SOME PRISON FRIENDS OF MINE

Vague noises are at all times audible in jail--stirrings, foot-falls, a

subdued voice now and then, the sharp orders of an official--"bawlings

out" as they are termed; the clanging of steel gates, the murmur of

machinery, the cacophany of musical instruments during practise hours in

the chapel; as well as the periodical screeches and ringings of whistles

and gongs. The general impression on ear and eye alike is of stealthy

repression, a checked unrest--a multifarious creature, uneasy but kept

down. The place is perhaps hardly less silent than a cloister; but the

peace of the cloister is utterly absent. An atmosphere of animosity and

contention pervades all--a constant apprehension of sinister things

liable to happen, a breathless struggle, the sullenness of hate, the

whispering of treachery. The eyes of officials peer, watch and threaten;

those of the convicts are downcast but privily rebellious, or

deprecatingly servile.

It is the everlasting pregnancy of war between slave and master, quite

different from submission to rightful authority. Whatever the law may

say, the rightfulness of prison authority is never admitted by

prisoners. Honest authority is tranquil and secure; prison authority

goes armed, conscious of its unrighteousness, and there is unremitting

nervous stress on both sides. Both sides seem secretly to await a signal

to sudden conflict.

At dinner, soon after my arrival, amid the omnipresent murmurous palaver

of conversation, there fell an unusual noise. The unusual is always

formidable in jail. The noise was nothing in itself, and would have

passed unheeded in a hotel dining-room. But over us, crowded together

there, spread an instant hush. All knew that men had been stabbed,

frenzied affrays had broken out in that room. What was it now? The guard

in the window stiffened and poised his rifle. The guards on the floor

caught their breath, but assumed a confident air. The men sat staring in

the direction of the noise, tense and waiting.

Nothing happened; somebody had dropped a plate and broken it, perhaps.

But had some natural leader of the enslaved leaped up and shouted at

that juncture, murder would have followed the next moment. Among every

hundred convicts there are eight or ten whom misery and wrong have made

reckless, whose morbid rebelliousness needs, to break forth, only the

shadow of opportunity to kill before being killed, and they accept it.

But it was not to be that day, and we relaxed, and grinned, nervously or

grimly, and resumed our meal.

Eight hundred men, clad in a shapeless monotony of dingy blue, labeled

on the back with their disgrace, stepping lightly or shuffling hastily

to and fro, heads bent and eyes downcast, performing various offices,

menial, clerical or industrial, with a certain obsequiousness and

ostensible zeal that was yet inwardly repulsion and protest--these were

men born under the great flag, Americans, my countrymen, and now my

companions! What a change, what a degradation from the free American

citizen of the streets and boundless expanses! Not men, now, but slaves,

condemned to penal servitude; not citizens, but a class apart and alien;

felons, criminals, no longer entitled to life, liberty and the pursuit

of happiness, but existing in shame and on suffrance, ruined, nameless,

parted from friends and families, with present physical pain and mental

misery, and with a future of hounding and helplessness, of fear and

hiding, of uselessness and aimlessness, of insanity and base death!

Upon what plea are these conditions established? Because the slaves had

broken the law--been guilty of crimes. But what crimes? Some had done

murder, others committed rape, some had held up a train, another had

blown a safe, another was a pickpocket, another a white-slaver, this one

had stolen food to avert starvation, that was a confidence man or bank

embezzler, here was one snared in some technicality of new finance laws,

yonder an ignorant moonshiner from the hills, who had grown corn in his

back yard and thought he had a right to make whiskey out of it--he had

no other means of livelihood. Breakers of God's laws; of man's; victims

of tricks and legal technicalities, of torturing want and of headlong

passion, and of sheer court errors or of perjured testimony--here they

were, all on the same footing, no discriminations made! To what end? So

that they might be punished and repent and go forth better men and

useful workers, and so that society might be protected and its integrity

vindicated. That is the ostensible reason; no other is alleged.

It sounds like a jest; but the men are here, the thing is done. In some

moods I would say to myself, "It's too preposterous--it can't be--it's

an hallucination--a bad dream!" But there it was, visible and palpable.

Was it protection for society to shut up a man from ability to support

those dependent on him, who were thus themselves driven to want and

perhaps crime, multiplying the original criminality by three or four or

half a dozen? Could any injury which the culprit could do to the

community equal the injury thus done by the community to him and his,

and indirectly to itself, by such treatment? Or could the technical and

perhaps unconscious violator of an obscure and whimsical law be reformed

by putting him on an equality with a cold-blooded murderer, or with a

man who had grown rich by selling the shame of women? Was the punishment

equable which handled with equal severity a brutish negro from the

cotton fields, and a man brought up in refinement and gentleness?

