should be correct, and their views practical; and that all strong assertions should be supported by strong documents. The English are a calm, reflecting people; they will

give time and money when they are convinced; but they love dates, names, and certificates. In the midst of the most heart-rending narratives, Bull requires the day of the month, the year of our Lord, the name of the parish, and the countersign of three or four respectable householders. After these affecting circumstances, he can no longer hold out; but gives way to the kindness of his nature puffs, blubbers, and subscribes!

A case is stated in the Hertford house of correction, which so much more resembles the sudden conversions of the Methodist Magazine, than the slow and uncertain process by which repentance is produced in real life, that we are a little surprised the Society should have inserted it.

Two notorious poachers, as well as bad men, were committed for three months, for not paying the penalty after conviction, but who, in consequence of extreme contrition and good conduct, were, at the intercession of the clergyman of their parish, released before the expiration of their term of punishment. Upon leaving the House of Correction, they declared that they had been completely brought to their senses-spoke with gratitude of the benefit they had derived from the advice of the chaplain, and promised, upon their return to their parish, that they would go to their minister, express their thanks for his interceding for them; and moreover that they would, for the future, attend their duty regularly at church. It is pleasing to add, that these promises have been faithfully fulfilled.' — App. to Third Report, pp. 29, 30.

Such statements prove nothing, but that the clergyman who makes them is an amiable man, and probably a college tutor. Their introduction, however, in the Report of a Society depending upon public opinion for success, is very detrimental.

It is not fair to state the recommitments of one prison, and compare them with those of another, perhaps very differently circumstanced, the recommitments, for instance, of a county jail, where offences are generally of serious magnitude, with those of a borough, where the most trifling faults are punished. The important thing would be, to give a table of recommit

ments, in the same prison, for a series of years, - the average of recommitments, for example, every five years in each prison for twenty years past. If the Society can obtain this, it will be a document of some importance, (though of less perhaps than they would consider it to be). At present they tell us, that the average of recommitments in certain prisons is 3 per cent.: in certain other prisons 5 per cent.: but what were they twenty years ago in the same prison ?- what were they five years ago? If recommitments are to be the test, we must know whether these are becoming, in any given prison, more or less frequent, before we can determine whether that prison is better or worse governed than formerly. Recommitments will of course be more numerous where prisoners are received from large towns, and from the resorts of soldiers and sailors; because it is in these situations that we may expect the most hardened offenders. The different nature of the two soils which grow the crimes, must be considered before the produce gathered into prisons can be justly compared.

The quadruple column of the state of prisons for each year is a very useful and important document; and we hope, in time, the Society will give us a general and particular table of commitments and recommitments carried back for twenty or thirty years; so that the table may contain (of Gloucester jail, for instance), 1st, the greatest number it can contain; 2dly, the greatest number it did contain at any one period in each year; 3dly, its classification; 4thly, the greatest number committed in any given year; 5thly, four averages of five years each, taken from the twenty years preceding, and stating the greatest number of commitments; 6thly, the greatest number of recommitments in the year under view; and four averages of recommitments, made in the same manner as the average of the commitments; and then totals at the bottom of the columns. Tables so constructed would throw great light upon the nature and efficacy of imprisonment.

We wish the Society would pay a little more attention to the question of solitary imprisonment, both in