The Association took up these matters, and for the purpose of obtaining legislation looking as undividedly in this direction as possible, appointed a committee, of which Rev. Mr. Sanborn of Concord served as chairman, who should, after due investigation and correspondence with other States, prepare the requisite bill for legislative consideration. After much labor, the following, as subsequently amended, was presented to the legislature at its session in '71.

STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE.

IN THE YEAR OF OUR LORD ONE THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED AND SEVENTY-ONE.

An act in relation to the Penal Institutions.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court convened:

SECTION 1. There shall be a Board of directors of Prisons to consist of five persons appointed by the Governor, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, who shall hold office for five years, except that the five first appointed shall hold their office for 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 years respectively, the commission of each designating his term of office. Thereafter one Director shall be appointed annually in the month of June, to hold his office five years. Such Board shall have charge and superintendence of the State Prison, and shall have such power, and perform such duties in respect to County Jails, the Reform School and other penal and reformatory institutions within the State, as the Legislature may by law impose upon it. The Board may, from time to time, elect from its own members or otherwise, a Secretary, who shall perform such duties as the Board may prescribe, and shall receive such salary as the Legislature may determine. The other members of the Board shall receive no compensation, other than reasonable and other traveling expenses, while engaged in the performance of official duty. And the limit of such expenses shall be in amount —— to each individual, which shall not be changed except at intervals of five years.

SECTION 2. Such Board shall have power,

I. To appoint the Warden, Deputy Warden, Chaplain, Physician and Surgeon of the State Prison, and shall have power to remove either of such officers, for cause only, after opportunity to be heard in his own defense upon written charges. All other officers and guards of the prison shall be appointed by the Warden thereof, and shall be removable at his pleasure.

II. To define the powers, duties and compensation of such officers, except the compensation of the Warden.

III. To establish by-laws for the government of the prison.

IV. To provide for the purchase of all articles necessary for the use of the prison, or the health and comfort of the officers and prisoners.

V. To provide for the sale of all articles manufactured in the prison or not needed for the use thereof.

VI. To make contracts, if expedient, for the support and employment of the prisoners or any portion of them.

VII. To make all necessary additions, alterations and repairs within the prison or its inclosure.

VIII. To provide such books and instruction as may be considered necessary for the convicts.

IX. To draw its warrant through its Secretary upon the State Treasurer in favor of the Warden for all appropriations made by the Legislature for the State Prison.

SECTION 3. Such Board shall visit the State Prison at least once every month, and oftener, when thought necessary, for the purposes of ascertaining whether the laws, rules and regulations are faithfully observed.

SECTION 4. The Governor may remove either of the Directors of the Prison for malfeasance or misfeasance in office, after having furnished him with a copy of the charges against him, and giving him an opportunity to be heard in his own defense.

SECTION 5. All acts and parts of acts, inconsistent with this act, are hereby repealed, and this act shall take effect from and after its passage.

This bill was presented and went to the judiciary committee of the House, a body composed of two ex-judges and other gentlemen of influence, all of whom favored it, some saying to me, privately, that it was the very thing needed. The committee reported it unanimously. It passed the House with no opposition, and so also the Senate, the final vote having been taken when some private interest in Concord started up to defeat the measure and induced a member of the Senate to move a reconsideration of that vote. His move prevailed, and the bill was referred back to the Senate committee, before which this interest appeared in objection to the measure, while friends were present in its advocacy. The committee again reported unanimously in favor of the passage of the document, but on taking final action it was postponed to the next session of the legislature.

Here was the point where the story circulated of the warden and chaplain quarrel, that this bill was the embodiment of certain peculiar notions of the latter which he was pushing to the disadvantage of the former, muddling some of the Senate, and thus leading them to think it not best to be "mixed up in the matter," and so to vote that the measure be put over.

It is wonderful to think how slight an influence will sometimes thwart an important measure in passage at the legislature. A mere whisper of some whim, a little prejudice against another, perhaps may put it all aside. How little attention is given to merit! This is true even of Hon. Senators. To one of these I spoke about his vote within ten minutes after he had given it, and he replied,—"I don't know, I am sure, how I voted, for I did not care anything about it."

The fact is, this bill did not originate with me. I had nothing to do with it, not being on the committee who framed it. But, as Agent of the Association, I spent more or less time at the State House, looking after the interest of the measure.

The next session the bill came up in the Senate again, and, through the same interest as before, probably, it was indefinitely postponed and another put on passage in its stead, which went to the House committee on prisons. But they did not think it worthy of being reported, and that died. A member of the committee remarked that it appeared to be a scheme started by one for the purpose of making a comfortable place for himself. And he, no doubt, had the right of it, for the prominent provision was that the Board should consist of three, one of whom must be a resident of Concord, and not be allowed over four hundred dollars. That would be a nice thing for the Concord man. Thus matters stand at present so far as legislation is concerned.

If the reader will give attention to the bill above presented, he will see that it is very comprehensive, and might easily be carried out. It contemplates the needed permanence, each member being in long enough to obtain large experience in prison management, yet changing sufficiently often to avoid the ill effect of remaining in office too long. It further contemplates small expenses, as each member of the Board is to charge nothing for his time.

It has been suggested that the bill be further amended, by striking out the words "and other instruction," in Article VIII., and inserting the following Section after Sec. 3, thus, Section 4: This Board shall consider the reform of the prisoners the paramount object of the prison, and shall secure to them such secular, Sabbath school, moral and religious instruction as, in their view, shall be most conducive to this end, but not therein to conflict with the labor interests of the institution.

