The Kansas University Quarterly

by Various

Again, in regard to the prevention of crime. One of the chief objects of penal servitude is to set an example before other evil-disposed persons of what the consequences must be if they in turn violate the law. But in each of these cases it is to make the commitment of crime less frequent that men are imprisoned, rather than that they should suffer for their sins. But, finally, in the last case the reform of criminals within or without the prison walls has become one of the prime principles of penology. No present system or theory can be complete in these days that does not consider in some manner the methods of bringing back into legitimate society those who by their deeds have become outcasts from the body politic. In the study of sociology there are two sides of social life to be considered: First, there is what might be called legitimate society, which has sprung up from indefinite and simple beginnings, but has grown into a strong organism, which might be called the proper status of social life; and then there is the other side of humanity which may be termed the broken down, decrepit or fragmentary part of the great social body, which may be called disorganized society. It is as much the duty of the reformer to study the organized and legitimate society as it is to study the disorganized or the fragmentary. In modern times there have been a great many who call themselves social scientists, who devote a great deal of time to the criminal and the pauper, and properly so, for, indeed, it is from these broken down parts of humanity that we realize more especially the nature of human society, and discern more clearly the means of preventing crime; but the ideal or legitimate society must not be lost sight of. We must keep before our eyes the proper laws, proper government and proper protection of organized society while we investigate the habits, conditions and qualities of its outcasts. Hence in all modern reforms there are two subjects to consider: A reform measure which shall by direct application tend to develop and strengthen that which is already considered good and, on the other hand, a reform measure which shall reclaim and reform that which is considered bad. In this respect the state prison and the state university are not so far apart as it would seem: one tending to build up and strengthen legitimate society, to protect the state in all its interests, to make law more prominent, reform more stable, human society more moral and intellectual, crime less frequent and industry more prevalent by well ordered education. These are the objects of the state university. While, on the other hand, in accordance with the last one of the penological principles stated, the prison has for its duty the same objects as the university, although applied to a class of individuals entirely different, who overstep the bounds of the law and by their own habits have abstracted themselves from legitimate society. Both institutions exist for the improvement of society and neither is instituted for the purpose of revenge.

While we have carried on the work of reform of prisoners to a considerable extent and while many seem to be carried away with it as the only great method of solving the evils of the day, we must not forget that the great institutions which tend to develop society on the basis of prevention of crime are not the only ones which are important to consider. And this arises from the very fact of reform, that if we allow either crime or pauperism to develop rapidly, unchecked, we shall soon find it such a burden on human society that the legitimate and well organized will become defective on account of the increase in the number of paupers and criminals who form a constant menace to civil institutions. While all sentiments for reform arise primarily from human sympathy with the weak and the erring, the state still rests the cause of its action in the full and complete protection of legitimate society. It matters not how individual sympathies act, the reformation of criminals finds its cause to be in the common weal of society. To make a prisoner more intellectual, to give him better moral qualities, to prepare him for better industrial independence, to send him out with a better life and means, if he wills, to support himself, to adopt means to help him from the prison world in which he has lived into a greater world outside: all this might arise out of benevolence, but it has for its ultimate end the simple protection and improvement of society as a whole. Consequently reform has become the sole great object in detaining criminals within prison walls. All other objects must be considered as means to this one great end.

In the discussion of penological principles one of the foremost methods of reform to be noticed is that of the classification of all criminals. Perhaps Belgium was the foremost state of Europe to adopt a thoroughly practical classification of prisoners. Formerly it was considered sufficient to have a large prison pen, a foul den into which old and young, light offenders and heavy villains were thrust, taking them out only occasionally for service or keeping them without service at all. Here the old criminals, hardened through many years of repeated crimes, would rehearse their stories to the young who were soon educated in all of the tricks of the trade. Here in these horrid dens the propensities for crime were increased rather than diminished, and plots and plans were made for future depredations upon society.

Within a comparatively recent period most nations have endeavored to properly classify prisoners. First a general classification, separating the old from the young, the hardened criminals from the novices. The modern tendency is to institute reform schools and work houses for juveniles, reformatories for youth, and regular prisons for hardened criminals. But in the highest ideal of prison science each one of these is to be a reformatory of a different class. Kansas has determined upon this classification. The Reform School at Topeka, the Reformatory at Hutchinson and the State Penitentiary at Lansing represent this three-fold classification. The reformatory at Hutchinson has not been completed. Its methods are to be patterned after the reformatory at Elmira, N. Y., the model institution of its class in America. The chief difficulty in the establishment of such an institution in Kansas is its great expense. It is a great undertaking for a young state like Kansas to compete with an old wealthy state like New York. Yet the Kansas reformatory may take all the essential features of the Elmira reformatory and by obtaining rather more service from its inmates may be made less expensive. It will be trying to Kansas tax-payers to provide such an industrial school for the criminals of the state as that at Elmira, while it is only by dint of close saving that they are able to give as good an education to their own sons and daughters who have never offended against the state. Yet it must be remembered that this is done for the benefit of the whole state, for the purpose of lessening crime and expense. The reformatory at Hutchinson should be completed as soon as possible as there is a great need for it that the prisoners at Lansing may be properly classified and a certain group of those most susceptible of reform should be sent there.

Within the prison walls classification of individual prisoners according to crimes, temperament and habits has been of great assistance in their management. In the United States there are two main systems in vogue, that known as the Pennsylvania System and that as the New York System. The former may be defined as the solitary cellular system, and the latter as the single cell system, with prisoners working and dining together. The Pennsylvania system had its origin in the celebrated Cherry Hill prison, built in 1821 to 1829, containing over 600 separate cells for continuous solitary confinement. This solitary confinement in large airy rooms is expensive but is considered as the best treatment of prisoners. Here the prisoner is kept at work, or instructed in trades or books. Work becomes a necessity to him. The only punishment is a dark cell with deprivation of work for a period.

The New York system is as has been practiced at Auburn, by which the prisoners are confined in solitary cells during the night, but have companionship during the day while at work, and at the dinner table. Each system has warm advocates. The solitary cell system has had most practice in Europe but the American plan has made up the lack of proper classification by the excessive work of prisoners.

Many persons hold that classification of prisoners in groups is a failure, and that the solitary cellular system is the only commendable method. Edward Livingston has thus set forth the advantages of this system:

“Every association of convicts that can be formed will, in a greater or less degree, corrupt, but will never reform those of which it is composed, and we are brought to the irresistible conclusion that classification once admitted to be useful, it is so in an inverse proportion to the numbers of which each class is composed. But it is not perfect until we come to the plan at which it loses its name and nature in the complete separation of individuals. We come then to the conclusion that each convict is to be separated from his fellows.”[4]

The extent of isolation which each prisoner undergoes must be determined somewhat by the nature of his case and somewhat by the conditions and convenience of the prison. It is hardly possible for many modern prisons to have complete separation on account of the expense incurred, for this would mean that within the cell itself the prisoner must perform all labor, and that the cell shall be commodious enough to carry on this labor by himself, or else that he be given labor elsewhere alone. Such a system requires an increased amount of attendance.

At the Kansas penitentiary the system of solitary cell confinement at night and when off duty, and the silent associations of prisoners in groups during the day while at work and at meals, is now in vogue. Without doubt this association during the day carries with it evil influences which are in a measure lessened by the requirements of the law for ten hours of labor for all able-bodied prisoners.