But I would go further, and challenge the right of the community to

inflict penal imprisonment as we know it at all. Some criminals belong

in hospitals, others in insane asylums, for others the thoughtless

neglect and selfishness of society is responsible, and they should be

succored, not punished; and the remainder should be constrained, under

surveillance but not in confinement, to compensate for the harm they did

by labor or self-denial aimed directly at that result. But of this

hereafter.

Meanwhile, I paid attention to my companions themselves.

In their intercourse with one another there was a singular amenity or

pleasantness, and with some who had been prisoners for a long time, a

sort of childlikeness. But it was like the childlikeness of a person

partly dazed, or recovering from a severe illness or shock. They greeted

one another with a covert smile, an unobtrusive movement of head or

hand; only when under direct observation of an official would they pass

without a sign. The usual words were, "How're you feeling?" or, "How're

they comin'?" not in the perfunctory tone of greetings in the outer

world, but with an accent of real interest and solicitude. The answer

would be, "Good!" "Fine!" with as much heartiness as could be thrown

into it--though it might be obvious enough that the truth was far from

being that.

There was one dear old fellow who had a variation on these forms; he was

an alleged moonshiner, though, as he said, "Yes, I did make some

whiskey, but I never sold none!" "How're you feeling, Joe?" I would say;

and he would reply, with his pathetic smile, and his high, soft voice,

"Pretty well--pretty well, for 'n old man!" with a drawling emphasis on

the "old." He was about seventy, with the soft brown hair of youth, but

bent and stiff and wrinkled with hard years and rheumatics; and if I

questioned him more closely, he would confess that he suffered from

"lots o' misery here!"--passing his gnarled old hands over his digestive

tract. Indeed, four-fifths of the men had that trouble in more or less

acute form, owing to the atrocious food supplied as our regular diet.

Joe's face, though lined with the hardships and privations of a long

life, was beautifully formed, aristocratic in its delicate contours; and

he possessed, and constantly used, one of the most delectable,

contagious and genuine laughs that ever made music in my ears. The men

would ransack their humorous resources in conversation with Joe, merely

for the sake of making him laugh. He would fix his old eyes squarely on

yours, and laugh and laugh with infinite mirth and good nature. Such a

sound in such a place was rare and wonderful, and helped one like fresh

water in a desert.

The general friendliness among the men--so contrasted with their

demeanor toward the officials--was due to the identity of their common

interests; they were in the same boat, facing the same perils and

disasters, united in the same aims and hopes, and leagued against the

same oppressors. They lived in the constant dread of some calamity; and

if I met the same man three or four times in the same day, he would

never fail to make the same enquiry--"How're you feeling?" recognizing

that I might have received some ugly blow in the interval. There was a

spontaneous courtesy and a charitableness in it that touched the heart.

The same sentiment was manifested at meals; if anybody got hold of

anything that seemed to him a little better than usual, he could not

rest till he had offered some of it, or all of it, to his neighbors at

table. "Here, take this--take it--I got more'n I want!" Or, watching his

opportunity, Ned the runner, who had comforted us on our first night in

prison, would come to the door of my cell, with his Irish humor and

cordiality shining in his eyes. "Say, Mr. Hawthorne, there's a dividend

been declared!" and out of some surreptitious receptacle he would

produce three or four crumpled cigarette papers--of all contraband

articles in the prison the most prized. "No--take 'em--I got no end of

'em!"

A peculiar consideration was manifested by the men toward "the old man";

my hair was white enough, to be sure, but it had been so for nearly

twenty years, and I was in much better physical condition than most of

them. I accepted their kind offices with gratitude and emotion, and,

when I saw that to do otherwise would hurt their feelings, their

concrete gifts, too.

But there were many instances of self-sacrifice greater than these; men

would go to the hole sooner than betray a comrade; and you are fortunate

in being unable to comprehend what that means. If a comrade in his range

was sick and unable to come to meals, I have constantly seen a man

secrete half of his miserable breakfast or dinner in his pocket, to be

carried up to the invalid and smuggled into his cell. It was a matter of

course, nobody remarked it. Any mistake or indiscretion committed by a

prisoner would be instantly and almost mechanically covered by the man

nearest him, though at the risk of punishment--and the punishment for

betraying human sympathy in this way is--of course it is!--especially

severe; it is conspiracy to cheat the Government.

