"begging" and "sleeping-out," and it is with vagrancy used in this
sense that the Prison Authorities are chiefly concerned. Under the Act
any person begging in any public place is an idle and disorderly person
liable to imprisonment on conviction under the common law for one month
or a fine not exceeding £5: a person wandering abroad without visible
means of subsistence, or not giving a good account of himself is styled
a "rogue and vagabond" and may be punished with imprisonment up to
three months, or a fine not exceeding £25. There is a third category of
Vagrant, known as the Incorrigible Rogue, _i.e._, a person who has been
more than once convicted of any offence under the Act. Such a person
is convicted at a Court of Petty Sessions and committed till the next
Court of Quarter Sessions to receive sentence, which may be to a year's
further imprisonment or to corporal punishment.
There is another class known as Vagrant, which does not come within
the jurisdiction of the Prison Authority, and who is known as the
destitute wayfarer or casual pauper. This class presents a curious
history of quasi-penal legislation. No special provision was made for
his case when the whole question of the Poor Law was comprehensively
dealt with by the celebrated Act of 1834. During the years following
that Act, there was an alarming increase of non-criminal vagrancy, and
the principle of relieving the casually destitute in "special" wards
of the Workhouse was established, and, with it, the principle of a
prescribed task of labour in return for food and lodging. There was,
however, no power to detain for more than four hours after breakfast
on the morning after admission. It was not till 1871 that the period
of detention was prolonged to the third day after admission, on proof
that there had been more than two admissions during the month; it
then became necessary to frame regulations for the detention of the
casual vagrant on lines analogous to those under which the prisoner
is detained:--labour, dietary, task, &c., and the casual ward became
in many respects a sort of miniature Prison for very short sentences.
These provisions, however, of which the purpose was to render detention
in Casual Wards unattractive, especially to the habitual Vagrant,
did not succeed in diminishing the number of the class of destitute
wayfarer, who have for so long been a puzzle and a problem to the Poor
Law reformer. The average numbers received into Casual Wards on a given
day, for the five years ended 1876, had risen from 2,945 to 8,012 for a
similar period ended 1913.
The Casual Wards, moreover, furnish a considerable contingent each
year to the Prison population in the shape of persons who misbehave
as paupers, _i.e._, refuse to perform the allotted task, or destroy
workhouse clothes. There was at the beginning of the century a
remarkable increase in the number of persons committed for offences
against Workhouse regulations. For twenty years previously the numbers
had oscillated between two thousand and four thousand: in 1901 they
increased to over five thousand. The cry that the pauper prefers Prison
to Workhouse was again raised with the object of showing that the
conditions of Prison life were unduly attractive.
This agitation, combined with the fact that the number of persons
convicted of "Begging" and "Sleeping-Out" had risen, in the four years
from 1900 to 1903, from 12,631 to 20,729 led to some uneasiness in the
public mind, and a special Inquiry was ordered by the President of
the Local Government Board as to the law applicable to persons of the
Vagrant class, and as to the administration of that law. Previously
to this, the Prison Commissioners had reported to the Secretary of
State--"that they are not prepared to admit that the increase of the
vagrant class sent to prison is due to the fact that the conditions
of prison life are unduly attractive. Casual paupers as soon as they
become prisoners are subject to ordinary prison rules, not specially
devised for dealing with this class, but to meet the _average human
needs of thousands of prisoners of different classes, characters,
professions, and physique_; and being, as a rule, under very short
sentences, they receive the dietary and employment which practice
and experience has designed as being, on the whole, the best and the
most salutary for the early stages of a sentence of imprisonment.
This dietary is not, like that of a casual ward, for one night or two
nights, but part of a systematically graduated dietary table, intended
to embrace both short and long sentences. The dietary and task are
uniform throughout the country, varying only on medical certificate,
all prisoners on reception being subject to a careful medical
examination, and if they deviate from the normal standard of health
and fitness, a full task of labour is not imposed; and the medical
officer also has power to make additions to the dietary. In workhouses,
however, our inquiries show that there is no uniform scale of diet
or of task, and, so far as we are aware, these are not regulated by
medical certificate as is done in prison. Hence, two results follow:
Firstly, vagrants to whom the prison dietary and task and medical
practice are well known, from a probable acquaintance with many
prisons, openly profess a preference for the prison in those localities
where the workhouse conditions are more severe; and, secondly, it may
happen that on reception in prison the medical officer will not certify
the prisoner as fit for the labour, the refusal to perform which, at a
workhouse, has resulted in imprisonment."
"Again, the prison dietary is based on the opinion of experts, is
framed on scientific principles, so as to represent a sufficiency,
and not more than a sufficiency, of food for an average man doing an
average day's work. The scale of tasks is based on the experience
extending over many years of what can reasonably be expected from a
man working his hardest during a given number of hours per diem.
They believe that both the dietary and the tasks strike a fair
average, so as not to err on the side of severity or leniency. As
before stated, they can be varied on medical advice. The large and
almost preponderating rôle played by medical officers of prisons is
a factor that should be taken into account by anyone who attempts to
compare prison with workhouse life. Public opinion properly exacts
the most scrupulous care in all matters affecting the treatment of
prisoners, and medical officers are always liable to criticism from
outside persons for having failed to diagnose this or that malady,
to have ordered this or that dietary, or to have prescribed this or
that task. They dwell on this matter at some length, because they feel
it necessary to guard against the impression which might be formed
from the fact that a small section of the criminal community openly
prefer prison to the workhouse, that therefore prison life is unduly
attractive, that its conditions are not sufficiently rigorous, and that
the whole edifice should be reconstructed to meet the special case of
a few ne'er-do-wells who have lost all sense of self-respect, and to
whom it is a matter of indifference whether they spend a few nights in
a workhouse, a prison, or a barn. The diminution of this class is not,
in our opinion, likely to follow from any alteration of prison régime;
it might be modified if, as we venture to suggest, a more uniform
system were established in workhouses, and a greater discrimination
shown in the treatment of each case; it can only be effected gradually
by a general improvement of social conditions, pending which the
prison can only play a very insignificant part as a remedy for this
evil; for no one can seriously contend that vagrancy is going to be
cured by a succession of short sentences in the various local prisons
of the country. So generally is this felt to be the case that strong
expressions of opinion from responsible persons have been expressed
in favour of some specific remedies being provided by the State for
dealing with the admitted evil of professional vagrancy. It has been
suggested that labour colonies should be established on the Belgian
model, where the professional vagrant who now tramps from prison to
prison could be detained for a long period of time. This system it
is believed has worked well in some foreign countries. A necessary
condition of its application would be some system of identification,
so that a vagrant, after undergoing a sentence in one locality, should
not, as now, be able with impunity to commit another offence in another
locality, again become subject to a light penalty, and so on _ad
infinitum_. If such vagrants could be identified by finger prints or
otherwise, and systematically dealt with on indictment and sentenced to
a long term, something at least more effective than the present system
might result. We do not see how any system can be effective without an
elaborate method of identification."
The Report of the Committee of 1906 is an instructive and valuable
document. The Casual Ward system was condemned both on the grounds of
efficiency and of economy, and it was boldly proposed to substitute
the Police for Poor Law Authorities as the body responsible for local
relief and management of Casual Wards. The want of uniformity in the
administration of over 600 independent authorities had impressed the
Committee as the principal cause in the failure of the system, and it
was believed that by giving control of the Wards to the Police, and by
that way only, uniformity of treatment would be secured.