One objects to the above bill, that, as it proposes no compensation for the time spent by the members of the Board, men of efficiency can not be found to act upon it. If the concern is to be run simply for money-making, that would be the fact; and of right should be. But, when we come to labors for raising these fallen ones from their crimes and degradation to uprightness and a higher life, in a word, to make true men and women of them as we ought, it is quite another thing. In that case we have men, good and true, men fully qualified for the task; men who, while carrying out the primary objects of the prison,—good order, good discipline and true reform every way,—would also present the best truthful show of legitimate gains in dollars and cents. Certainly it is demeaning to our State to think otherwise. We have men among us, of noble minds and large hearts, who, by honest industry and true integrity of purpose, have raised themselves to that position in the public estimate where they deservedly share the fullest confidence of their fellows, for ability and fidelity to the highest and purest aims, and who feel that they owe it as a gratuity to society to lend a measure of their talents in managing her public interests. Hence, no difficulty is found in obtaining men to act with the highest efficiency as trustees to our colleges and seminaries without compensation. So, too, enough can be found really fitted to run the prison as proposed.

Another objection to the bill has been, that it does not make it obligatory for one of the Directors to reside in Concord. As the object of the legislation is for the special advantage of the prison, rather than to make a place for a certain Concord gentleman, it was not thought needful to insert such a limitation. Then, again, railroad facilities are so great as to do away with the need of such an enactment. That whole matter can be safely left in the hands of the appointing power, who should look for the best men to the position.

But the bill, with the connected ideas, is here placed before the reader, with the ardent hope that it will be thoroughly studied by him, improved where it can be, or a better one substituted, and thus the best system of prison management practicable be hit upon and made a law as soon as may be, thereby running the institution on principles commensurate with the prevailing intelligence of our people, the genius of our Christian civilization, and in keeping with the times in which we live and what is being accomplished in other States.



46. Experience with the new government. In June, '71, the Democratic rule gained the ascendency at Concord. When the new rulers became established in their places, and were able to give attention to prison matters, the Governor sent for me to call at the council chamber, which I did. His desire, as well as that of his council, was to know really about the state of things at the prison. It seemed that statements had been made to them tending to show something of their true character. I gave some general intimations as I understood matters, but could not, from the circumstances, enter into particulars as on the preceding pages; and, indeed, had not then so learned some of the facts that I was at liberty to speak of them. They professed a determination to have the prisoners properly treated, with enough to eat and of good food, though the Governor said he had not posted himself on prison matters at all, not thinking it worth while from the circumstances. It will be understood that he was elected, not by the popular vote, but by the legislature, and, previous to its assembling, he could put but little confidence in his election there.



47. Chaplain determines to have an investigation into the charges against him in the Prison Report, but relinquishes the idea. On reading the Prison Report for that year, I felt not only shocked at the character of its general statements, so far as the warden and committees were concerned, but also determined on having an investigation into the charges against me. Touching one's character in that way is no trifling matter, and I did not feel like sitting quietly down under representations so entirely false. Had I been guilty, I would have borne the deserved rebuke without a murmuring word. Some proposed that the new Governor and Council make a general investigation of the prison matters, and I put this in with the rest. But they were not inclined to that unless parties preferred charges, in which case they would hear and consider them. Hence, I decided to call for a hearing on those allegations, and prepared the papers according to legal advice, but thought best, before sending them in, to consult certain influential friends in the place about attempting the move, and received a decided remonstrance against it; they arguing that the step would stir up strife, make divisions and party alienations; that, in the uncertainty of things, I had no assurance of obtaining satisfaction, and the like. Supposing this to be given in sincerity, and that, perhaps, it might be for the best, I gave the matter up, and threw aside my papers.



48. Anniversary of P. A. Association for '71 and remarks on our jails. This was held in the Representatives' Hall, at Concord, the second Tuesday evening of June. Ex-Gov. Smyth, President in the chair. Attendance not large. The Agent gave a full report of the past year's doings, showing that good success had attended their efforts, and that the enterprise was taking hold of the public mind in a measure, though with some opposition. It had been a year of planning, commencing and going forward as a new struggle in the State; the object of the Association being to aid those released from prison by furnishing them with good, immediate employment, under proper influences and with suitable surroundings, helping with money only as indispensable, and then not intrusting it to those aided to disburse. An important beginning had been made, much hard work performed, and a measure of good evidently accomplished, giving favorable indications for the future, with the needed energy and effort. Only $100.50 of the $300 appropriated by the State had been expended.

In preparing this Report, the Agent had written to all the jails in the State, proposing over thirty questions for answers, in order to develop the state of crime and the penal working in our commonwealth. Only a part responded, but enough to furnish us with important subjects for study and effort. The good of society, the welfare of the State, loudly call for our better minds, our more influential workers to give most earnest attention to these matters. We should here make a great effort for improvement; an effort entered into by ministers of religion and those of justice, legislators and all. Woman, also, should come to the help.

As now managed our jails are prolific schools of crime. The old, hardened offender and the young, in comparative innocence, are huddled together, the latter to be taught in deeds of wrong and adroit methods of performing them of which he had never dreamed before; instruction that, perhaps, fires his mind to enter these ways of sin as a business for life. Does not this look to the need of a classification, in these institutions, that we now have not?

In some cases the women's cells are in the same wards with the men's, and they can freely talk together, though locked in separately, and probably never allowed to associate further. But there is a living remembrance of wrong, daily seen in Concord, which should cause us to blush, in the person of an unfortunate boy, who had his birth in jail, the mother having been in durance there one year previously as a candidate for State Prison,—another sad lesson for comment and remedial labors.

Our jails are cultivators of indolence. Men, women and children are locked in there with no useful employment,—except in that at Manchester,—nothing to do but to impart and study lessons of crime; and some manage to remain there the most of the time, preferring this to honest labor. These all go to swell the burdens of the tax-payer. Why not have some sort of industries connected with these places? Set these fellows at work on something. Keep them out of idleness, so far as can be. If the employment does not bring in largely of dollars and cents, it will, in what may be better. And are not some of our jails themselves nuisances, a disgrace to the State?