The traditional tale of a prisoner's devotion to animals is also true; a

man next me at table--a yegg--for two weeks poured half his allowance of

milk (he was on milk diet for acute indigestion) into a surreptitious

bottle, and bore it off for the sustenance of a couple of little forlorn

kittens that he was acting as special providence for. The meditative

smile with which he perpetrated this theft upon the prison authorities

was a wonderful sight. Another convict, a hardened old timer, for

several weeks lavished cargoes of tenderness upon a rat which he had

laboriously conciliated and tamed. "What makes you so fond of that

animal?" enquired one day a sentimental and statistical old lady visitor

to the prison. After struggling with his emotions for a minute, he burst

out, "Yah! he bit the guard!" This dialogue was overheard, and enchanted

the whole penitentiary for months.

But one reflects that, whatever humane or lovable traits prisoners may

exhibit, they are after all criminals! The existence in a lost soul of

good qualities or impulses side by side with evil ones has long been

recognized. Victor Hugo illustrated the discovery in his Jean Valjean,

it was a staple with Dickens, Bret Harte's heroes are all of that type,

it was the inspiration of much of Charles Reade's eloquence, Kipling has

more than a touch of it, our contemporary fiction-mongers sentimentalize

over it, and the train-robber in the movies usually has a full line of

sterling virtues up his sleeve. The lost soul, in short, brims over,

upon occasion, with the wine of regeneration. Therefore (so runs the

moral) let us of the elect furbish up our charity, and be as tolerant

toward this non-human class of people as may be consistent with our own

safety and respectability. Scraps of our own lustrous impeccability have

somehow found their way into them, and we cannot afford wholly to

disavow them, in spite of their wretched lodgings.

This phariseeism is so inveterate with us, that I may fairly say that

one has to be sentenced to jail as a criminal in order to correct it.

From that vantage ground or Mount of Vision it presently dawns upon us

that these men are no more lost souls than we are--are, in fact, woven

out of the same yarn and cut from the same cloth. And from this same

vantage ground it also gradually dawns upon us that, in one respect at

least, the aggregate in a jail is better than the same number of men

taken haphazard from the city streets. For the former have now laid

aside self-righteousness and dissimulation, which are of the essence of

our unrestrained civil life: "I killed a man, yes; I robbed a bank, I

picked a pocket, I lived off a woman, I swindled my stockholders, I

counterfeited a banknote." No disguise here--no evasion.

But when you go into the details of the transaction, weigh the causes

which led up to it, consider the conditions surrounding it, realize the

temptations or provocations that precipitated it, you step into your

confessional: "Lord, my nature and heart are not different from this

sinner's, and but for accidents and good fortune which were none of my

providing, I should stand accountant to-day as he does!" You bring the

whited sepulcher home to you, and find that you have been living in it

yourself. And if you have a little intelligence you will acknowledge in

your convict the scapegoat who--not more and perhaps less blameworthy

than you--is bearing your iniquities as well as his own.

So, instead of condescending, with supercilious eyebrows and spotless

broadcloth, to concede that these unfortunate members of a non-human

class sometimes betray traces of saving grace after all, it might better

become you to wish that some of their saving graces appertained to

yourself. At your best showing, you are a pharisee and a hypocrite, and

he is not; he stands confessed; your sin is still secret in your soul.

By what right do you look down upon him?

These things which I now say to you, I said first to myself, sitting in

my cell, or watching the endless gray-blue files shuffle past me on

their way to and from meals. It was of small help or significance that I

claimed innocence of the particular offense that happened to be charged

against me; I was as indistinguishable from these men in heart as I was

in outward garb and rating. And I had manhood enough to feel glad that,

since they had to be here, I was here with them. The burden of the

scapegoat has its compensations.

On my first Sunday in the chapel, there came an exhorter or revivalist,

accustomed to dealing with prisoners from the platform, and dubbed "The

Old War-horse of Salvation," or some such title. He had his white

waistcoat, his raucous, shouting voice, his phrases, his anecdotes, his

"my men," "my friends," "fellows"; his "I'm saved, I hope, and you can

be!" Oh, the phariseeism of that "I hope!" At the end of his uproar, he

called upon those of his hearers (we had all sat quite silent and

impassive during the performance) who were willing to be saved, to stand

up in their places. All the stool pigeons arose (poor devils), and a few

other bewildered persons who fancied it expedient to be on the side of

the angels, "Thank you--thank you--thank you!" hoarsely cried the

exhorter, naively accepting their response as a personal compliment to

himself.

