[If the discussion which has followed the meeting of the International
Prison Congress in Washington last October has brought anything clearly
to the surface, it is that the county jail system of this country has
succeeded in turning upon itself the spot-light of Europe. Why should
we not take advantage of this borrowed illumination to become familiar
with our own problem?--Editor.]
The following extracts give the gist of an interesting study of our
jail system which was read before the last Maryland State conference of
charities, and recently published in _The Institution Quarterly_ of the
Board of Administration of Illinois.
“So much has been said, and so well said, regarding the folly and
iniquity of the county jail system in the United States, that it seems
like a waste of breath to discuss it further.... No fault can be found
with any one jail, that may not be found with scores or hundreds of
others. There are jails that are too large, and jails that are too
small; insecure jails, unsanitary jails, jails without light, jails
without heat, jails without ventilation, filthy jails, jails that are
not properly governed, palatial jails, and jails that are not fit for
occupation as stables or pigstyes. I suppose that I have personally
inspected nearly or quite one-fourth of all the jails in this country,
and my attention has been drawn to every form of defect and disgrace by
which a county prison can he disfigured.... But in what forum is the
case to be tried? Who is to exercise the necessary jurisdiction? Where
is the jury charged with the duty of rendering a verdict? Who will
select the jurors? and when? and where?...
“It is not difficult, where the conditions in some county jail are
shown to be shameful and intolerable, to arouse local sentiment in
favor of some measure of improvement. If it is overcrowded, build an
addition. If it is filthy, inaugurate a general house-cleaning. If it
is unsafe, make it stronger. If it is unsanitary, it is easy to supply
artificial light and heat, or to put in sewerage, water and modern
plumbing. With these and other changes, it will do. If not, or if the
sheriff needs a fine official residence, and the town wants a handsome
public building and profitable contracts for its erection, then it may
be possible to bring about the construction of a new prison.
“But what does all this really amount to? In all the essentials of good
prison organization and management, the new jail is no better than
the old one; and the money spent upon it is simply an addition to the
immense investment in a wretched and indefensible system. Instead of
being an aid to reform, it is an obstacle to reform. It increases the
weight of the already too heavy burden resting on the shoulders of the
friends and advocates of the thorough and effectual reconstruction of
our existing prison system, from the top to the bottom.
“It would therefore seem to be high time for a radical change in our
method of attack. We must adopt a new plan of campaign, which will aim
not at the capture here and there of an outwork, so much as at the
occupation and destruction of the innermost citadel.
“... Does any one imagine that the abuses at which I have barely hinted
could long survive, if all convicted offenders, major and minor,
misdemeanants as well as felons, were in the custody of state instead
of county officials? The initial result would be a diminution in the
number of prisons. There are many times too many local prisons. Some
of them stand empty from year to year; some are overcrowded, at least
during the weeks immediately preceding a term of the criminal court.
The needless multiplication of jails entails a heavy pecuniary burden
upon the people.
“The massing of sentenced prisoners would admit of their
classification, and of the introduction of reformatory methods of
dealing with them--useful, healthy occupation both for body and mind,
and some measure of education and religious influence.
“The officers in immediate charge would naturally be men of higher
grade, their tenure of office would be more secure, and they would have
no other duties to distract their attention from their proper work.
They would have little time or opportunity for pernicious political
activity. They could be better paid.
“The corrupt fee system, under which it is to the pecuniary interest of
some official that arrests should be multiplied, would go by the board.
“We might hope to see the last of iron cages, and foreigners could
no longer satirize our prisons under the generic term of menageries.
The state would avail itself of the services of competent architects,
and traveling salesmen would not be able to sell to unsuspecting and
simple-minded commissioners and supervisors their illusory spectacles
in shagreen cases.
“In a word, we should have an opportunity to replace irresponsible by
responsible prison management, and competency would in time take the
place of incompetency.
“This proposal implies, of course, the complete and final disseverance
of the prison for men convicted of crime from the house of detention
for those awaiting trial, whose guilt is yet unproven, and who may be
innocent. From the days of Plato to the present moment, that has been
a cardinal maxim of prison reform. The jail system has prevented the
realization of this ideal.
“It is not the house of correction, but the house of detention, which
constitutes the most refractory element in this complex problem. Let us
lay that portion of it aside, for the moment, and consider the other,
which is easier. There is no practical obstacle to the establishment
of one or more state houses of correction in any state, except the
indifference of the legislature; and that can be overcome by a campaign
of education....
“The point is to insist that the condemned misdemeanant, like the
condemned felon, shall be committed to the custody of the state, which
alone shall have the power to execute upon him, the sentence of the
court. This simple measure may be relied upon to do away with one-half
of our present grounds of complaint.
“I have no fear that, this first step taken, the state will not, sooner
or later, see its way clear to take a second, and a third, and as
many other steps as may from time to time appear to be expedient and
practicable. ‘I do not ask to see the distant scene; one step enough
for me.’
“I confess that I do not see how, at present, it is possible to
dispense with the county jail as a house of detention. Ill-adapted
as it is to that use, if we gain nothing, we at least lose nothing
by conservatism as to this point. Consider the absolute necessity
for having a place of confinement for prisoners awaiting trial.
Consider the enormous cost of providing a new and improved house of
detention in each county. If it should be said that so many houses
of detention are not requisite, that the state might be redistricted
for judicial purposes, or that prisoners might be carried back and
forth between counties, remember that the witnesses would also have
to be transported, at great expense. Neither of these suggestions is
likely favorably to impress a practical mind. Possibly there are jails
which might be remodelled, so as to serve reasonably well as houses of
detention only; and there may be counties in which the present jails
should be condemned as nuisances, and houses of detention, properly
planned for that exclusive use, might there be built. These are details
which may be left to take care of themselves. Why put off doing what
we can do, because there are other things that we can not do? The time
may come when we can do more. Why advocate reforms which are sure to
provoke such a united opposition as to insure their defeat in advance?
“On this subject, however, there is one suggestion that may well
be made. The population of our minor prisons might be materially
reduced, if a more liberal use were made of the constitutional right
of bail. The purpose of temporary release under bond is twofold; to
relieve the public and to relieve the prisoner. It is expected that
the courts will exercise this power in a liberal spirit, and they
do. Some of them are authorized to release prisoners on their own
recognizance, at the discretion of the court. Every court should
possess this right, and greater use might well be made of it. In our
large cities, there are many persons guilty of disorderly conduct, or
charged with the violation of some police regulation, or some trivial
or purely technical offence, who would face trial, without being held
in custody, but are unable to procure bondsmen. In both civic and rural
communities, there are also many whose family and business relations
are such, that there is no reason to apprehend that they will seek to
avoid trial by running away. The fact that such persons can not furnish
bail is no sufficient reason for their imprisonment. In all such cases,
the committing magistrate must of course use wise discrimination in the
exercise of his right to waive the usual bail-bond.
“It is further desirable that the criminal code should provide for the
probation of the accused, in advance of trial.
“By the adoption of these and other similar methods, fewer men and
women would be exposed to the peril of moral contagion in prison,
which, under our present system, affects even those who may be, and in
fact often are, innocent. Moreover, it is an error to imagine that all
who are guilty of the charges for which, under the statutes, if unable
to pay a reasonable fine, they must endure a term of incarceration, are
depraved. The boy who throws a ball through a plate glass window and is
caught, is no worse than the boy who does the same thing and makes his
escape without being arrested; nor the boy who can pay a fine, than the
boy who can not.”