BY HELEN CAMPBELL.

No form of charitable work undertaken in this busy century holds more

perplexity and uncertainty than that for women, who, whether for great or

small offenses, have come under the ban of the law, and who pass from the

shadow of the prison to confront a public feeling which is, in the main,

so absolutely antagonistic as to leave small chance for reform, or hope

of making new and better place.

It is certain that there is much justification for such feeling. There

are few in whom the missionary spirit is strong enough to enable them to

accept undaunted, the possibilities involved in receiving as a member

of the family, a woman whose desire for reform may be outweighed a

thousand times by the power of her appetites, and whose influence may

bring contamination to all within its reach. Even in less dangerous

cases, where youth and ignorance are the excuses for the violation of

law, there is always the fear that association with older offenders has

given a knowledge of evil that will work equal disaster, and thus the

door is as effectually closed against the slight as against the confirmed

transgressor. It is part of the popular conviction that work for women

is far less productive of results than work for men, a conviction that

has a certain foundation of truth. Even in the Water Street Mission of

New York, in which the most apparently hopeless class was reached and

held, McAuley was constantly baffled by this fact, and in time accepted

it as inevitable. He did not question, more than other workers have done,

why this was so, or how far the world was responsible for the state of

things he bewailed, but came at last, by almost unconscious steps, to the

conclusion given in a talk with the writer.

“You’ve wondered, at times, that we didn’t have more women here,” he

said, a year or two before his death. “Don’t you know that you can haul

in a hundred men to one woman? What it means, the good Lord only knows,

but they don’t stay put. They cry an’ promise, an’ promise an’ cry,

an’ you do for ’em with all your might, an’ all at once they’re off,

an’ may be you never see ’em again.… When a girl’s once down, it isn’t

once in five hundred times that you can pull her out. Take that very

one you was so sorry for. She’s been to every meeting ’round here, an’

cried an’ begged to be helped. She’s been taken first to one ‘Home’ an’

then to another, an’ she’s run from every one back to her old life. The

system’s wrong. That’s my opinion. You take a ‘Home’ where a lot are in

together, an’ the devil’s let loose. They chew tobacco an’ chew snuff,

an’ get drunk on the sly, an’ the old ones tell the young ones all their

lives, an’ the last end is worse than the first, for they learn a lot of

deviltry to add to their own. There ain’t but one way, as I can see, to

save ’em. Keep ’em apart. Let Christian families that can, make up their

minds to take one at a time; hedge her round; give her enough to do, an’

get her interested, an’ pray night an’ day she may be kept. That will

save a good many, for it’s mostly worked where it’s been tried. But there

ain’t anything in our work so discouragin’ as this very thing. What you

going to do? These girls comin’ out of homes where a dozen, may be, has

herded in one room, what do they know of decency or cleanliness? What

can they know, I’d like to know? No, I tell you; the work’s got to begin

at the beginning. Get hold of the children. Send them off. Do anything

that’ll train them differently. They’re born in sin and born to sin, and

the Lord only knows what’ll come if good men and women don’t wake up and

take hold.”

Admitting the serious nature of the difficulties involved, it is quite

certain that many of them have been born of an utterly false estimate

of the relative degrees of guilt in men and women. Neither time nor

space allows discussion of this point beyond the suggestion that in the

present White Cross movement, and the questions that at once arise as

the first necessity in any understanding of its nature or need, may be

found the secret of much that has made against women. Simple justice, the

last acquired and, it would seem, the hardest won of all virtues, makes

chastity as binding an obligation upon man as upon woman, and gives to

both, when repentant, the same pardon and the same hope for a future.

Thus far, charity has ignored the woman, forcing her to bear not only the

pain and sorrow of unblessed motherhood, but the sentence of perpetual

banishment from the society whose laws she has defied.

It is at this stage that workers among the poor most often find her,

hopeless, and in the large proportion of cases driven back to crime as

her only resort. They form a great proportion of the inmates of any

prison for women. Every town and village has its quota of candidates for

reformatory or jail, and mourns, collectively and individually, over the

terrible tendencies of this class, with small thought that prevention

may be easier than cure, and that if children born to such conditions

come into the world, society is bound to see that their training shall,

as far as possible, neutralize the results of such inheritance. Society

has no time for prevention. It proposes to pay for prisons rather than

for industrial schools; to labor with full fledged criminals, rather

than to crush out vice while still in embryo, and congratulates itself

on the magnificent liberality of its provision for the criminal, and the

remarkable success of the prison system as a whole.