With regard to the punishment of Vagrancy also, the evidence showed
that there was no uniformity whatever in the sentences given for
Vagrancy offences. It was found that sentences given by stipendiary
magistrates appeared to be as little governed by any fixed principles
as those inflicted by unpaid justices. The great majority of the
sentences are for fourteen days or under. The evidence showed
conclusively that as a protection against vagrancy, short sentences
were indefensible. They quoted the opinion of the Prison Commissioners
that the "elaborate and expensive machinery of a prison, whose object
is to punish, and at the same time to improve, by a continuous
discipline and applied labour, cannot fulfil its object in the case of
this hopeless body of men who are here to-day and gone to-morrow, and
who, from long habit and custom, are hardened against such deterrent
influences as a short detention in prison may afford." They came
generally to the opinion that while it is evident that short periods of
imprisonment were useless, and long periods could not be given without
injustice, and having regard to the fact that prison conditions could
not be made deterrent to vagrant offenders, a complete change in the
treatment of Vagrancy was called for. Their principal proposal was
that the class of habitual Vagrants should be defined by Statute to
include any person who had been convicted three or more times within
a period of twelve months of certain offences, such as "Begging,"
"Sleeping-Out," or refusing task in Casual Wards, and that such a
person should be treated, as far as possible, not as a criminal, but as
a person requiring detention on account of his mode of life.
The Report on the Belgian Colony at Merxplas, which was issued by a
Committee appointed by the Lindsey (Lincs.) Quarter Sessions in 1903,
had strengthened the growing conviction in this Country that new
methods were necessary for dealing with habitual Vagrants, and a large
number of local authorities and Courts of Quarter Sessions addressed
memorials to the Secretary of State and the Local Government Board
in favour of the establishment of Labour Colonies for Vagrancy. The
members of the Committee visited such Colonies in Holland, Belgium, and
Switzerland, and though they came to the opinion that these Colonies,
whether voluntary or compulsory, exercised but little reformatory
influence, in spite of this, however, there was such a consensus of
opinion as to the evil resulting from unrestrained habitual Vagrancy
that the establishment of compulsory Labour Colonies in England and
Wales was recommended. They state in their report, "even if they are
not successful in achieving greater reformatory effects than the
existing labour colonies abroad, we think that at least they may clear
the streets of the habitual vagrant and loafer, may make him lead a
more useful life during his detention, and may offer a real deterrent
to those starting on a life of vagrancy." At the same time, they urged
the great importance of a system of identification, by which the
habitual vagrant could be recognized and dealt with. The finger-print
system would furnish an easy method, and would only entail that any
person charged with a vagrancy offence should be remanded for a few
days to enable information as to previous convictions to be obtained.
Any inconvenience that might be caused in the first instance by the
remand of any person charged with a vagrancy offence would be fully
compensated for by the ultimate results. The fact that no action has
been taken upon the elaborate inquiry of 1906 goes to show that the
sequestration, under strict control, of the habitual vagrant is not
generally accepted as a solution of the evil, and it is a remarkable
thing that, while in most civilized countries the proper treatment
of Vagrancy has been the subject of so much thought and discussion,
as in Belgium and Switzerland and other countries, and of practical
expedients for the protection of the community from this _plaie
sociale_, yet in England, Vagrancy is still dealt with and punished
under the old law of 1824, a law which has little relation to the
facts, customs, and habits of the present day, which only requires that
where a vagrant shows by his actions that he is either a nuisance or
a danger, there shall be power at law to bring him before the Courts.
Although the magistrate may give him three days', or three months'
imprisonment, or Quarter Sessions order him to be flogged, it remains a
matter of indifference; and so long as public opinion is in this state
regarding the question, it is not likely that Parliament will intervene.
Conditions prevailing during the War have caused a striking
illustration to be furnished showing how the general demand for labour
which prevailed has had the effect of practically clearing the prisons
of the Vagrant convicted of Begging and Sleeping-Out. The numbers
proceeded against for these offences had risen steadily for nearly
20 years until 1910, and for a number of years prior to the War had
averaged over 37,000 annually, furnishing in 1913 no less than 11 per
cent. of the total receptions into prison, though from some Counties
the percentage was much greater, _viz_:--from Lincoln, 66; Cornwall,
58; and from many others over 30. Since that date, this large body
of Vagrants in prison has fallen by no less than 93 per cent.,
_viz_:--from 15,000 in 1913-14 to 1,066 in 1918-19.
For a few years before the War, however, a decrease had been noted.
By some it was attributed to the growing opinion among Magistrates
as to the futility of very short sentences: by others, to the fact
that recent alterations in the Prison régime had rendered a few days'
sojourn in Prison more irksome than formerly: others also considered
that the gradual adoption by various police authorities of the
Way-Ticket system, (the object of which is to enable the needy wayfarer
to move quickly through the county towards his destination and to
provide him on his route with lodging, supper and breakfast at the
casual ward, and with a mid-day meal, thus removing all necessity for
begging), was a cause of diminishing the offence of Begging in public
places. Others were of opinion also, that the Insurance Act, by which a
Magistrate has proof of whether a man is a bonâ fide worker or tramp,
has led to a greater individualization in the case of Vagrants brought
before the Courts, and correspondingly to the diminution in the number
committed to Prison. But an examination of statistics, spread over
a long period, shows that the rise or fall of Vagrancy offences and
other minor charges, is chiefly determined by the prevailing rate of
unemployment in the country. Thus, in the years of trade depression
which culminated in 1909, and which showed a very high percentage of
unemployment, the number proceeded against for Begging and Sleeping-Out
also reached the highest recorded total, _viz_:--45,408. Although
this number is very great, there was, in addition, an enormous total
of persons of vagrant habit, _i.e._, with no settled place of abode,
appearing in criminal statistics at this time charged with offences
other than Begging and Sleeping-Out. An inquiry made about this time
showed that of the male Local Prison population _on a given day_
(14,632), no less than 4,411, or 30 per cent. (including 695 convicted
of Begging and Sleeping-Out) had no settled abode, of whom 82 per cent.
had been previously convicted, and 1,420, or 32 per cent., were classed
as _habitual_ vagrants. It is not surprising to find, therefore, that,
with the rapid fall in the percentage of unemployment, which set in
in 1910, and has continued since, until during the War, when, owing
to the abnormal conditions prevailing, there was abundant work for
all, the number of persons actually charged with Vagrancy (Begging and
Sleeping-Out) should have fallen in 1918 to only 2,651, and that, at
the same time, a great decrease in crime should be recorded also. (Vide
Chapter XVII).
So far as non-criminal vagrancy is concerned, active steps have lately
been taken by the Local Government Board with a view of introducing
greater uniformity in the administration of the Casual Wards, at least
so far as the Metropolis is concerned. An order was issued in November
1911 vesting the control and management of the Casual Wards in the
Metropolitan Asylums Board. The Board appointed a special Committee to
give effect to the Order, and at once took steps to provide for the
uniformity of all the Casual Wards committed to their charge, which had
hitherto been administered by the separate local Boards of Guardians.
