The Man Behind the Bars

by Winifred Louise Taylor

This institution stood as one of the best in the country, and doubtless it was above the average in most respects. While the convicts were under rigid repressive regulations, the guards were under rules scarcely less strict, no favoritism was allowed, no bribery tolerated, and the successive administrations were thoroughly honorable. While the different wardens conformed to accepted standards of discipline there were many instances of individual kindness from members of the administration, and no favor that I asked for a prisoner was ever refused.

But the twentieth century has brought a complete revolution in methods of dealing with convicts. This radical revolution is overthrowing century-old customs, and theories both ancient and modern. It has been sprung upon us so suddenly that we have not yet grasped its full meaning, but the causes leading up to it have been silently working these many years.

For ages the individuality of the human being has been merged in the term criminal; the criminal had practically ceased to be a man, and was classified only according to his offence; as murderer, thief, forger, pickpocket, etc. During the nineteenth century there was a gradual mitigation of the fate of the convict: laws became more flexible, efforts were made to secure more uniformity in the length of sentence imposed, many States discarded the lock-step and the striped clothing, and the contract system was giving place to other employment of convicts. While the older prisons were growing unspeakably worse through decaying walls and increasing vermin, as new penitentiaries were built more light, better ventilation, larger cells, and altogether better sanitation were adopted. However, the Lombroso theory of a distinct criminal type, stamped with pronounced physical characteristics, was taught in all our universities and so generally accepted by the public that the criminal was believed to be a different kind of man.

The courts did a thriving business collecting all their fees and keeping our prisons well filled, while the discipline of the convicts was left to the prison officials, with practically no interference. Prison congresses were held and there was much talk around and about the criminal, but he was not regarded as a man with human feelings and human rights; methods of management were discussed, but the inhuman punishments sanctioned by some of these very wardens were never mentioned in these discussions. "We are in charge; all's right in the convict world," was the impression given the outsider who listened to their addresses.

Unquestionably many of these prison wardens were at heart humanitarians, and gave to their prisons a distinctive atmosphere as the result of their personal characteristics, but they were all the victims of tradition as to dealing with convicts—tradition and precedent, the established order of prison management. The inexperienced warden taking charge naturally followed the beaten tracks; he studied the situation from the point of view of his predecessor, and the position at best was a difficult one; radical innovations could be made only with the sanction of the prison commissioners, who seemed to be mainly interested in the prison as a paying proposition; and pay it did under the abominable contract system.

And so the years went on with the main lines of prison discipline—the daily lives of the convicts—practically unchanged. The convict was merely a human machine to be worked a certain number of hours with no incentive to good work beyond the fear of punishment. No thought was given to fitting him for future citizenship. Every prison had its punishment cells, some of them underground, most of them dark, where men were confined for days on bread and water, usually shackled standing to the iron door of the cell during working hours, and at night sleeping on the stone floor unless a board was provided—the food a scant allowance of bread and water. Punishment of this kind was inflicted for even slight infractions of rules, while floggings, "water cures," and other devilish methods were sometimes resorted to. In prisons of the better grade the most rigidly repressive measures were enforced and all natural human impulses were repressed. This was considered "excellent discipline."

Now, as to the results of those severe punishments and rigid repressive methods: were the criminals reformed? Was society protected? What were the fruits of our prisons and reformatories? I have before me reliable, up-to-date statistics from a neighboring State as to the number of men convicted of a second offence after serving one term in prison. The general average shows that forty, out of every hundred men sent to prison for the first time, on being released commit a second crime. This percentage represents a fair average of the results of non-progressive prison methods to-day. But while our prisons were practically at a standstill and crime was on the increase the world was moving, new ideas were in the very air, destined to be of no less importance in human development than the mastery of electricity is proving in the material world.

There is an old proverb that all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy. Some fifteen years ago the vital truth contained in this old saying suddenly crystallized into the playground movement. More chance for recreation, more variety in mental occupation, more fresh air and sunshine, were strenuously demanded. Not only have playgrounds broken out even in the midst of our crowded cities, but open-air schools have sprung into existence in Europe and are gaining in favor in this country where climate permits. Athletics in all forms have steadily gained in popularity. Freedom for the body, exercise for every muscle, is not only advocated by physicians but has become the fashion, until golf is now the great American pastime, and the benefit of physical recreation is no longer questioned.

Even more far-reaching in eventual influence is the modern recognition of the rights and claims of the individual. This awakening is so widespread that it cannot be centralized in any personal leadership. It is like the dawning of a great light upon the life of the twentieth century in all civilized countries, and already it is affecting existence in countless directions.