This subject of hereditary mental taint or disorder, in connection with wrong doing, opens to the phrenologist a wide and important field for investigation. But when he is forced to the conclusion that the one has acted from a disordered impulse of mind, uncontrollable, and he therefore not responsible for his acts, it can make no difference with the fact that the wrong doer must be restrained and put where he can not trespass upon the rights of others. It will rather lead to the questions of where he shall be confined, how employed, after what manner treated, and in what light regarded; perhaps showing clearly the need of important modifications in our present system of prison management.
22. The Warden admits presents to prisoners from friends outside. He would permit friends outside to send soothing dainties to the sick, or packages of fruit or home comforts to the well; or florists of the city to send bouquets to stand upon the speaker's desk on the Sabbath, for the prisoners to admire, and each received a flower or sprig to carry to his cell as a memento of innocence and purity, and a stimulus to love the Author of such beauty. It was really gratifying to see what cheer to the fallen these remembrances from the outside world would bring. All packages thus sent to prisoners were most carefully examined by officers, that nothing wrong should pass.
23. Warden decides to resign. He had not found his place a bed of roses. Certainly it possessed its thorns, and these, at times, largely predominated. His efforts for bringing the prison, in all its departments, to what it was, had cost him a great struggle, many anxious hours of planning, and at times perplexities in executing. But his greatest vexation came because of opposition, from certain ones without, to what he felt assured was for the best good of the institution, and from the misrepresentations of those opposed to all prison reform and improvement, who think it an outrage to the State to treat a prisoner better than a brute. He says one complained of him thus: "You give the prisoners too good fare, and make things too comfortable for them, on account of which they will wish to return. Whereas, the prison is a place for punishment, requiring you to keep the inmates on poorer food, and food so prepared that it shall be a punishment to eat it, and make everything around them a source of discomfort, that, after leaving, they may thereby be deterred from crime through dread of being returned."
From all considerations, the warden resolved to resign at the close of the year, yet, while remaining, to continue the usual prison rations and efforts at reform. His wife also heartily joined in his efforts, having from the first done much towards the excellent fare of the prisoners, and seeing that the sick were properly cared for. Hence, on one occasion, finding a man gradually wasting away with consumption, the skin wearing from his emaciated limbs by the hard prison couch, she sent in her own feather bed, that he might pass the remainder of his days in what comfort he could.
But what shall we think of the assertion that "the food should be so prepared that it shall be a punishment to the men to eat it?" Can it be possible, that one in New Hampshire, at this late day, uttered a sentiment like that? So the warden most positively asserts. To say nothing of its inhumanity, common worldly policy would repudiate such an idea. Of food thus prepared one at first would eat as little as possible to live, his powers for labor therefore depart, his appetite gradually fails, and he goes down to death.
All who use horses or oxen, except the worst of men, would scout such a practice. They say, "To have teams work well, feed well." So it must be with men, whether in prison or elsewhere. Power for muscular labor can be furnished only by generous food.
Then the fear that good prison fare would induce the prisoners to return purposely on recommitments, must have been expressed without due consideration, or being taught by prison facts. Statistics show that, where the prison is the most cruelly managed and the inmates are kept on the poorest fare, the greatest number return on second or third sentences. Then as to our own prison, the very year this complaint was made, more pardons were granted, I think, than had ever been before in one year since the founding of the institution. And most surely none refused to accept of the offer and depart. Besides, nearly all who had friends, except those soon to go out by commutation, were constantly importuning them to intercede for their pardon, while those who had none, were persistent in their pleadings with the warden, chaplain and other prison officers to help them in efforts for the desired boon. Why this, if good fare would be an inducement to return? Would the utterer of that sentiment have sanctioned the idea of leaving the prison doors all unlocked and unbolted for one night? What a skedaddling there would have been, old or young, sick or well, the infirm and decrepit, hobbling off as best they could, leaving their good fare behind and their cells "to let."
What an idea! The good prison living, which at best can not be made equal to the comforts in our most common families outside, lead men to desire to be locked up in those gloomy cells for its sake and subjected to the general prison regime! That man may fear it who will.