We need, at least, two work-houses. They may not be of great expense at ornamenting, but appropriate, substantial, fitted every way to their use. Then fill them with this vagabond population now floating back and forth between the establishments catering to vice and the jails. Give them really corrective sentences. Modify essentially this short-time-sentence system. If one's wrong habits are not corrected by one sentence, let the next be longer, or till thoroughly reformed, reform being the object aimed at. Then should we take the keepers of these rum-shops, billiard-saloons, gambling-dens and houses of ill-fame, with those of their frequenters that need be, and put them here at work, too. This would be a wonderful purifier of society. Give each a dose, say of six months, when, if that don't cure, repeat it till the work is accomplished in them also.

Then, here are numerous other connected questions for us to study, discuss and settle in regard to securing a general punitive system, a system in advance of what we now possess, more corrective of crime. And what shall be done for those children coming up in idleness, ignorance and vagrancy?



49. Fourth of July at the prison in '71. The observance this year was in exact contrast with that of last, the one bringing gratification and pleasure, the other, gloom and punishment. The workmen and other help desired prison work to cease that day, for their enjoyment, which was granted. But, instead of studying any means for giving a moment's pleasure to the inmates, they were locked in their cells for the day. But I spent the hours with them, going from cell to cell, and making efforts for removing the intolerable tedium, not unfrequently hearing the contrast between the last Fourth and this, alluded to with deep sighs. It would have been great relief to them could they have continued their work in the shop for the day. Hence, the remark of one and another, "How cruel to keep us shut up here!" "Oh, how much more agreeable to be out at work!" "I would rather work four times as hard as usual than be confined here." Thus, they expressed themselves. If punishment was the purpose, that was effectively obtained.



50. Chaplain's removal from office. The custom had been for the chaplain to remain in office till resigning, or for an indefinite period. This seems to be needful, if he is the right man, for it takes time for him to become acquainted with the inmates and establish himself in their confidence. Frequent changes in this office is bad policy. After serving in the place a while and finding so much interest connected with this department of labor, I decided to throw my whole energies into the work for a time and see what fruits could be gathered therefrom. I was also at no little labor and painstaking in a change of location, moving near the institution, to be in close proximity to my work. Things progressed till, a few weeks after the March election of '71, a Democratic neighbor remarked that, should his party come into power, I should have a competitor, the next summer, for my office. It was understood that the competing gentleman's plea was, that, more than twenty-five years previously, he had been appointed to the place and served nine years, but when the Democratic party lost the power, he was set aside; yet he had been living all these eventful years true to those principles, and now on the party's return to power he should be restored also to his former place. It was understood, too, that he had received the promise of the position on this contingency. The new Governor obtained his election, after which Democratic friends of the city and elsewhere assured me that my place would not be disturbed, especially as I was doing so much for the prisoners; and one of their leading men undertook to attend to the matter when the Governor and council should come to the prison questions, and present the general wish from all parties that I remain. I proceeded with my usual work for six weeks, when, just at night, one day, I received word that I had been dismissed. Directly referring this to that gentleman, "Why," said he, "that is a mistake. This very afternoon, not two hours ago, at the council chamber, they assured me they should not act on the prison offices till their next meeting some two weeks ahead." But notwithstanding his assurances, the step was taken just on the heel of their adjournment.

On inquiring of a councilman, if, in this dismissal, they had been influenced in any measure by the aspersions in the Report, he said they had not; that they did not doubt but that I had been faithful in my duty, assuring me that the reason was wholly political; to which I had no excuse to offer, as I had been guilty of voting the Republican ticket; and if I must be dismissed on that ground, of course no more words were needed. But there did seem a lack of straightforwardness for them to move as they did in the matter without giving this gentleman the opportunity of presenting what he wished.

The gentleman appointed was a good man, but feeble, and acknowledged to a friend that he could not do what had been done for the prisoners the previous year. But the idea seemed to prevail that he could do what was desired by the warden. Hence, as is understood, the secular school is largely a thing of the past, and finally the Sabbath school is given up. Now, this is a very nice place for him in his advanced years, he being over seventy, where he has no care, and but little labor.

But what of the effects upon the inmates thus left with so much idle time on their hands? Anything but good. A young man, the previous year, was quiet and orderly, closely attentive to his studies, making good advancement; but, when left with all these unemployed moments, he turned his thoughts to planning an outbreak, was arrested in the execution, and for months condemned to the ball and chain. Whereas, had his mind been kept employed as formerly, no doubt he would have continued quiet. Does it pay thus to cut off educational and moral privileges and share such results?



51. Prison fare under the new government. I did not serve under this government for a period sufficiently long to enable me to learn from personal observation very much as to what would be gained in the fare of the prisoners, but thought some steps were being taken in the right direction. The cracked wheat dinner was abolished for meat and potatoes. The evening after, I found the prisoners rejoicing over it. One exclaimed, "Didn't we have a good dinner, to-day? They have put away that wheat stuff, and now give us good meat and potatoes. Oh, isn't it good?" A woman, leaving prison, gave us an account of the warden's scolding, that Councillor —— "was about poking his nose into everything." This, if true, gave signs of a determination to know and remedy matters. But they had to work under difficult circumstances. They did not begin sufficiently near the bottom.

As informed, they went quite thoroughly into fitting up the clothing and bedding,—a welcome move, for no set of fellows ever needed it more. The next winter, however, I said to a man who was leaving, "You fare better over there this year than last, do you not? You are kept warmer, are you not?" To which he answered, "I don't see much difference." Certainly, I was looking for a different answer from this, and did not know what to make of it.