The results have been very remarkable. Of the twenty-eight casual wards
available on the 31st March, 1912, only six remained in use by the end
of 1919, the average number of inmates accommodated on a given day
at the end of the years named having fallen from 1,114 to 82 during
the period. The comparative accommodation available is shown in the
following table:--
--------------+----------------+----------------+----------------
| 31 Mar., 1912. | 31 Dec., 1913. | 1 Jan., 1917.
--------------+----------------+----------------+----------------
Men | 1,136 | 627 | 286
Women | 402 | 177 | 92
Double Beds | 110 | 57 | 28
--------------+----------------+----------------+----------------
Total | 1,648 | 861 | 406
--------------+----------------+----------------+----------------
The Metropolitan Asylums Board, in their report for 1912, had no
hesitation in expressing the view that the decline of casual pauperism
in London is due to the unification of the Casual Ward Authorities in
the treatment of London as a homogeneous whole under an absolutely
centralized system. The Report confirms the conclusions arrived at by
the Committee of 1904 with regard to classification and treatment. They
report as follows:--"First there is the bonâ fide working man in search
of work, and we have no reason to doubt the estimates which placed the
proportion of this class at under 3 per cent. of the whole. Secondly,
come those who undertake casual labour for a short time, but will not
or cannot undertake continued work. This type soon degenerates into the
habitual vagrant unless deterred, as we hope under present conditions
he is being, from the continual frequenting of casual wards. The third
class is the 'work-shy' or habitual vagrant who professes to look for
work but has no desire to find it. Amongst this number are many who
although strong and able-bodied, deliberately embark upon a career of
idleness and of alternation between casual ward and prison at such an
early age as twenty years. They are often qualified and able to work
and have been assisted over and over again until they are given up
as hopeless and their papers marked 'prefers to walk the streets.'
Further reference is made to this class of habitual vagrants in the
section discussing the question of punishments, where it is pointed out
that neither casual ward nor prison exercises the slightest punitive
or deterrent effect. It is certain that the community need have no
compunction about applying to this class so-called severe measures of
compulsory detention and work for indefinite periods, and it must be
remembered that for vagrants, who will not have households of their
own, who have but one object in all their wicked and perverse lives--to
exist without work at the expense of their industrious neighbours--we
are taxed to provide board and lodging. Lastly, there is the class of
old and infirm persons who are unemployable, who cling to the little
liberty left to them by going from casual ward to casual ward in
preference to entering the workhouse infirmaries. Between the 1st May
and the 31st December, 1912, thirty-three men over fifty, including
twelve over sixty, were admitted from forty to fifty-four times each in
the casual wards, and nine women aged from fifty to seventy years were
admitted over forty times each."
It remains to be seen whether this endorsement of the findings of the
Committee by the Authorities of the Metropolitan Asylums Board, who
have given such close and practical attention to the subject, will
influence opinion toward the severe measures of compulsory detention
which are recommended. Prior to the War the number of persons sentenced
at Quarter Sessions as Incorrigible Rogues was increasing, the average
number for the five years ended 1913 having been 618, as compared with
398 for the preceding five years. This increase may indicate greater
attention on the part of the Courts towards repressing the evil.
Although there is no system of identification for the purpose of the
Vagrant Class at present in existence, there is evidence from a Prison
in the Midlands that, of 700 prisoners of the Vagrant Class received
during a period of 12 months some years ago, one-third had served from
two to seven imprisonments during the year. The total convictions
incurred by these 236 prisoners were as follows:--
From 2 to 4 previous convictions had been incurred by 95
" 5 " 10 " " " " " 66
" 11 " 20 " " " " " 58
" 21 to 30 " " " " " 6
" 31 " 50 " " " " " 9
67 " " " " " 1
87 " " " " " 1
It will be seen from the foregoing short account of the history of
Vagrancy that England has not yet adopted any special plan for dealing
with this problem on the lines with which we are familiar in other
Countries. It is possible that the growth of professional Vagrancy,
manifested in an increase of those offences which are now grouped
generically under the law of Vagrancy, may induce either the State
or the local Authority to protect itself against what is at once an
intolerable nuisance and a social danger, by the introduction of
a System which will allow of the sequestration, for indeterminate
periods, and under an austere system of detention, of that category of
Vagrants, who, by a series of convictions for criminal acts, prove to
be a danger to society. At the present time, however, no action in this
direction is being contemplated by the Government, and the efficacy of
imprisonment for the punishment of such offences is still relied upon,
in spite of increasing evidence that short sentences are ineffectual as
a remedy. So far as the casual pauper is concerned, it is likely that
the recent action of the Local Government Board in the unification of
the Casual Ward System will be further extended in that direction where
the policy, carefully and energetically carried out by the Metropolitan
Asylums Board, has already been fruitful in such excellent results.
(2) INEBRIETY:--
It is just fifty years ago since the need for special legislation for
the proper control and treatment of inebriates, on the grounds that
such persons contributed to crime and lunacy, and caused nuisance,
scandal, and annoyance to the public, became apparent. At that time
there was no process whereby an inebriate who became a public offender
could be dealt with, except by short sentences of imprisonment; and
no means whatever by which a private inebriate could be dealt with,
however much he constituted himself a cause of nuisance or distress
to his family. The futility of short sentences of imprisonment for
the reform of the inebriate offender was fully recognised by prison
authorities; by those who took an active interest in prison reform; and
by magistrates, before whom the same drunkards repeatedly came, in no
way improved by the only method then applicable; and was accentuated
by certain notorious cases of persons who served, without improvement,
hundreds of short sentences.
In 1872 a Select Committee of the House of Commons agreed that it had
been shown, by the evidence taken, that "drunkenness is the prolific
parent of crime, disease, and poverty" that "self-control is suspended
or annihilated, and moral obligations are disregarded; the decencies
of private and the duties of public life are alike set at nought; and
individuals obey only an overwhelming craving for stimulant to which
everything is sacrificed." No action was taken on this Report until
1878, when a Bill was presented to Parliament for dealing with the
more easy and less costly part of the recommendations, _viz_:--those
which concerned inebriates admitted voluntarily. No attempt was made
to deal with the really important class, _i.e._, persons convicted as
Habitual Drunkards. The Statute of 1879 did no more than permit the
establishment of Retreats, to which inebriates could be voluntarily
admitted. More than ten years later, in 1892, when the inadequate
protection afforded by the Law against the nuisance and the evil of
habitual inebriety led to a renewed agitation, especially against the
repeated infliction of short sentences for ordinary drunkenness, a Home
Office Committee of Inquiry, under the Presidency of an experienced
Chairman of Quarter Sessions, Mr. J.L. Wharton, M.P., was appointed.
This Committee aimed, as its composition shows, rather at an amendment
of the Criminal Law, and the abolition of recurring short sentences of
imprisonment, the futility of which had been fully demonstrated. At
this time there was less concern with regard to voluntary inebriates
who, on the application of relations or friends, might be compulsorily
committed to Retreats, than with the grave social evil which resulted
from the interminable commitment to prison of persons who by committing
offences against public order came within the action of the Criminal
Law, or who were proved guilty of ill-treatment and neglect of their
wives and families, and who failed to find the required sureties for
good behaviour.