Women are supposed to be merely occasional offenders, and that there

are, in every state, hundreds outside of the prison who are habitual

law breakers, and an equally large proportion within its walls, is a

proposition received as incredible. Yet it was not till Massachusetts

found herself forced to deal with eight hundred per year of such cases,

that the first reformatory was organized, in 1865, and the number has

increased steadily with the increase in population. County prisons,

of which there were twenty-one, were, too often, simply nests for

propagating vice. In a few of the larger ones great order and system

prevailed. In the smaller ones there was next to none, and male and

female prisoners, dirty, ragged and obscene, mingled together and

interchanged lessons in new forms of vice. In all of them three classes

of offenses were to be found, women convicts being sentenced usually for

drunkenness, unchastity, or larceny; the relative prevalence of the three

being indicated by the order in which they are given. The first class,

wherever found, are most often Irish women, at, or past, the middle age.

They are not criminals, though at times, in some cases, dishonest or

unchaste. Often they are eager to reform, and yield to the temptation to

drink as many men yield, for the momentary relief from grinding care and

anxiety. Many of them become accustomed to the short sentences usually

given by magistrates for this offense, and there are countless women

who have had thirty, forty, and even fifty short imprisonments. A long

term, or, in aggravated cases, imprisonment for life, affords the only

security, the mere smell of liquor being often enough to awaken appetite

and bring on a wild debauch. The three crimes can in almost every case be

traced back to a neglected childhood.

“My mother died whan I was a bit of a child, an’ my father drank and beat

me,” is the story of nine tenths of these cases, and will remain the

story. The life of a single great tenement house, if told in full, as

it has recently been done, shows how the seed is sown, and what harvest

we may expect, and prison systems, however admirable, can touch but the

smallest proportion of those who come within their walls. And even here,

in this system, which deserves all the eulogy it receives, women have had

but the most meager share of the benefit intended. It is only here and

there that, spurred on by some great souled woman, wrought to white heat

of indignation at the suffering and ignominy heaped upon these weak and

most miserable sisters, there has grown up a better system of treatment,

or a refuge in which reform has been made possible. Even to-day, in

cities where reform is supposed to have perfected itself, there are

Houses of Detention, at the mention of which compassionate judges shake

their heads, and use any and every pretext to avoid condemning, for even

a week, a young girl guilty of some first and slight offense, to their

unspeakably infamous walls. Who enters there leaves hope behind, and

life in any real sense, is over, once for all, for the sad soul that has

learned what awaits it there.

In a little town of Massachusetts, many phases of this question have long

since been answered. The work is so quietly carried forward that few

save those interested in philanthropic problems have any knowledge of

its nature or scope. In the belief that its story will awaken, not only

interest, but stronger faith in the possibilities of reform, its outlines

are given here. From its success grew the greater work which makes the

title of the present article, a work which would have seemed well nigh

impossible had not such demonstration first been made of its entire

feasibility.

Practically, its foundation was laid in Dedham, thirty years or more

ago, where a temporary asylum was afforded to women just discharged from

prison, and much the same methods were adopted in the Springfield “Home

for Friendless Women.” But as one of the most efficient workers wrote at

the time: “The more thoughtful saw from the first that they were working

only at the top of the tree, and must go to the root to accomplish real

good in large measure. The necessity of making the term of imprisonment

one also of instruction, was apparent; also the vital need of purifying

the corrupted by personal contact with pure and good women, laboring

among them in a spirit of love and sympathy.”

It was not until 1870 that, after a preliminary meeting in Boston,

officered by some of her most earnest citizens, a memorial was presented

to the legislature, in which the need was set forth of better prisons for

women, and of a reformatory discipline for all criminals. This was called

“The Memorial of the Temporary Asylum for Discharged Female Prisoners in

Dedham, and of the Springfield Home for Friendless Women and Children,

and of others concurring with them.” The names of Whittier, Henry Wilson,

Bishop Eastburn, and many others equally noble, were affixed, and the

almost immediate result was the establishment of the Prison Commission

of the state, and a few years later, the building of the separate prison

for women at Sherborn. Thirty acres of land were purchased here, and the

prison was placed upon a knoll, from which one of the finest views in

the county may be had, a neighboring pond giving a full supply of pure

water, and the facilities for drainage being excellent. The form chosen

for building was a cross, with two more transverse sections, one at the

front, and one for hospital purposes, at the rear. But forty-eight strong

cells for the more refractory class were built, the majority occupying

small, separate rooms, divided by brick partitions, and each owning a

window. The basement has two large laundries, one for prison, the other

for outside use, the latter bringing in a comfortable income toward

the support of the prison. Over this laundry is the prison kitchen and

bakery, the work in both being done by the prisoners, under supervision.

Above this, in the third story, is the large hall used as a chapel, and

a library adjoining it, while the second story contains two large work

rooms, one for sewing, and the other for making chair bottoms. Sewing

machines are in the first one, and here all the clothing for the prison

is made, as well as a good deal for another institution. A school room is

also on this floor, occupied six hours a day, the women going to it in

classes, each class having an hour’s instruction a day. Here many take

their first lessons in reading and writing; easy arithmetic and geography

are also taught.