52. The warden question. It was supposed and reported that the warden would be removed; then we learned that the political muddle prevented, some contending for a straight, out-and-out Democrat, others, for a Labor Reformer, the party with whom they had bargained and thus gained the power. Then there was another element which seemed largely to prevail, and which some thought acted more powerfully than all others,—the fear as to how the prison accounts would stand at the end of the year. They had found out the condition of things in the prison, and learned something of how they had been run the previous year, and had every reason to suppose that they could not possibly make so large a show of gains as was then made. A highly important matter to them, for, should they run behind, their opponents would, of course, use it to their party disadvantage in future political campaigns. What could they do in the matter? Of course, the most feasible way was to keep the same warden, with the hope, by his manipulating, of a less falling off; or the fact of their having made no change here, would blunt the force of the falling-short argument materially. Hence, party interests would prompt them, on the one hand, to remove the chaplain for a partisan; and on the other to retain the warden for his aid to them politically. Thus, it seemed that party considerations ruled the whole matter, and that the rulers, instead of rising to the true dignity of their position, and inquiring about the real interests of the prison, the best man for the place, bowed obsequiously to the shrine of party. True, late in the fall, or in early winter, they moved in the matter by appointing a gentleman of Concord to the wardenship, but under such circumstances, that he could not, for a moment, think of accepting, though doubtless he would have improved matters had he done so.



53. Experience at the prison subsequent to dismissal. This experience was limited, but sufficient to open another dark chapter in the history of poor human nature. I still acted as agent to the Association. In August, a man was to leave, concerning whom they started the story that an indictment was made against him, ready for his arrest on leaving prison; but they promised that if he would leave within a half hour after his dismissal, he could go safely. I had a place for him near a friend with whom relatives had deposited money on his account, but whose locality I supposed he did not know. Very early, on the morning of his release, I, by a message, solicited the warden to forward him to me, so that I could send him on the five o'clock train. But seeing nothing of him, I at length went to the prison office and asked the warden if he would please let the man out, as I could send him by the next train. He answered, "He has gone, Sir; went this morning at five, for New York." I now turned to the deputy as usual previously, and asked, "Will you please furnish me with a list of those going out this month?" He answered, "No, Sir;" when the warden said, "You have had enough to do with the prisoners, already. You are not to have any more concern with them." I answered, "Very well," and, turning to go out, remarked to a man about to leave, for whom I had a place in readiness, "Come to me as you leave here, and I will give you directions as to where to go." The deputy followed me, indulging in a tirade of most abusive language. As he finished the words, "You had better not be over here making a fool of yourself, but keep away lest you get kicked out," I had arrived at the top of the stairs, where I stopped, supposing he proposed to kick me down, remarking, in a subdued tone of voice, nothing frightened or excited, "Here I am. If you wish to kick me down stairs, you can. I came in civilly on business, supposing, as a citizen, I had a right to that." The deputy ejaculated, "A d——d poor citizen," the warden also having followed, and joining freely in the vituperation. Seeing no active signs of putting the threat in practice, I started on and came safely away, but was subsequently informed by one then standing at the foot of the stairs, that he kicked towards me, when I had taken a few steps. But he did not hit or injure the object of his rage. In this experience I was more fortunate than a guard, who, as he asserts, when leaving service there, was followed to the front door and kicked down the steps by the warden, upon the ground, the foot hitting his back and causing such lameness that he had not then, after four months, recovered. He was purposing to prosecute the warden for damages.

Thus, while they have smiles and words of suavity for some, they can deal freely in such abuse to those who doubt their highest perfection. Now, if they would treat me and others thus, what would they do to the prisoners? One will say, "They were irritated towards you, for you had told the Governor and Council about the prison management." That was no doubt the fact. And they will become irritated with the prisoners also, who are helplessly in their power, where they can treat them as they please.

As to the two prisoners, whether the one pretended that he would go to N. Y., and took passage accordingly, or was forced to that, I never knew. But he would have taken passage to any place the warden proposed, in order to escape from his hands, as, through his influence, he doubtless feared the arrest. For the ticket, the warden expended the man's five dollars allowed by the State, and advanced him five more, probably supposing that it would be paid him by the Association. The man, as I learn, rode until he felt safe from being seized, when he left the cars, traveling on foot for lack of means to go by public conveyance, and, at length, arrived at this friend's, in as bad a plight, probably, as any before spoken of. He said he had been sick, confined to his cell for weeks, was neglected, and sometimes was not furnished with water to wash for days together.

The warden, himself, accompanied the second man to a place in the city, and put him to work as he had previously arranged. Soon hearing of his locality, I called, found his new pants with a bad rent, after only part of a day's wear, and furnished him with suitable clothing, pointing out the place also of my arrangement to which he could go, or remain where he was.

Another leaving prison, and calling on me, remarked, "I asked the warden where you lived, to which he answered, "I don't know;" an additional specimen of the truthfulness there.

But one queries, "Why was the warden determined that you should not see the men coming out?" He could have had but one reason, the fear that they would tell me the stories of their sufferings. The one ticketed for N. Y., I learn, gives some spicy accounts.



54. Prison report for '72. This claims a better financial show than that of the previous year. Thus says the warden, p. 4, "I am permitted to record another year of financial success." Then the committee, p. 10, "The financial affairs are in a highly prosperous condition. You will find, by looking at the treasurer's report, that there has been a net gain, to the State, of $5,501,03, after paying all outstanding bills, which is a greater gain than the previous year, considering the less number of convicts and the larger outlay for clothing, &c. When we consider the large appropriations that have been required from year to year to run the prison, it must be encouraging to the tax-payers of the State to know that the prison has added the two past years, $10760,20 to the revenue of the State, with no outstanding bills, and no complicated matters to embarrass the institution."

This, surely, is a glowing picture; one so greatly enjoyed by its authors, that it would seem almost too bad to spoil it by letting in a gleam from the light of truth. We see from the Report that our present managers here follow closely in the footsteps of their immediate predecessors as to their statement of financial facts, though intent on outdoing them in appearances at least. Like them, they reckon only a part of the expense in running the prison, leaving out the warden's salary, and other large items, and thus pretending the gains to be what they are not. They could equally as well have omitted the sums paid the physician, deputy, guards and overseers, thereby making the figures indicate a gain of over twenty thousand for the two years, instead of over ten thousand. The principle of statement would have been the same and equally truthful. It certainly appears as though they were straining every nerve to secure the greatest personal and party popularity on the dollar and cent question. Nor would we, by any means, censure them for that, provided they proceed with a due regard to truthfulness, the rights of the prisoner and the best interest of the State. But the people can justly require them to give these a proper place in their plannings and efforts. The pecuniary question is of high import and not to be lost sight of for a moment, but should not be allowed to swallow up every other interest with a miser's greed and with even a measure of disregard for what is really true.