The principle of the Act of 1898, which resulted from the findings
of this Committee, was that the protection of the community, and the
opportunity of reform, would only be obtained by relatively prolonged
detention. The Act accordingly legalized detention for a term not
exceeding three years (_a_) of persons convicted on indictment, where
a Superior Court is satisfied that the offence was committed under
the influence of drink, or that drink was a contributing cause, and
where the offender admits that he is, or is found by a Jury to be, a
Habitual Drunkard: (_b_) of persons convicted under various Statutes
enacting penalties for drunken conduct, who, within the preceding
twelve months, had been convicted summarily at least three times of
any such offence,--such persons to be confined either in a State
Reformatory or in a Reformatory established and maintained by local or
independent authority.
Action was at once taken by Local Authorities throughout the country to
provide for the reception of cases committed from Courts situate within
their jurisdiction, but in the hope and belief that such accommodation
would prove sufficient, no action was taken by the State to provide a
State Institution until it became manifest that some special means must
be created for dealing with cases which proved violent and intractable,
and with which the local authorities were unable to cope; it being
admitted that in order that these Reformatories might exercise the
most beneficial effect, they must be conducted under conditions as
far removed as possible from Prison methods and restrictions. Unless
the State were in a position to undertake the charge of such cases,
the only alternative would have been to discharge them, and, in fact,
such discharges did take place, and it was made clearly evident that
the establishment of a State Institution was essential to the proper
working of the Act. It was accordingly decided, in 1900, to build a
State Reformatory for female Inebriates on a plot of land contiguous
to the Female Convict Prison at Aylesbury, and for male Inebriates it
was decided to adopt a disused part of Warwick Prison which could be
entirely severed from all connection with the penal quarters.
It was decided to confine the use of the State Reformatories to the
reception and treatment of persons who had proved uncontrollable in the
Local Reformatories. They are conducted on prison lines only so far
as is necessary to ensure safe custody and control, and on strictly
asylum principles in all matters referring to the treatment of inmates.
The application of all restraint and punishment is controlled by the
medical aspect of the question. The majority of inmates are persons
who, through a long life of debauch, immorality, violence, and crime,
have given constant trouble to the Police in the streets and to Prison
Authorities during innumerable penal sentences. They are either too
old, too confirmed in their habits, or too demented to afford ground
for any hope of reformation. The value of the State reformatory will
not consist in the production of actual results, but its existence will
permit of certified institutions carrying on a work of reformation
otherwise impossible. It will also ensure the retention to the end of
their sentence of persons who are dangerous at large, a disgrace to
the streets, and an important source of contamination to others. The
pity is that at the end of such sentence the law requires the absolute
discharge from custody of persons known to be so dangerous and so
deleterious to the peace, morality, and health of the community at
large.
These State Institutions are under the control of the Prison
Commissioners, and form part of the Prison administration. They are
controlled by minute regulations, approved by Parliament, and their
function is to reconcile, as far as possible, a strict custody and
control with certain alleviating conditions and privileges for those
who deserve them. Their population is however, relatively small, the
average for the three years prior to the War not having exceeded
nineteen Males and fifty-seven Females. Since that date the numbers
gradually fell, and, at the present time, there are no inmates in
custody. The inmates of State Institutions practically represent
the persons of both classes who are of a character and temperament
incapable of control in local Institutions. As the number committed to
the local Institutions diminishes, there is, of course, a corresponding
reduction in the number coming under State control.
Although both Sections 1 and 2 of the Act give effect to a most
important principle, _viz._, the special treatment otherwise than by
imprisonment, of persons whose offence is due to morbid conditions,
affecting the power of self-control, and whom it is practically useless
to punish for the offence, while the predisposing condition is left
untouched, yet experience, so far, does not furnish evidence that the
power given to the Courts is either largely exercised or fruitful of
curative effect.
The great majority of cases dealt with under Section 1 of the Act are
for cruelty to children (459 out of 586 up to the end of 1913) and the
tendency of the day is more and more towards Summary procedure, owing
largely to the delay, and expense, and trouble involved by commitment
for trial under this Section to the Superior Courts.
With regard to Section 2, which enables Summary Courts to send to
Inebriate Reformatories persons convicted of certain scheduled offences
of drunkenness, only about 4,300 have been dealt with since the Act
became law, although during that period more than 3,500,000 persons
have been convicted in Summary Courts of drunken behaviour.
The reluctance of the Courts to pass long sentences of detention,
especially in the case of men, (more than 80 per cent. of the
commitments are women): the comparative ease and simplicity of
commitment to Prison: the delay and difficulty involved by a
comparatively cumbrous procedure; and an uncertainty as to the prospect
of recovery, as a result of special treatment--all these things operate
against any wide use of the law in Summary Courts, which is also
hindered by the absence of any definite instruction as to the share to
be borne by the State and the Local Authority, respectively, in the
maintenance of these Institutions.
Opinion has, however, been by no means indifferent to the operation
of the Act, and is far from being satisfied at the present time
with the extent of its application. In 1908, the Secretary of State
appointed a strong Committee to inquire as to the operation of the
Law, and to report what amendments, either in law or administration,
were desirable; and their valuable recommendations will probably
receive the attention of Parliament in the near future. The principal
proposals are in the direction of increasing the power of the Summary
Courts, giving to Magistrates a discretionary power to send to
Reformatories, in addition to, or in substitution of, imprisonment,
all persons who are adjudged to be Inebriates and who commit offences
now dealt with summarily by committal to Prison. It is also proposed
that the necessity for proving three previous convictions shall be
abolished, and that the State should, at its own cost, provide for
the accommodation and maintenance of all Inebriates committed by
Courts. With regard to penalty, the free use of the Probation Act was
recommended under special conditions suitable to the case. If, however,
Probation were not thought desirable, it was proposed that the first
sentence to a Reformatory should be for a period not exceeding six
months, to be followed by a period of Probation; but where an Inebriate
forfeits such Probation, on breach of its conditions, he shall be
liable to be committed to a Reformatory for a period not exceeding one
year, again, on release, to be subject to Probation; but if he again
forfeits such Probation, for two years, and, in the event of further
forfeiture, for three years.
Should these recommendations be adopted by Parliament, it is possible
that greater results than at present might be achieved, and the
measure might find larger application. It is doubtful if the public
sentiment is keen to penalize inebriety, when it does not result in
serious harm to the community, by methods of long detention under
discipline and control. In so far as the proposals of the Committee
of 1908 modify these long periods by placing offenders on Probation,
there may be disposition on the part of the Courts to take this course,
except in cases where the overt criminal act resulting from inebriety
is grave and serious, and where punishment under ordinary penal law
is called for. There is, moreover, a feeling which operates against
harsh or drastic sentences in the case of inebriety, due to the
proved association between mental disorder and habitual drunkenness.