But that great audience sat dark, silent and impassive, and it could

only have been the tough hide of the Old War-horse that made him immune

to their cold contempt. I said to myself, "What a terrible audience it

is! Who is fit to stand before it?" These men had seen, known and

suffered the terrible, nameless things; the Unknown God, perhaps, had

spoken to many of them in their solitude; and now this being of white

waistcoat and phrases must get up and urge them to wash their sins in

the blood of the Lamb! In their silence they were preaching to him a

sermon such as no mortal pulpiteer ever uttered; but his ears were deaf

to it. "One--three--six--nine souls saved to-night! Thank you--thank

you--thank you!" And he turns to receive the polite congratulations of

the distinguished guests who sat behind him on the stage.

In prison, and only in prison, the veil is lifted or rent in twain, and

men are revealed as they are. As they stand before their Creator, they

stand now before their fellows. They are helpless--so warden and guards

think--but they have gained a power beyond any physical might of man.

They are voiceless, but they challenge mankind. They endure every

indignity and outrage; but an account will be required of those

responsible for it.

I wish to emphasize this dropping of the mask--this stop put to

posturing and pretending--this going forth in rude nakedness before

one's fellows. The man in the church pew chants out with the rest of the

congregation, "We are sinners, desperately wicked, and there is no

health in us;" but he says it with his tongue in his cheek, and fitting

his mask on only the more tightly. Or the man "convinced of sin" on the

anxious seat at the revivalist meeting frenziedly accuses himself of all

the sins in the decalogue, but finds protection in the very generality

and promiscuity of his confession, which includes and at the same time

conceals the particular fact that he robbed the till and got away with

it. We seldom hear of a penitent of this kind being indicted by a Grand

Jury, tried, convicted and jailed on the basis of his salvation

outcries. He talks figuratively.

There is nothing dramatic or hysterical in the attitude of the felon in

his cell. He robbed the till, he admits to you; but he does not drag in

the rest of the decalogue to divert your attention. And his penitence,

when he feels any, is not, in nine cases out of ten, prompted by the

expectation of getting a clean bill of health on his entire life-account

(the empty till included) from a good natured Savior not too keen about

details. He tells you, as a rule, "I was foolish and took too many

chances!" or, "If I'd handled the thing by myself, instead of admitting

a partner, it would have been all right;" or, "Oh, of course, I was a

damned fool; what's the use of bucking up against the fly cops!" In the

case of a murder, it might be, "I'm sorry I killed him, but I guess any

fellow would have done the same in my case."

Duration of confinement does not modify this attitude; the man of ten

years says the same as the man of ten months, except--and the exception

is worth noting--that the former's moral sense, whatever he originally

had of it, has been blunted or discouraged, and he has conceived a

settled animosity against human authority, and disbelief in the justice

and sincerity of its administrators. He has been the subject, during his

incarceration, of such numberless acts of gratuitous tyranny, outrage

and cruelty, and has seen so much of "the way things go," in general,

that though he may concede that honesty is the best policy, he can find

no other recommendation for it, and is prone to the secret conviction

that honesty itself is somehow only a cleverer way of cheating.

Such a state of mind is bred by prison experience--not otherwise. Prison

obstructs or altogether closes every door to genuine moral reform in

prisoners.

A few larger souls overcome the obstructions; for example, our John

Ross, who more than thirty-three years ago, in the blindness of a

drunken spree in Yokahoma, killed a shipmate who angered him. He died in

jail last June (1913). He was sentenced to death, but got commutation to

life imprisonment. He was a fine type of man, physically and mentally.

His spirit was never broken by what he endured, and some years before

being transferred to Atlanta, he became, in a simple, non-sensational,

but profound way, religious. At Atlanta, in his cell, he was a center of

good influence on his fellow convicts; truthful, hearty, faithful,

manly, cheerful; his preaching was by personal example, and by support

and help given at need to the weak and despairing. He was promised

freedom on parole; the promise was not kept; but even this last betrayal

failed to break his staunch heart. He died like a man, with composure

and dignity.

With a few such exceptions, prisoners are unrepentant except for

business reasons--that is, either because they recognize that crime does

not pay, or in order to influence in their favor the pardoning power.

Many of them, of course, employ their prison opportunities to devise new

crimes and to train fresh recruits from the younger convicts. Men who

have been imprisoned more than once lose hope of anything better than

transient freedom; they know they will be prevented by the police from

earning an honest livelihood, and that they must either starve or steal.

They become in the end mere prison creatures, destitute of evil or of

good, active or passive.