In estimating the entire amount of expense to the community, this year, in running the prison, of right we should reckon a somewhat large item not above alluded to, the sum expended in caring for those made invalids the past year by the prison management, and thus sent out to the public charge. Of these there are probably six at least,—those two sent to the Insane Asylum, and four others. Thus, deducting all the real expenditures, but a small list of gains are left.

To be able the better to judge comparatively and see the drift of things in our prison management, let us select the more important items from the Reports of the years '70, '71 and '72, forming them into a table, taking the average number of the prisoners for each year, obtained by adding the numbers at its beginning and end, and dividing by two. Under the food and clothing items, let us insert what they pay in Massachusetts State Prison per day for food, and per year for clothing, to a prisoner or per capita:

1870. 1871. 1872.

Average number, 123 1-2 104 1-2 85 1-2 Expense for Overseers and Guards, $5,960 03 $6,314 91 $6,613 32 " Physician, 100 00 250 38 282 00 " Provisions, 8,581 32 5,416 41 3,283 00 " " per capita, 69 48 51 83 38 39 " " per day, per capita, 19 14 1-5 10 1-2 " " per day in Mass. Prison, 18 18 6-10 18 7-10 " Fuel and Lights, 1,195 43 954 41 682 13 " Clothing, 1,963 94 1,447 86 1,472 24 " " per capita, 15 90 13 85 17 21 " " in Mass. Prison, 21 67 19 40 18 72 " Library, 262 95 94 84 0 " Ordinary Repairs, 1,937 64 1,057 08 1,029 50 Earnings of Convicts, 25,338 22 22,619 70 19,134 45 " " per capita, 209 22 216 41 223 79

This table tells its own story and is in perfect unison with all that has been uttered on former pages. The guards and overseers, the same in number, and with no additional labors, receive increased pay from year to year. Nor has there been any going up in the scale of wages outside to cause a demand for this. Nor were they more experienced and intelligent, thereby claiming higher compensation. Many were mere boys, some not overstocked with intelligence. They had one boy of seventeen for overseer in the shop.

The physician's pay has also received a yearly rise in the scale, though with a large diminishing in numbers of prisoners and, as the Report says, a remarkably healthy state among them. How can we reconcile this? True, the first year he attended only when called, and subsequently every morning. But why the difference between the second and third years with the fewer men and alleged healthy state? This is what needs explaining.

But we find the food expense going the other way,—19, 14 1-5 and 10 1-2 per day to a man. What a cutting off! Will it go on thus till the story of Hierocles about the man's horse shall be verified in our prison? So, also, of the lighting and fuel with no change of space to be warmed,—$1,195 43, $954 41 and $682 13. No wonder there was such suffering from cold that second winter, before pointed out. Then what of the third? No change in the prices of the market can account for this variance. It must have been sheer withholding the necessaries of life. We see that the Charlestown food allowance per day, for those years respectively, was,—18, 18 6-10 and 18 7-10, increasing a trifle. Nor does any great extravagance appear in that first year with us, nineteen cents, one cent lower than authors say should be, though one higher than Massachusetts.

The allowance to the library is also suggestive,—$262 95, $94 84 and 0. True, during the first year the library was repaired, enlarged and newly catalogued, but the second year the appropriation was about what is annually demanded for keeping the books properly replenished and in suitable order. It is as small a sum as should be thought of. That cypher, therefore, for the third year, shows an unwarrantable neglect. These figures are especially suggestive, too, on the educational and moral points, perhaps a good index of them. And what a show! Down, down! What a picture for New Hampshire! Grant that the chaplain preaches to the men Sabbath mornings, meets them in the prayer-meetings, &c., to what does it amount in the midst of such surroundings? True, it gratifies them to assemble, hear the human voice, and sing. That is about all the good that can be looked for under the circumstances.

The labor figures, too, are expressive,—$209 22, $216 44 and $223 79, what each earned per year; poorer fare and more work. We admit that this rise may, in part, be credited to the fact that, from the former warden's suggestion, our rulers had arranged for the doctor to visit the prison daily and examine the cases desiring excuse from work, by real or pretended sickness, with the anticipation of saving more or less labor, which that warden supposed he had lost from being left himself to do this excusing, and without medical advice, which measure commenced when the new warden came in. But, besides this, enough remains unaccounted for in that way, no doubt, to render it highly probable that too many of those complaining of having been driven to work when sick, had just cause for such complaints.

Those figures on repairs are important,—$1,937 64, $1,057 08 and $1,029 50. That first year made the last of those spent in that general fitting up, enlarging and repairing as preparatory to running the institution at more income, less expense, and, consequently, larger gains than ever before, thus laying the foundation for its present prosperity. Those sums for the second and third years would have been mere trifles but for keeping the shop appliances in repair, and that of the first very much less. Now that the contractor keeps these appliances in order himself, this repair bill for a long while to come should be very small. Hence, when we hear the laudations of the present apparent financial prosperity of the prison over that of a few years ago, we are not to infer that those former rulers were any the less shrewd, far-seeing, or energetic in financial matters than those of later date, but that the latter are only reaping from what the former sowed.

The table shows us how the increased gains are secured; mostly by withholding the necessaries of life from the men, and yet driving them to more work.

But we turn from examining this table more directly again to the Prison Report of '72. It says,—"As complaint has been made that the prisoners were not properly fed and clothed, or that the food was deficient in quantity and quality, we say to you that we think no prisoners in this country are so well fed and clothed as the convicts of the New Hampshire State Prison." What shall we think concerning the judgment of those writers? It seems that they have become conversant with the prison fare in all the States of our country, and, after careful examination, have deliberately formed the opinion that the fare in the N. H. State Prison, at ten and one-half cents per day, is really better than that elsewhere at eighteen cents.