Experience of the operation of the Law of 1898 has confirmed this
belief. Of the more turbulent cases whom it has been necessary to
transfer to State Inebriate Reformatories for purposes of control, it
is found that a very large proportion are more or less defective in
mind. That such persons should be segregated from their fellows, and
from the opportunity of doing harm is, of course, a great gain; and,
of itself, would justify the cost of these Institutions, which is
considerable. It must be frankly recognized that in these cases the
purpose of detention is for the public safety, and not with the hope of
reform. The law protects the community by compulsory segregation within
a limit of three years, although the criminal offence will probably
in most cases only warrant a short sentence of imprisonment. This is
something gained in the interests of order. It does not constitute
an encouragement to make further efforts for the cure of habitual
inebriety by means of costly Institutions, and for this reason, apart
from the inherent difficulties of the case, rapid progress in dealing
with this evil in this country can hardly be expected. The Prison
Authority is only concerned with this question of inebriety as a
factor of crime. By many writers, drink and crime are used almost as
synonymous terms, yet nothing is so difficult as to trace the extent
to which criminal statistics are influenced by drink. In 1913, the
actual convictions for drunkenness represented 32 per cent. of the
total convictions for all offences, but in addition to this, must be
reckoned the number of offences to which drunkenness was directly a
contributing cause. It is a reasonable inference that alcohol enters,
as a contributing factor, into about 50 per cent. of offences committed
in this country in any given year. To legislate against drink is
indirectly, therefore, to legislate against Crime. As shown in Chapter
XVII, a striking illustration has been afforded showing the great
decrease in crime generally which has taken place during the War, when
severe restrictions have been placed upon the sale of intoxicating
liquor. In previous years, in times of industrial prosperity and
plentiful wages, convictions for drunkenness have been enormous, and
have obscured the decrease which has taken place, as a result of
prosperity, in other offences, _e.g._, Vagrancy, and petty larceny.
In his Report for 1909, Dr. Branthwaite, the Inspector under the
Inebriates Acts, furnishes a most valuable and interesting analysis of
the life history and mental and physical conditions of 1,031 persons.
This investigation was conducted by himself personally, and throws a
flood of light on the nature of the problem to be dealt with. He states
that as a result of his inquiry, "three points of vital importance
stand out clearly--(1) the close association between inebriety and
psycho-neurotic disturbance, (2) the physical unfitness resulting
from a life of uncontrolled inebriety, and (3) the necessity for the
organisation of more suitable methods for dealing with persons who
offend against law and order by reason of habitual drunkenness."
"The presence of obvious mental defect in a large proportion of cases,
and (in cases not obviously defective) the criminal tendencies, the
proneness to immorality, the uneducability, the early age at which
disorderly habits commence, the ease with which all inmates become
excited by alcohol, and their unreasonable behaviour in a hundred
different ways, are conclusive evidences of the existence of a mental
state far removed from normal, in nearly all cases committed to
Reformatories. To attempt to attribute all such conditions to vicious
indulgence in alcohol is absurd; they existed in the large majority
of cases long before drunkenness appeared, or they developed _pari
passu_ with the drunkenness from a common cause. When mental defect is
obvious, it will usually be found responsible for the drunkenness; when
not sufficiently definite to be recognised, a modified morbid strain,
a heredity of disorder, a psycho-neurotic fault, a constitutional
peculiarity, call it what we may, will generally be discovered as the
key to the position."
His condemnation of short sentences in Prison as a cure for inebriety
in all its forms is expressed as follows:--
"The arguments in favour of the substitution of something better than
the short sentence prison treatment of inebriates hold good, whether
the individual be reformable or not. The routine of a prison is no
more suited to the needs of the habitual drunkard than it is suited to
the treatment of any other form of mental unsoundness. The inebriate
requires careful medical attention, regular bathing, physical exercise
and drill, with a view to the recovery of physical, as a preliminary
to recovery of mental health. His condition demands harder, more
continuous and healthy work than is possible in the confines of a
cell, or even within the restricted area of prison walls. Either in
the form of education, work or play, he wants occupation of some sort
throughout the day, in company with his fellows, under supervision
only just sufficiently strict to prevent its misuse. Discipline is
essential, but it should be the discipline of army barracks, or a ship;
not the necessarily hard routine of a prison. Punishment, as such, must
be kept in the background, and, so far as is possible, encouragement
for good conduct, and reward for good work, should replace the fear of
the results of bad conduct and idleness. But, above all, he requires
medical treatment for his disordered mental state applied as early as
possible after the condition is recognised. The nearer an Inebriate
Reformatory resembles a mental hospital in all its arrangements, the
better will be its suitability for the work it has to do, and the more
the mental aspect of inebriety is kept in the foreground, the more
satisfactory will be the results of treatment and control."
It is true that the views expressed by Dr. Branthwaite seem to indicate
as a rule the dependence of habitual inebriety on pre-existent "mental
defect", and will not, as such, be accepted by general authority; and
it is well known that a strong tendency to drink to intoxication exists
in very many persons and families who show no other signs of deficient
intelligence or loss of self-control. But the experience of many other
observers who have dealt with inebriates committed by the courts to
reformatories under the Act undoubtedly corroborates Dr. Branthwaite's
opinion that notably large numbers of such inebriates have been
markedly defective in mind from even their earliest years.
The question is well summed up in the general observations on the
nature of Inebriety in the Report of the Committee of 1908:--"Inebriety
is undoubtedly a constitutional peculiarity; and depends, in many
cases, upon qualities with which a person is born, in many is acquired
by vicious indulgence. Whether the possession of such a constitutional
peculiarity, when inborn, should or should not be considered, from
the scientific point of view, a disease, is perhaps, a question of
nomenclature. If such native constitutional peculiarities as the
possession of a sixth finger, and the absence of a taste for music,
are rightly considered diseases, then the native constitutional
peculiarity which underlies many cases of inebriety may be so
considered. But there are cogent reasons why the term disease should
not be used to characterise the inebriate habit. By disease is
popularly understood a state of things for which the diseased person is
not responsible, which he cannot alter except by the use of remedies
from without, whose action is obscure, and cannot be influenced by
exertions of his own. But if, as is unquestionably true, inebriety can
be induced by cultivation; if the desire for drink can be increased
by indulgence, and self-control diminished by lack of exercise; it
is manifest that the reverse effects can be produced by voluntary
effort; and that desire for drink may be diminished by abstinence,
and self-control, like any other faculty, can be strengthened by
exercise. It is erroneous and disastrous to inculcate the doctrine
that inebriety, once established, is to be accepted with fatalistic
resignation, and that the inebriate is not to be encouraged to make
any effort to mend his ways. It is the more so since inebriety is
undoubtedly in many cases recovered from, in many diminished, and since
the cases which recover or amend are those in which the inebriate
himself desires and strives for recovery."
CHAPTER XIV.
"PATRONAGE" OR AID TO DISCHARGED PRISONERS: ITS EFFECT ON RECIDIVISM.
As prisoners in this country are classified broadly into two categories
(1) those sentenced to penal servitude--"Convicts:" (2) those sentenced
to ordinary imprisonment--"Local," or short-sentenced prisoners,--so
has the system of aid-on-discharge varied according to the category to
which a prisoner belongs. For Convict Prisons there has been, until
lately, no system of aid-on-discharge strictly so-called. What is known
as the Gratuity system in Convict Prisons operated for many years as
the principal means for providing a convict on his discharge with
means of obtaining the necessities of life. There was no Discharged
Prisoners' Aid Society immediately connected with the establishment
from which the convict was discharged, as in the case of Local Prisons,
but certain Metropolitan Societies, notably the Royal Society for
the assistance of Discharged Prisoners, and later the St. Giles's
Christian Mission and the Church Army and Salvation Army, came to be
recognized as the agents for helping a convict on discharge. There
was no Government Grant. It was voluntary on the part of the convict
whether he should place himself in the hands of such a Society. If
he so desired, the Gratuity that he had earned would be paid to him
through the Police or otherwise at the place whither he went on
discharge. A Gratuity, as already described, was a sum of money which
could be earned under the Progressive Stage System for general industry
with good conduct: it had no relation to the value of work done, being
based simply on the degree of industry, and apportioned to what is
known as the Mark System _i.e._, so many marks representing so much
cash. The English Gratuity System was, therefore, quite different from
what is known on the Continent as the "_Cantine_" or "_Pécule_" System,
under which a prisoner receives a percentage of the actual profit of
his work, and which he is allowed to spend on diet or otherwise during
detention. An English convict (unless in the Long Sentence Division or
under Preventive Detention) was not allowed to spend any part of his
Gratuity while in Prison, but it was accumulated as a small cash fund
to provide against the day of discharge. £6 was the maximum that could
be earned, but the average amount earned would be considerably less
than this. In old days it was possible for convicts to earn large sums
of money, but the practice was condemned by a Royal Commission in the
middle of last century, and, since that date, the amount earnable has
been limited as stated.