The prison has four divisions, for the classification of convicts, the

three higher ones each containing what is known as a “privilege room,”

the prisoners who have obeyed the rules being allowed to spend an hour

each evening under the supervision of the matrons, before they are

locked in for the night. Four cheerful dining rooms are provided, and

unlike the county jails, where prisoners eat alone from a tin pan, the

women gather, under the supervision of matrons, each with neat plate and

basin, learning order and decorum, and in many cases having their first

experience of clean and palatable food. The matrons have comfortable

rooms, commanding a view of the corridors, and a private dining room and

kitchen in the basement. A parlor on the second floor is also at their

disposal, thirty matrons and assistants using it in such intervals of

leisure as come.

The chief officers may be either men or women, at the pleasure of

the Governor, these being superintendent, steward and treasurer, the

remainder being all women, and including a deputy superintendent, a

chaplain, a physician, school mistress, and clerk. The wishes of the

founders were carried out in making the superintendent a woman, Mrs.

Edna C. Atkinson’s name having become the synonym for patient and most

faithful labor in this untried field. There are others as worthy, but

with her, they shrink from any public recognition, content to have laid

silently the foundation of a work which is copied in detail wherever the

same results are desired.

The hospital is a model of its kind, three stories in height, and

thirty-two feet wide by seventy-seven long. The dispensary and wash

room, the doctor’s sitting room and some small wards for special cases

are on the first floor. The second one has a large ward, sunny and airy,

with space for twenty beds, and at one side bath rooms, and a small

room where the dead are laid until burial. The convalescent ward is on

the third floor, and in each and all, is the exquisite neatness which

is a revelation to every occupant. Of the physical misery that finds

alleviation here, one can hardly speak. “Intemperance, unchastity, abuse

from male companions, neglected childbirth, hereditary taints, poor food

and clothing,” have all done their work, and demand all the skill the

physician can bring to bear. The work is hard and often repulsive, but

the sick prisoner is especially susceptible to influence, and often, when

all means have been tried in vain, yields at last under the pressure

of pain and gratitude for its relief, and goes out from the ward a new

creature spiritually as well as physically.

From the beginning they are made to feel that here is one spot where love

and sympathy are certain. There is no convict dress branding them at once

as infamous. Each division has its own; blue check of different patterns

being chosen to distinguish the different grades. The upper ones have

neat white aprons for Sundays. Night dresses and pocket handkerchiefs

are provided to teach neatness, and every woman is required to have

smooth hair and a well-cared-for person. In the nursery, an essential

department of a woman’s prison, the babies show well fed, happy faces,

and are as neatly and warmly clothed as the mothers. This department

has sixty rooms, each ten by twelve, with a bed and crib for mothers

with infants, while above it is a lying-in ward, with all necessary

appliances. Often there is not the slightest hint of maternal instinct,

and the mother must be watched to prevent the destruction of the child,

but more often it is strong, and desire for reform is first awakened with

the longing that the child should know a better life. The bright, clean

quarters, the regular employment, the sympathy and encouragement, on

which, no matter how skeptical or scoffing in the beginning, they come

to depend, all foster this desire. Indifferent even to common decency

in the beginning, unknown instincts awaken, and here is one answer to

the argument sometimes made, that criminals have no right to attractive

quarters. Here, again, the same worker already quoted may speak: “In the

first place, the loss of liberty is a terrible privation, especially when

the term of confinement is long. Most persons will bear any hardship

rather than be confined, even in a pleasant place. The depraved women

of our prisons are indifferent, at first, to the things which please a

higher taste. The dark and filthy slums of Boston are far more charming

to them than the clean and sunny prison. The work is hateful to their

idle habits, and being unpaid, it has no motive to incite them to

performance. The silent, separate rooms, the quiet work room, try them

inexpressibly. There is no danger that the prison will be too tempting.

They long for the intoxicating drink, the low carousals of their usual

life, and when discharged from an ordinary prison, with no reformatory

influence, eagerly rush into the old haunts, and begin anew the foul

life.… Ferocious, indeed, are they, when long habits of intoxication,

joined to ignorance and strong passions, are subjected to the restraints

of a prison.”

“No woman can govern a ferocious woman,” was asserted in the

beginning, by a well known Senator; but that point settled itself

years since, women having proved better able to control women, no

matter how brutalized, than any man has ever been. In one case a woman

was sent from a neighboring prison, who came determined to create

disturbance. Insurrection seemed inevitable, such passion of revolt

had she communicated to many, but wise management quelled it at once.

Three strong men were necessary to convey her from the yard to the

punishment cell, but this was done under the personal direction of the

superintendent, and the men were allowed no violence or abuse. For days

she remained unsubdued; then quieted, and at the end of ten was conquered

and transformed into a quiet, orderly, obedient worker.