Then again, ibid: "No article of food has been furnished by us that was not good, sweet and wholesome; and as good in quality as will average upon the tables of the tax-payers of the State. The remarkably healthy look of the convicts is plain proof that they are well cared for, have a plenty to eat, and that which is good." It seems that the authors of this part of the Report have not only traveled far and wide over our country and surveyed each prison, but have also called on every tax-payer of our State, scrutinized their tables carefully, and found that their average living costs not over ten and one-half cents per day to each individual. When found they time for all this? Or are we to understand that they are purposely using the whitewash their predecessors left?

The chaplain is again, in this Report, brought forward thus, pp. 10 and 11,—"At the commencement of our labors as Prison Committee there was a want of harmony between the former chaplain and the officers of the prison, which seemed to us against the interests of the prison, and ought, in some way, to be removed. We could see no way to obviate this difficulty other than the removal of the warden or the chaplain. After due consideration, with the best information we could get, we thought best to recommend the removal of the chaplain and the appointment of Mr. Smith to that office. By this change harmony was at once restored. Mr. Smith has rendered faithful and effective labor, to the entire satisfaction of the committee and officers of the prison. Mr. Smith's prison experience, together with the deep interest he has for the welfare of the prisoners, seems to indicate him to be the right man in the right place."

"Rather hard on the former chaplain," said one of our editors. But what shall we believe? One of the subscribers to this article told him that he was removed on purely political grounds, as previously narrated. Then there was that corroborative assertion by the democratic neighbor that Mr. Smith had received the conditional promise. Now this declaration is published to the world. Where is the truth? Were they unwilling to put it out squarely that they had made a political foot-ball of the prison? Or would they rather sacrifice the character and reputation of an innocent man, who had labored as best he could for the good of the institution? They pretend to have acted in view of a difficulty between the chaplain and warden, and "with the best information we could get, we thought best to recommend the removal of the chaplain." Where did they obtain that information? There was, of course, but one source, and, from a year's experience, the writer understands something of its character, that it would not be impossible for men regarding themselves rather shrewd to leave, wholly misconceiving the real truth. But what shall we say of this course of condemning a man unheard, and on ex parte assertions? Is that the part of honorable dealing? But the whole subject is left with the reader to pass judgment upon in view of the facts already set before him.



55. International Penitentiary Congress, London, July 3-13, 1872. This resulted from the move already spoken of at the gathering in Ohio in '70. Dr. Wines, there selected to the important work of bringing about the proposed assemblage, received due governmental qualifications by a commission from our President according to a special act of Congress, the Secretary of State also opening the way by communicating with the various governments represented at Washington, respecting the great subject. On this mission, the Dr. visited Europe in '71, received a cordial welcome from the various governments, and found them generally in readiness to enter heartily into the move. After due consultation, London was settled upon as the place of meeting, a committee, to provide for which and facilitate its general objects, was chosen in London with the Right Hon. Sir Walter Crafton as Chairman and Edwin Pears, Barrister at Law, Secretary. This committee is represented as composed of all political parties, with Lord Carnarvon really at the head, similar committees being formed in most of the other countries moving in the enterprise. To prepare work for the congress and secure its objects, a circular was addressed to the various States containing thirty prominent questions on imprisoning and its connected points, for answer. On assembling, this body found itself composed of delegates duly commissioned from twenty-two different governments, Russia and Turkey included, all the States of Europe represented but Portugal, delegates present from India, Victoria and other British colonies, South America, and eighteen of our United States, then representatives from various penitentiaries, benevolent societies for giving aid to released prisoners, magistracies, &c., &c., 298 in number, a gathering the like of which, in some respects, had never been held. Here were judges, professors of criminal law, prison managers, philanthropists, and various gentlemen skilled in the working of criminal jurisprudence.

Here the commissioned dignitaries from kings and emperors found themselves met with delegates from voluntary associations and democratic institutions. How could they, in justice to their dignity, submit to this? But the matter was amicably adjusted, and all came upon a democratic level and acted in the greatest harmony,—an important gain to manhood. The meeting was held at a Hall of the Middle Temple; at the opening, Earl Carnarvon presiding and making the inaugural address, giving welcome to the foreign delegates and making numerous important suggestions. At the next session Dr. Wines presided, and gave an address full of information as to the purpose of calling this congress and the objects to be gained,—a universal harmony in prison managing, which managing should have certain broad principles underlying, permeating and vivifying it.

At a soiree given by the English committee to foreign visitors, the Prince of Wales and suit attended, thus showing the sanction of the English government to the congress. This sanction was also expressed by the attendance at one session of the Home Secretary of State, Right Hon. Austin H. Bruce, giving an official welcome to the gathering, and expressing a hope of being materially profited by the deliberations. The meeting, on the whole, was an important affair, of high interest from beginning to end. Its transactions are published in a volume of 796 pages, to be had of Rev. Dr. Wines, New York. Then one of the commissioners from New Hampshire, Mr. Allen Folger, wrote out a synopsis of the doings, which has been published in a pamphlet of 50 pages, by the authority of our State, for distribution, showing the interest our Governor and Council take in these matters.

The questions before spoken of were taken up by each country and elaborate answers given, papers were read upon them and thorough discussion had. The order was not to take any votes but to bring in facts of the various prison workings, to interchange views, criticise and thus sift out the best, in which, evidently, great enlightening of mind was obtained, and a great advancement made in the right direction. On page 537 of Transactions we have the following reform sentiments: "Man, in the state of penal servitude, is no longer a thing, but a moral being, whose liberty human justice has not the right to confiscate absolutely and irrevocably, but only within the limits required by the protection and security of social order. The logical sequence of this view is, that it is the duty of society to reform the criminal during his temporary privation of liberty, since, in this way only can the peril of his relapse be successfully combatted, and the public safety effectually maintained. The reformation of imprisoned criminals is not, therefore, in our day, a work of philanthropy, but an obligation of the State."