With regard to Local Prisons, from the earliest times it was not
uncommon for persons to leave bequests for the relief of prisoners
on discharge from Prison, some of these dating as far back as the
15th century. The first legal enactment took place in 1792, by which
Judges and Justices were authorized to order any prisoner on discharge
to be conveyed by pass to his own parish. About this time, Societies
began to be established for the relief of prisoners on discharge.
One of the earliest--the Sheriff's Fund Society (which exists at the
present time), was founded in 1807-8 for the relief of necessitous
prisoners discharged from Newgate Gaol. Another Institution, known as
the "Temporary Refuge for Distressed Criminals" discharged from the
London Gaols, owed its origin to the efforts of the Society for the
Improvement of Penal Discipline. It was commenced in 1818, but was soon
after closed for want of funds.
In 1823 an Act of Parliament was passed giving power to Justices
to direct that such moderate sum should be given to any discharged
prisoner, not having the means of returning to his family, or resorting
to any place of employment, as in their judgment should be requisite,
such sums to be paid either out of benefactions or as Prison expenses.
Soon after this time, numerous Societies came into existence. One of
the most notable experiments of this kind was the Birmingham Discharged
Prisoners' Aid Society. A report issued at this time by the Chaplain
of the Prison, the Rev. J.T. Burt, stated that the Society took its
rise in the conviction of its founders that crime is to a considerable
extent the result of external circumstances. The Society employed an
agent to canvas employers for work, and found lodgings in the homes of
poor persons of respectable character for the discharged prisoner. In
special cases it gave guarantee to the employer against special loss in
the event of his sustaining injury through the person recommended to
him. The whole plan was reported to work successfully.
A prisoners' relief Society was formed in connection with Worcester
Prison in 1840. Its rules provided, as an inducement to employers of
ex-prisoners, for the grant of a weekly sum of money. This allowance
might continue for three months, being subject to withdrawal in
unworthy cases. For prisoners who could not get work, an allowance
not exceeding four shillings a week might be paid for a period not
exceeding one month.
Another early experiment was the "Gloucester Refuge for Discharged
Prisoners" commenced in 1856. Prisoners on discharge from the County
Gaol were, on the recommendation of a Visiting Justice or the Chaplain,
maintained free of charge for a fortnight, after which a small charge
was made. On employment being found they handed over the whole of their
earnings, any balance remaining being handed to them on leaving the
Institution. The stay of unemployed inmates was limited to fourteen
days, and in no case exceeded one month.
Another phase of relief to discharged prisoners took the form of an
"Industrial Home" at Wakefield, founded in 1856, under the auspices of
the Governor of the House of Correction for the West Riding. It was
said to be self-supporting, manufactures being carried on. Lodgings
were found for inmates outside the Home.
These three experiments are said to have compared favourably as regards
expenditure with those having the same object in view, which had
been established in London, and known as the London Reformatory, the
Preventive and Reformatory Institution, and the Metropolitan Industrial
Reformatory at Brixton.
About this time, Societies for aiding ordinary prisoners on discharge
were formed at many of the larger Prisons, _e.g._, the Hull, East
Riding, and North Lincolnshire; Glamorganshire; North and South
Stafford; Leeds; West Kent; Manchester; Liverpool; and the Metropolitan
Aid Societies, all of which are in existence at the present time.
The success of the Birmingham experiment is said to have led to the
passing of the Act of 1862, which recited that Aid Societies had been
established by voluntary effort, and gave power to Justices to pay a
sum not exceeding £2 to such Societies, to be expended on behalf of the
discharged prisoner.
Another Act was passed in 1865 which re-enacted a similar provision
to that contained in the Act of 1862, the expense to be borne by the
local rates. Under the Prison Act of 1877, it was laid down that "where
any prisoner is discharged from prison, the Prison Commissioners may,
on the recommendation of the Visiting Committee or otherwise, order a
sum of money not exceeding £2 to be paid by the Gaoler to the prisoner
himself, or to the Treasurer of a Certified Prisoners' Aid Society or
Refuge, on the Gaoler receiving from such Society an undertaking to
apply the same for the benefit of the prisoner."
This being the law, two general observations may, I think, be made with
regard to it (1) that the duty of aiding prisoners on discharge has
been recognized from the beginning of the century as a public duty to
be borne by public funds, the Voluntary Aid Society being ancillary for
this purpose, _i.e._, to assist in the disbursement of public money,
and _incidentally_, at least, in the first instance, to increase it by
private benefaction (2) that in its origin this grant was a charitable
gift, irrespective of the prison history and conduct of a prisoner, and
the total sum expended might assume large proportions, the maximum of
£2 being permissible for _any_ prisoner.
As a matter of fact, the local authority used this power very
sparingly. A Return is given in Appendix 19 of the Second Annual
Report of the Commissioners, and shows that the total discharges for
the three years preceding 1878 were, roundly, 370,000, and the total
gratuities paid to prisoners, roundly, £11,000, or a proportion of
about 7d., per head, the sums given varying greatly in the different
districts, _e.g._, Cold Bath Fields Prison gave £3,000 and Manchester
£60 for a nearly similar number of discharges (circ. 30,000). In some
Prisons, there was a system of giving a percentage on the value of
work done, but this did not prevail to a large extent, and the above
statement may, I think, be taken as roughly representing the extent to
which monetary help was forthcoming to discharged prisoners before the
prisons passed into the hands of the Government.