“She was that patient and kind she did all she could for me,” was her

comment on the superintendent, and her case is illustrative of dozens of

the same nature. Nothing impresses them more than the unselfish nature

of the care bestowed, and as their skill in manual labor develops,

their interest grows with it, and they begin to take pride in what may

be accomplished. They are ready, when the term of confinement ends, to

lead decent lives, but they must be shielded for a time, else ruin is

inevitable.

Here, then, comes in the mission of a “Wayside Home.” The thought of

such shelter came many years ago, to the man who gave all his life to

making paths plainer for sinning and suffering souls, and who in the

“Isaac Hopper Home,” as often called the “Father Hopper Home,” solved

the problem in a degree. Even here, however, admission was conditioned

on a letter or word of endorsement, and there was no spot in all the

great city in which a homeless and friendless woman, without such word,

could find temporary refuge. It remained for Brooklyn to offer such a

possibility, and the quiet home that in the early spring of 1880 opened

its doors, asked but three questions:

“Do you need help?”

“Are you homeless?”

“If taken in, will you remain a month, keep the necessary rules of the

house, and do your share of its work?”

These question are “the hinge on which the door swings, and when once a

woman crosses its threshold she stands on her honor, and is trusted just

as far as she will allow.”

Cramped for room, dependent upon voluntary contributions for furnishing,

provisions, and all the running expenses of such an undertaking,

the first year found them without debt, and with ninety-nine women

sheltered and protected, sixty-two of whom found places, and, with

but few exceptions, proved faithful and worthy of trust. During the

second year two hundred and twenty-four were helped, cramped quarters

forcing the managers to refuse many applications. Half of the income

for that year was earned by the inmates, in laundry, sewing room, and

days’ work outside. A larger house was taken, but the same principle of

free admission continued. Many who left the Home voluntarily, and some

even who had been expelled, returned, penitent and sorrowful, and were

received again, and given another chance, the only bar to return being in

the discovery that the influence of a woman in some cases did more harm

than could be counteracted in the Home, in which case there is written

across her name, “Not to be admitted again.”

A matron and two assistant matrons are employed, the matron having

general charge of the house, keys, and work; the first assistant, of

sewing room and laundry; and the second of the kitchen and all household

supplies. But thirty women can be accommodated at any one time, and it

is hoped that a building especially for the purpose may soon give the

added facilities so imperatively demanded. The work holds little poetry,

and the expression of some of its subjects is so debased and apparently

hopeless, that one gentleman, accustomed to give freely, remarked: “I see

nothing better to do than to tie a rope round their necks and pitch them

into the river.”

The poor souls were themselves much of his mind, but a month or two gave

a very different aspect to affairs, work and the certainty of sympathy

bringing new life. Undisciplined and weak, in the power of appetite

both inherited and acquired, they have fought battles whose terror the

untempted can never know; fought and won, the roll now holding hundreds

of names. Working against perpetual obstacle and disadvantage, the story

of the five years is one of triumph for managers as well as managed. “We

began,” said one of the workers, “holding in one hand the key to an empty

house, for which the rent was paid for one month, and in the other hand

all our worldly possessions—five dollars—and since that time we have

bought our present home, and furnished it comfortably for our work. It

accommodates thirty-five women, and three matrons, and we have paid on

it $5,000, carrying a mortgage of $9,000. None of these things are the

ultimate of our work. They are but means to an end, and that end the

saving of the lives and souls of these women.”

Effort of as extended a nature is possible only for a body of earnest

workers, but this mere hint of its nature and results may perhaps

convince some who have doubted its possibility, and serve as the clue

to companion methods in country towns. Faith in possibilities, both

human and divine, has been the condition of success for what is already

accomplished, and the village may test these no less than the city.

Reports filled with every practical detail may be had by addressing a

note to “The Wayside Home, 352 Bridge Street, Brooklyn, N. Y.,” and the

writer stands ready, at any time, to answer questions as to methods,

assuring all doubters that, for all patient workers, success is certain.

* * * * *

The finest pleasures of reading come unbidden. In the twilight alcove

of a library, with a time-mellowed chair yielding luxuriously to your

pressure, a June wind floating in at the windows, and in your hand some

rambling old author, good humored and quaint, one would think the Spirit

could scarce fail to be conjured. Yet often, after spending a morning

hour restlessly there … I have strolled off with a book in my pocket to

the woods; and, as I live, the mood has descended upon me under some

chance tree, with a crooked root under my head, and I have lain there

reading and sleeping by turns till the letters were blurred in the

dimness of twilight.—_From Prose Writings of N. P. Willis._

The Chautauquan, Vol. 05, July 1885, No. 10 · 第 16 / 110 题