In one or two prisons they have been so successful in reform efforts, that, having taken some of the very worst criminals, they have led them to such order and good behavior, as to be able to dispense with locks and bars, rendering the prison more like a great family, kindness being the great controlling element.

In the abridged report of the proceedings of the International Congress, under the head of "Cumulative Imprisonment," we learn that the following question was submitted, and several important suggestions followed its presentation.

QUESTION: Ought prisoners on reconviction to be subjected to more severe disciplinary treatment than on the first sentence?

It was opened by M. Peterson, of Bavaria, who maintained that cases required treatment according to the degree of demerit shown on the prisoner's trial, and therefore, that instead of laying down one principle, the right course was to leave the judges to decide what should be done in each case.

M. Ploos Van Amstel, of Holland, and M. Stevens, of Belgium, advocated a merciful treatment as likely to have more effect than severity.

Mr. Aspinall, of Liverpool, read resolutions which the Liverpool magistrates had passed, to the effect that it was desirable that cumulative principles should be applied to the punishment of all crimes and offences, and that the magistrates should be empowered to transfer well conducting and deserving prisoners to homes for the remainder of their sentences. Voluminous statistics showed that there were numerous reconvictions up to seventy times, and that the conclusions arrived at, by the magistrates, was that it would be better for the prisoners and better for society if the cumulative principles were carried out.

Dr. Guillaume, of Switzerland, mentioned his experiences in some of the cantons of his country, which had led him to the conviction that it was better to give the reconvicted such sentences as would enable the prisoner to learn a trade, by which he could earn his living in the labor market without being obliged to fall back upon the lines of crime, than to give short and severe punishments, which, by including a lessened diet, sent the criminal back into the world, not only unimproved in morals, but deteriorated physically.

It would seem, according to his views, that the design of imprisoning is, to bring back to society those once injurious, but who are now changed to good citizens.

Mrs. Julia Ward Howe, of Massachusetts, advocated the merciful and kindly treatment as being the way to make a permanent impression upon the criminal classes.

M. Robin, of France, stated that his experience led him to set his face against all pains and penalties in prison, as against Christian principles, and advocated the teaching of trades. All in all, strict adherence to Christian principles should be at the bottom of the treatment of criminals.

Count de Foresta, of Italy, held that the question was rather one of law than prison discipline. He urged that there was a line of prison discipline beyond which it was impossible to go without turning the discipline into cruelty.

Another question touching "Prison Labor," was brought forward and considered, as follows:

QUESTION: "Should prison labor be merely penal, or should it be industrial?"

It was opened by the reading of a long and interesting paper by Mr. Frederick Hill, brother of the late celebrated Recorder of Birmingham. The substance of the paper was that labor, to be made useful and productive, follows natural laws, which are the same in prison as out of prison; that it is an advantage to the prisoner to fit him for usefulness and to make more easy his reform; that it will help pay the cost of his conviction and imprisonment; that upon release, he will be better armed against relapse into crime, as well as much better prepared to obtain an honest living than those whose labor has been merely penal; that the pains and privations necessarily attendant on the process of moral reformation are so great as to make it unnecessary, for the maintenance of the principle of deterrence, to superadd artificial pains and penalties.

Colonel Colville, Governor of Colbath Fields Prison, one of the largest London prisons, spoke very strongly against the tread-mill system of punishment which is in nearly all the prisons of England, and almost unanimously condemned by the prison officials.

The general opinion of the Congress was in conformity to views expressed by the speakers mentioned.

Under the question touching the moral value of visitation of the prisons by women, we find the following sensible views expressed:

"While the character of the visiting women depends upon chance, they are as likely to be indiscreet, and to interfere unwisely as otherwise. If they were selected as men are, or ought to be, for their fitness, their work would be done with good judgment and discretion. Then, again, criminal men separated from their families and from all gentle influences, need the ministry of good women for their reformation. The motherly influence of pure, gentle women will sometimes control and subdue the violent, when even blows would fail to do so."

The whole force of the International Congress went in favor of the idea of reforming the prisoners. For this the body advocated stimulating the prisoners' self-interest, thus:

"In this way, the prisoner's destiny during his incarceration should be placed, measurably, in his own hands; he must be put into circumstances where he will be able, through his own exertions, to continually better his condition. A regular self-interest must be brought into play. In the prison, as in free society, there must be the stimulus of some personal advantage accruing from the prisoner's efforts. Giving prisoners an interest in their industry and good conduct tends to give them beneficial thoughts and habits, and what no severity of punishment will enforce a moderate personal interest will readily obtain."

They also advocated using the moral force:

"In criminal treatment, moral forces should be relied on with as little admixture of physical force as may be; organized persuasion to the utmost extent possible should be made to take the place of coercive restraint, the object being to make upright and industrious freemen, rather than orderly and obedient prisoners. Brute force may make good prisoners, moral training alone will make good citizens. To the latter of those ends the living soul must be won; to the former, only the inert and obedient body. To compass the reformation of criminals, the military type in prison management must be abandoned, and a discipline by moral forces substituted in its place. The objects of military discipline and prison discipline, being directly opposed to each other, can not be pursued by the same road. The one is meant to train men to act together, the other to prepare them to act separately. The one relies upon force, which never yet created virtue; the other on motives, which are the sole agency for attaining moral ends. The special object of the one is to suppress individual character and reduce all to component parts of a compact machine; that of the other is to develop and strengthen individual character, and, by instilling right principles, to encourage and enable it to act on these independently."

They tell us again "that the self-respect of the prisoner should be cultivated to the utmost and every effort be made to give back to him his manhood." "There is no greater mistake in the whole compass of penal discipline, than its studied imposition of degradation as a part of punishment. Such imposition destroys every better impulse and aspiration. It crushes the weak, irritates the strong and indisposes all to submission and reform. It is trampling, where it ought to raise, and is therefore as unchristian in principle as it is unwise in policy."