At this point, as was to be expected, when every other Department of
Prison administration was undergoing revision and reconstruction,
the question of devising a system of aid-on-discharge received a
large share of notice. As before stated, the law of 1877 gave the
power to grant £2 to any prisoner. There was, therefore, no legal
difficulty in the way of continuing the same method that had previously
prevailed, _viz_:--in deserving cases of granting a sum of money on
the recommendation of the Visiting Committee, or otherwise. This
comparatively simple method was not resorted to, and apparently
because it seemed to the authorities to be too capricious in its
operation, to work unevenly, and to lack that precision and uniformity
which it was the object to establish. Moreover, as stated, it had
no relation to the conduct and industry of a prisoner, and it was
only natural that the Commissioners should be predisposed in favour
of the system of gratuities under the Progressive Stage System, at
that time working with success in Convict Prisons, and where the
money that a prisoner could earn by industry with good conduct was
also a gratuity or benefaction which, under proper direction, might
be used for his benefit on discharge. In their Second Annual Report,
the Commissioners stated "There is no reason why such a system of
awarding gratuity for industry should not be worked in conjunction
with that of aiding prisoners with reference solely to their needs
on discharge. As respects the grants of aid, it is, in our opinion,
essentially necessary to success that the co-operation of persons
unconnected with the prisons should be secured in order that _by their
aid_ and interest, prisoners may be provided with employment." Here
we have, therefore, a distinct departure, the so-called 'gratuity'
of the convict system taking the place of the former grant in aid in
Local Prisons; or, in other words, one of the methods for securing
Prison industry and conduct being utilised for the additional purpose
of supplying the needs of a prisoner on discharge. It is, I think,
obvious that such a scheme--though it worked well in regard to convicts
where the maximum gratuity might reach £6--is not applicable to Local
Prisons where the maximum is fixed at ten shillings, and where few
prisoners reach their maximum, or even a considerable portion of it,
owing to the shortness of their sentences. However, the attempt was
made, and a sum of £5,000 taken in the Estimates under the heading of
"Gratuities"--an equivocal term, meaning both the earnings of prisoners
under the Progressive Stage System and also the charitable donation,
which was to benefit the prisoner on discharge. It soon became apparent
that the effect of this policy would be to starve existing Aid
Societies and to paralyze their powers of good. Strong representations
were made to the then Secretary of State that it had become impossible
to help short sentence cases--often the most deserving and including
most of the first offenders--and in December, 1878, a Conference of
Aid Societies was held to "protest against the failure of the Stage
or Mark System for the purpose of aid on discharge," and a resolution
was passed asking the Government to make a grant in addition to the
gratuities under the Stage System at the rate of one shilling a head
of total discharges. In consequence of this, the Home Office decided
that the Stage System should be considered as a matter of discipline,
but that assistance to Discharged Prisoners' Aid Societies should be
on a different footing: and that it was reasonable, and in accordance
with public opinion, to make a grant either according to the number
of cells or the number of discharges _provided a certain proportionate
amount is voluntarily subscribed_. Here are contained two important
assertions of principle on which has been based the action of the
Government since this date.
(1) that it is the duty of the Government to make a charitable
donation in aid of discharged prisoners in addition to the gratuities
under the Stage System, which are an affair of prison discipline.
(2) that the sum should be regulated by the amount of private
subscriptions, provided that a maximum calculated on the total number
of discharges is not exceeded.
In short, the State goes into partnership with bodies of charitable and
benevolent persons, duly certified under the Act, in order to secure
a double object (_a_) the State object, that steps shall be taken at
least to lessen the chances of a man's relapse into crime (_b_) the
private and charitable object of relieving misfortune and distress.
After some correspondence, the Treasury agreed to the principle, and
in addition to the money already taken for gratuities in Local Prisons
(£5,000), an ultimate limit of £4,000 was sanctioned for this purpose,
and its expenditure was regulated by the following conditions:--
(1) that there should be assigned to each prison the proportion of
this sum which its average number of prisoners or of discharges bore
to the total number of the same.
(2) that there should be a Discharged Prisoners' Aid Society in
connection with the Prison, and that voluntary subscriptions should be
at least an equal amount.
(3) that the Society, if required, take charge of the sums earned
under the mark system.
(4) that the grant should be exclusively for the benefit of prisoners
recommended by the Prison authorities as industrious and fairly
conducted.
(5) that the grant shall not in any case exceed £2, inclusive of the
sum earned under the Stage System.
The System, however, did not work satisfactorily; and the Departmental
Committee on Prisons of 1894, after considering the matter, reported
that it did not appear that there was either uniformity of action
under definite principles, or that the various Societies were so far
organized as a whole that the effect of aid could be satisfactorily
ascertained. There seemed to be a great and unnecessary variation in
the methods of working. They advised that a special inquiry should
be undertaken into the character, and working, and methods, of each
Society, and were in favour of an increase in the Government Grant
where it was shown that Societies were working on principles approved
by the Government, and with success. Such an inquiry was undertaken by
the Commissioners in 1896, and, at the end of the following year, a
Circular was issued by them prescribing Rules for the future regulation
of all Aid Societies.
In suggesting these Rules, the Commissioners made it clear that it
was not their desire or intention to coerce or interfere with the
free liberty of action of Societies which were of course only subject
to official control so far as they might draw a subsidy from public
funds. They pointed out that "the central authority has opportunities
not possessed by individual societies of collating information as
to the methods and working of all Societies; and upon the knowledge
thus obtained, of forming an opinion as to what are, on the whole,
the methods most likely to succeed in attaining the objects which the
Societies and the Government have in view: that uniformity of procedure
does not necessarily connote official control. As there has been in the
past, so there must be in the future, official control to this extent,
_viz_:--that it is the duty of the Government to satisfy itself in all
cases where there is a grant, however small, from public funds, that
the grant is expended in a proper and effectual way on the object for
which it is designed: that the Commissioners are, on the one hand, the
trustees for the Government grant, and, on the other, the responsible
authorities for carrying out the sentences of the law, and, though
their strict duty ends when the prisoner has purged his crime, and
left the prison gate, common humanity demands that some care shall
be bestowed by the State on the discharged prisoner, both in order
to relieve his immediate necessities, and to make his re-entry into
honest life possible and less difficult: that it is in the fulfilment
of this latter duty that they have in the past been able to avail
themselves of the assistance, warmly proffered and gratefully accepted,
and in very many cases zealously and effectually rendered, of certified
Societies for the Aid of Discharged Prisoners: that these Societies now
form a network of charitable and philanthropic effort spread throughout
the country and working in connection with each prison: that their
work, though due to private initiation, and mainly supported by private
subscriptions, has nevertheless such public importance and value,
that it is becoming more the duty and concern of the Government, not
indeed to fetter and harass their free and independent action by the
imposition of binding official rules and regulations, but to encourage
and stimulate their efforts, to offer direction and guidance, and it is
in this spirit, and not with any desire to override or control the free
play of benevolent action, that the Commissioners desire to suggest,
for the guidance of each Society, the methods which they believe to be
the most effectual."
The Scheme was as follows:--
(1) That the Governor and Chaplain should, in all cases, be members of
the Committee, and should act with, or as, a Sub-Committee under the
larger body, for the purpose of dealing with small cases, and those
under short sentences.
(2) That the Visiting Committee should, if possible, in all cases be
members of the Discharged Prisoners' Aid Society, and take an active
share in its management, _especially in cases where they are also
Trustees of the Prison Charity_.
(3) That a Sub-Committee of ladies be appointed for the assistance of
female prisoners, and that they act under instructions prescribed for
them by the Commissioners.
(4) That for both male and female prisoners, Agents should be appointed
in all cases.
(5) That the Society should establish relations with any Labour Homes
or Institutions for men and women that may exist in the county or
district, and shall arrange for the charge of cases by payment of a
capitation grant.
(6) That the Society should appoint corresponding members or
committees, _e.g._, Clergymen, Police Officers, private individuals
(male and female) in districts remote from the Prison with the object
of (_a_) paying gratuities; (_b_) following up a case; (_c_) securing
care and superintendence in a deserving case; (_d_) furnishing
information with a view to employment.
(7) That the Society should take charge of _all_ gratuities and arrange
for their disbursement in a manner most advantageous to the prisoner,
and calculated to prevent the immediate and useless dissipation of
the money. Payments of cash in lump sums should, as far as possible,
be avoided, and receipts for all cases should be taken for the aid
which has been given. Payments by instalments and through the agencies
described in (6) will be preferred, and when necessary, payments in
kind by the purchase of clothes or materials, according to the needs of
each case.
