Prisoners their own warders

by John Frederick Adolphus McNair; W. D. Bayliss

In the later days of our Singapore convict jail, of which time only are we in a position to express an opinion, the treatment of the convicts was one of discipline from beginning to end. There was first the probationary period under fetters, in gangs upon the public roads, or upon the severest hard labour; next the period of freedom from this restraint and a time of test, and if they stood this test well, then advancement to a position of trust, either on the lower rung of the prison warder-staff, with a belt of authority across the shoulder, or, if an aptitude for any trade was evinced, to the position of a novice in the workyard, at whatever branch of industry the convict was thought to be best suited. There was then open to the prison warder a rise in grade to that of peon, with a distinctive badge, and eventually to the highest grade of a tindal or duffadar, if duly qualified. In the case of the industrial class there was also open a promotion to a higher grade, and eventually to that of a foreman of artificers. All were fully occupied and employed, and the jail was in point of fact a busy hive of industry, the pervading idea of the convict authorities being to teach the convict to love labour, and to take a personal interest in it.

We know that there are still some who think that no prisoner, while undergoing his sentence, should be allowed to feel any pleasure in the occupation in which he may be engaged; and hence they advocate the crank, shot drill, and other aimless tasks, which serve but to irritate, and do not the least good to the heart, from whence all our actions spring. For a short term of probation, no doubt, the task should be irksome; but when this is over and it should not be prolonged work should be given which would tend to call out the best feelings, restore self-respect, and act as a sort of cordial to remove lowering and depression. To explain by a homely instance what we mean, we will mention an incident that occurred to one of us when building the Woking prison in 1866. A convict undergoing sentence there, of the labouring class, was found to be of an exceptionally dogged and dull nature. Nothing pleased him; he was disgusted with the world, and wished he was out of it. After a time he was tried at plain brick-laying in a foundation, and gradually began to handle a brick rather well. He seemed to grow step by step more reconciled to his lot, and was advanced to work upon a chimney-piece. A day or two later he was asked how he was getting on. He then replied, with a bright smile upon his face, "Oh, very well, sir, now! I likes my chimbley-piece, and dreams of her at nights in my lonely cell."

Hence we see how the implacable temper of this convict gave way over a congenial bit of work, and the first step was thus taken towards his reformation of character, and he continued to improve until his release from prison.

Herbert Spencer says with truth, "that experience and experiments have shown all over the world that the most successful criminal discipline is a discipline of decreased restraints and increased self dependence"; and to a degree of this "self dependence" the convict we refer to had been encouraged to aspire.

Of course, in all criminal prisons we must expect a certain percentage of incorrigible characters, who under the best training cannot be brought under control; but the bulk of those in the old Singapore jail, and we had often as many as two thousand at a time, were well behaved, and gave evidence of the good influence of a course of discipline upon them; for when they were advanced to a ticket-of-leave, and thrown again on their own resources, they very rarely a second time came under the cognisance of the police, but peaceably merged into the population, and earned their livelihood by honest means.

We have one word to say in reference to the employment of these convicts as warders over their fellow-prisoners; a system, so far as we are aware, then unattempted either in Europe or America, even in a modified form. We do not, however, see why, in the case of well-behaved and suitable European convicts sentenced to long periods of penal servitude, some might not be placed in certain such positions of trust under free warders; and as the new prison rules for our jails may possibly involve a large increase in the warder staff, it has occurred to us that the system might have a trial to a limited extent; but we are, of course, not in a position to speak with any authority upon the subject as affecting our own prisons. In our case, with the exception of two or three European warders, the whole warder staff were convicts; and at first, certainly, there was the fear that so large a number of convict warders might side with the convicts, when a rule they might have thought repugnant to all, was introduced by the governing body. There also appeared the danger that discipline might be undermined by a system of favouritism, especially amongst men of the same caste, or that they would shut their eyes to breaches of the rules.

None of these apprehensions were, however, experienced; but, on the contrary, these convict warders were always the first to apprise the authorities of any contemplated attempt at escape, or of any ill-feeling that might be brewing amongst any particular class, or breach of prison rules; so that, in a great measure, they acted in the double capacity of both detectives and police. It was only upon very rare occasions that a convict warder had to be disrated; and the punishment amongst them consisted for the most part in fines for want of vigilance and attention to detail, and such like petty offences. They all manifested the highest appreciation of the trust reposed in them, and lived in a perpetual fear that they might forfeit their position, and have to begin anew the whole course of jail punishment.

It need scarcely be said that great care was exercised to single out men of the best character, and to the highest posts those who could take upon themselves responsibility as men of purpose and discretion. Promotion in the different grades was made only by the Superintendent, who in our case was an officer who had served in India, knew natives of most sects and races, and was acquainted with their habits and customs, and spoke one or two of their languages.

The prison system in all its branches worked in perfect harmony, and all the parts of it seemed to be adapted to each other. Discipline was maintained throughout, and the artificer gang, as we have shown, developed a high skill in their various trades; so that important public works could be executed without difficulty or embarrassment. Those also who had passed through its course, and were admitted back to society upon a ticket of leave, as a rule behaved themselves as good citizens.

In the extraction of labour from the convicts, there was no desire on the part of the Government to work the establishment with a view to show any pecuniary profit in the returns; though, as it proved, the actual cost to the State was often more than reimbursed by their labour, estimated as it was at two-thirds of that prevailing in the place, and the material at half the market price. However, in regard to this part of the question we might here quote "Jeremy Bentham," who once wisely said of prison labour, "It is not the less reforming for being profitable."