I repeat that the experience of associating with men without disguises

is novel and refreshing. A tedious burden is lifted from the shoulders;

the bones in the sepulcher are less revolting than the whitewash

outside; it is pleasanter to know what a man is than to suspect him. It

is certainly much wholesomer, on the other hand, to uncover your own

deformity than to hide it, especially when you know, or fear, that the

hiding is unsuccessful.

There is a sense of brotherhood, long since unfamiliar to human

intercourse under usual conditions, but welcome even at the cost of

conditions such as these. The truth gradually emerges to our

consciousness--it is not the evil in us that kills brotherhood, but the

vain, unending effort to make the evil seem good. Now our eyes meet one

another's frankly; the skilfullest counterfeit was worse than the worst

reality. There is nothing in us to be proud of, but something to be

thankful for. Society has done its worst to us; but it could not take

away from us our mutual kindliness, or the qualities that justify it. We

are condemned as wicked, but we are comforted by one another's good.

Prison, in short, more convincingly than any abstract argument,

demonstrates its own futility as a means of either taking revenge upon

the prisoner, or of inducing him to hate crime and to turn to good.

Revenge, of course, is officially discredited nowadays, though it is

practised as actively as ever under guises more or less civilized; but

the pretense of moral reform by penal imprisonment is becoming too

preposterous to be tolerated much longer. On the contrary, prison

renders the great aggregate of prisoners collectively self-conscious;

the goats find themselves, and are forced into antagonism with the sheep

not only as individuals but as a body. They make common cause together,

and in obscure ways achieve a degree of organization. They learn to

regard the community not as better than themselves, but as more

successful pensioners of fortune; they fear them because the advantage

of numbers is on their side, but they hate them because they feel,

either justly or unjustly, that they have suffered injustice at their

hands, and they will prey upon them when opportunity serves not only

from the original motive of physical need, but from the additional and

more sinister one, bred in prison, of retaliation for the wrong done

them.

When you sap a man's faith in plain justice, and terrify him with the

threat of irresistible power, and torture him in mind and body through

the exercise of that power, you drive him to the support and society of

men similarly circumstanced, and thus create the precise analogue in the

body politic of a cancer in the individual body. Prison attempts to

segregate this cancer, but only promotes its increase. Its poison is in

the blood and circulates everywhere.

As I passed out of the dining-room after meals each day, I came to

notice a young man who sat at a table near the door. He sat with folded

arms, and with a set and gloomy countenance; his eyes were fixed on

vacancy, and he did not speak with his companions. A crutch leaned

against his shoulder; he had lost one leg.

I learned his story. In the settlement of a small estate of which he was

an heir, a sister of his had obtained money that belonged to him, and

when asked to restore it to him, had refused to do so. After some

fruitless negotiation, he got angry, and sent her through the mails a

message containing violent expressions of reproach and animosity. The

young woman took this paper to a United States marshal, who brought it

to the attention of the district attorney, with the result that the

brother was indicted under some law of libel or of obscene matter, was

arrested, tried, and convicted, and sentenced to Atlanta penitentiary

for five years. After he had been lodged in his cell, his sister

repented of her action, and sought to have him freed; but the law does

not recognize such changes of heart, and the brother must serve out his

time.

We all know how easily family quarrels arise, how bitter they may be

while they last, and how readily, withal, they may be accommodated by

tactful handling. The sister had done wrong; the brother had lost his

temper; in what family has not such an outbreak occurred? But because

the brother had happened to put his bad temper on paper, the law, being

rashly invoked, seizes him, takes five years out of his life, and brands

him with the shame of the jail bird. Upon what plea can such an act be

construed as justice? But the district attorney shows the court that the

statute has been violated; the judge charges the jury, the jury finds

its verdict in accordance with the legal evidence, and the thing is

done. It is a mechanical process--nothing human about it.

Review your own life, and discover whether you have ever stood in the

shadow of a similar catastrophe. Were you ever angry with a relative or

with any other person, and did you express your anger to him in words?

Then you are as guilty as this one-legged boy, sitting there at his

table with his life ruined. Only, he happened to write his anger, and

the sister happened to show it to a lawyer, and the machine was set in

motion which no repentance or forgiveness or remorse can stop. But the

machine does not increase the culprit's fault, and for such a fault the

legal penalty may be five years in jail. You are not so remote from the

subterranean brotherhood as you may have supposed.

Will prison reform him? Is society protected? Is faith in human justice

promoted by such things? His case is but one of scores in every jail

that are as bad and worse. But--"throw him to the lions--serves him

right!" is still the cry.

The Subterranean Brotherhood · 第 17 / 39 题