Farther, "The system of prison discipline must gain the will of the convict. He is to be amended, but this is impossible with his mind in a state of hostility. No system can hope to succeed which does not secure this harmony of wills, so that the prisoner shall choose for himself what his officer chooses for him. But to this end the officer must really choose the good of the prisoner, and the prisoner must remain in his choice long enough for virtue to become a habit. This consent of will is an essential condition of reformation, for a bad man can never be made good against his will. Nowhere can reformation become the rule instead of the exception, where this choice of the same things by prison keepers and prison inmates has not been attained."

They assert, too, that the officers should possess a hearty desire and intention to accomplish the object of reform in the prison. Regarding these officers they also say thus:

"In order to the reformation of imprisoned criminals, there must also be in the minds of prison officers a serious conviction that they are capable of being reformed, since no man can heartily pursue an object at war with his inward beliefs; no man can earnestly strive to accomplish what in his heart he despairs of accomplishing. Doubt is the prelude of failure; confidence a guaranty of success. Nothing so weakens moral forces as unbelief; nothing imparts to them such vigor as faith. 'Be it unto thee according to thy faith,' is the statement of a fundamental principle of success in all human enterprises, especially when our work lies within the realm of mind and morals."

Finally, they assure us that "work, education and religion (including in this latter moral instruction) are the three great forces to be employed in the reformation of criminals."



CONCLUSION.

The two systems of prison management, previously alluded to, are now before the reader so far as these pages have elucidated, the reformatory on the one hand, and the punitive and money-making on the other. And which do you prefer? Will your choice be for the honest effort to raise up the fallen, to do our duty to the erring, to throw what influences can be about these disturbers of society to lead them to become upright citizens? Or, will it fall upon the crushing, cruel, vindictive course, the process of making them more debased, sordid, revengeful? Do you prefer manhood-producing with its benign effects, or money-making attended with the blighting of the higher aspirations of the soul? This subject has been taken up in the narrative form, that the writer could the more easily, by incidents, and in the briefest way, bring out the peculiarities of the two systems in their workings and the animus impelling them. He has brought forward nothing in the line of facts and incidents except what had come under his own observation, or been so reported to him that he had no doubt of its truthfulness. Many of the incidents in Part II. he would gladly have passed in silence, regretting exceedingly the necessity of bringing them out. But a solemn sense of duty seemed to impel him to this task. He has delayed any move hoping the turn of events would excuse him from penning these truths for the public eye. But his conscience and his God will condemn him, if longer delayed. He has brought forward names with no unkind feeling, or purpose to expose or wound, but to show the way things have moved. No matter what course others may have taken towards him, he has endeavored studiously to follow the exhortation he has so often given to the prisoners in yielding all that into the hands of God, for his disposal.

This matter is now before the people. Will you not study the questions carefully and act? Will not ministers of religion and of law, merchants and artisans, all those in the various industries of life, men and women come to the help? True, the latter, however pure and exalted, is now forbidden entrance to the chapel in labors of love for the fallen men. Hence, that somewhat recent shock to the community in the stern refusal of Elizabeth Comstock's request for permission to address the inmates on their moral and religious interests. How long shall such things be in our prison? How long shall the light of science, of morality and of pure religion be virtually shut out from that abode? How long shall we work so as to make bad men worse, hard hearts harder, the depraved more iniquitous, the pestiferous more destructive to the safety and quietness of society? Till the people shall stir effectively, make their voice heard and their power felt. Why not change our system of imprisoning and put it fully on that of reform? Why not adopt the course of dismissing prisoners only on condition of good evidence of reform and on further condition of being returned in case of relapse into crime? Why not arrange for those who will not reform, as some will not, to serve in prison for life, thus freeing society of their depradations? Then why not use them humanely while keeping their time occupied in useful employment, still permitting each to enjoy the means of mental, moral and religious culture. Many, thus situated would, no doubt, live really good, pious lives, who, from their moral weakness, could not resist the temptations to crime which are met on every hand without. To such, the prison should act as a kind, beneficent guardian.



Transcriber's Note: The following typographical errors which were present in the original edition have been corrected.

In the Table of Contents, "B. and E's request" was changed to "B. and E.'s request".

In Part I, Chapter 1, a missing quotation mark was added after "managing penal institutions".

In Part II, Chapter 1, a missing quotation mark was added after "correction of prison abuses".

In Part II, Chapter 6, "laborers in she school" was changed to "laborers in the school".

In Part II, Chapter 11, "a line of sustantial agreement" was changed to "a line of substantial agreement".

In Part II, Chapter 19, "On said of the cracked wheat" was changed to "One said of the cracked wheat".

In the original text, two chapters were numbered 24. The second of these has been renumbered 24 1-2 (which matches the numbering in the Table of Contents).

In Part II, Chapter 24 1-2, a missing quotation mark was added after "a system of especial surveillance".

In Part II, Chapter 26, "Had they endeed his sufferings" was changed to "Had they ended his sufferings".

In Part II, Chapter 27, "asked to state about the Silver case" was changed to "asked to state about the Sylver case", and "the patient really died of a heart difficult" was changed to "the patient really died of a heart difficulty".

In Part II, Chapter 35, a missing quotation mark was added after "take anything extra", and a missing comma was added between "irritability" and "angry feeling".

In Part II, Chapter 36, a missing quotation mark was added after "it seems that Pike is nominated".

In Part II, Chapter 47, "they were no inclined to that" was changed to "they were not inclined to that".

In Part II, Chapter 51, a quotation mark preceding "One exclaimed" was deleted.

In Part II, Chapter 54, "Prison report for 72" was changed to "Prison report for '72", and a missing quotation mark was added after "no complicated matters to embarrass the institution".

In Part II, Chapter 55, "the teaching of rades" was changed to "the teaching of trades", a quotation mark following "without turning the discipline into cruelty" was deleted, "should it beindustrial" was changed to "should it be industrial", a quotation mark was added following "industrial", a quotation mark was deleted following "views expressed by the speakers mentioned", and a quotation mark was added following "to act on these independently".

THE END