(8) That the Society should allow other benevolent societies or persons
desirous of assisting discharged prisoners to make arrangements for so
doing, subject to its approval and control.
(9) That the Societies should co-operate with each other by mutual
arrangement, in taking charge of cases coming from districts other than
their own; especially of the juveniles whose sentences are in excess of
one month and who are transferred to collecting or district prisons,
and who thus by being moved out of their own localities might suffer by
being deprived of local interest in their case.
It will be seen that these Regulations did not fundamentally alter
the principles according to which the aid to discharged prisoners
had hitherto been regulated. Gratuity remained part of the system:
there was no proposal to increase the Government Grant, and the new
Regulations applied only to prisoners discharged from Local Prisons.
The object in view was mainly to secure greater uniformity in method,
and otherwise to secure the co-operation of any outside agencies,
persons, or Institutions which might be able to give assistance in the
districts where the prisoners were discharged.
No further action was taken in the way of improving or altering the
system of aid-on-discharge in either Convict or Local Prisons till
some ten years later, when a very important step was taken, completely
changing the system of the former, and largely modifying that of the
latter. The Commissioners informed the Secretary of State in 1909 that,
after full consideration, they had come to the opinion that the task
of rehabilitation in the case of a man on discharge from a sentence of
Penal Servitude was too difficult and too costly to be left entirely to
voluntary Societies unaided by any grant of public funds, and working
independently of each other, at a problem where unity of method and
direction are above all things required. Mr. Secretary Churchill,
to whom these views were represented, at once agreed that a new
Agency should be established for the aid of discharged convicts, and
announced his decision in the House of Commons in July, 1910. The new
Association has accordingly been formed, and is called, "The Central
Association for the Aid of Discharged Convicts." It combines, for the
common purpose of aiding prisoners on discharge from penal servitude,
all those Societies which had hitherto been operating independently
at Prisons. This new Association is subsidized by the Government, and
is not dependent on voluntary contributions. At the same time, the
Gratuity System has been discontinued, and the Association undertakes
to provide in the case of every discharged convict, so that he may
not be without the necessaries of life, and a fair prospect of
rehabilitation on the day of discharge. The Association, which is under
the capable management of Sir Wemyss Grant-Wilson at 15, Buckingham
Street, W.C., established a procedure by which every convict is
interviewed at a reasonable period before discharge. At this visit,
his wishes and circumstances are ascertained, and if he desires to
place himself under the care of any of the Societies represented on the
Association, arrangements are made accordingly.
The Association is governed by a General Council, of which the
Secretary of State is President, and on which the Societies and
Institutions hitherto operating in this particular field of charity
are represented.
While these great changes were proceeding in the Convict System, I was
endeavouring also by conference with representatives of Discharged
Prisoners' Aid Societies of Local Prisons to obtain their agreement
to certain changes in the system of aid for Local prisoners, having
been led by experience to the opinion that a greater efficiency might
perhaps be attained in dealing with prisoners discharged from Local
Prisons under a different system. I submitted certain propositions, the
object of which was, within the limit of existing financial resources
(public and private), by an alteration of the financial arrangements,
to increase the powers and duties of Aid Societies, subject to a
sufficient control of public funds on the part of the Commissioners.
This could only be made possible by discontinuing the practice of
allowing certain prisoners to earn gratuities _as a matter of right_
by good conduct and industry in prison. Long experience had led the
Commissioners to the opinion that the Gratuity System in Local Prisons
was not a success. It was originally borrowed from the Penal Servitude
System at the time when Local Prisons were centralized at Whitehall,
and was generally accepted as a sufficient discharge of the power
conferred on Justices of the Peace under Section 42 of the Prison Act,
1865, for making provision for the benefit of discharged prisoners, but
it was ineffective, as a means of charity, because such a relatively
small percentage of prisoners (_i.e._, only those whose sentences
were over one month) would profit by it, and, secondly, as a means of
discipline in securing the good conduct of the prisoners by the hope
of earning a small sum on discharge, it could now be dispensed with,
as the power to earn remission, conferred by the Prison Act, 1898,
constituted, in the opinion of the Prison Authorities, a sufficient
inducement to abstain from acts by which this highly-prized privilege
could be lost. It was therefore desirable that the benefits conferred
on prisoners by the Gratuity System should be secured to them in some
other way. The State was paying in Gratuities at that time about
£8,000 a year, and between £3,000 and £4,000 by way of grants to Aid
Societies, under the scheme approved in 1897. To this total of about
£11,000 a year the Aid Societies were contributing, roughly, about
£10,000 a year. My proposals were (1) to abolish all gratuities: (2)
to raise the Government grant from 6_d._ to 1_s._ per head: (3) to
place this money at the disposition of the Aid Societies, at a rate
corresponding to the number of prisoners discharged from each prison,
subject to certain conditions, the principal of which were that every
Discharged Prisoners' Aid Society should: (_a_) be duly registered with
a certificate of the Commissioners that it is properly and efficiently
organized: (_b_) that the increased Government grant should be met by a
local annual subscription equal to one-half of the amount: (_c_) that
the money hitherto spent on Gratuities should be handed over to the
Discharged Prisoners' Aid Society, no Society to receive less in grant
than the annual average amount of gratuity earned at the prison during
the last triennial term.
The effect of these proposals, which were finally approved by the
Secretary of State and the Treasury, at the beginning of 1913, was
obviously to increase very materially the amount which each Society
receives from public funds. The intention is that every case,
_irrespective of length of sentence_, shall receive the _personal_
attention of the Aid Society attached to the Prison, whose resources
are considerably increased under the present plan. The Government
having great confidence in the earnest purpose of the Discharged
Prisoners' Aid Societies throughout the country, felt justified in
asking them to undertake this greater responsibility. In giving effect
to these proposals it was pointed out to the Aid Societies that it
could only be undertaken, with any prospect of success, and even with
fairness to the prisoner (especially if under a long sentence, and
henceforth to be deprived of his Gratuity), subject to the following
conditions--
1. The affairs of the Society shall be managed by a Committee. The
Committee shall appoint a Sub-Committee whose duty it shall be to meet
weekly at the Prison, and to make provision for assisting prisoners due
for discharge in the ensuing month or fortnight. The Sub-Committee
shall consist of at least one member of the Discharged Prisoners'
Aid Society, to be selected by roster or otherwise, in addition to
the official Prison Authorities. The Governor, Chaplain, Priest, and
Minister of the Prison shall be _ex-officio_ members of the Committee
and of the Sub-Committee. Lady Visitors shall also be members of both.
2. Where the amount of work to be done is sufficient, the Society shall
appoint an agent or agents to act under their direction generally, and
in particular:--
(_a_) to find employment for discharged prisoners.
(_b_) to find respectable lodgings or Homes in which discharged
prisoners may be placed and maintained in suitable cases.
(_c_) to visit, encourage, and report on the progress of all persons
under the care of the Society.
(_d_) to accompany prisoners to the railway station and see them off,
if required.
3. The Society shall keep a record of its dealings with all discharged
prisoners, and shall publish an Annual Report, with statements of
results and of Accounts in an approved form. The accounts shall be
audited by a Chartered Accountant. Three copies of such report shall
be forwarded to the Commissioners not later than the 14th of April in
every year.
4. The payments and grants received from the Commissioners shall be
expended for the benefit of prisoners, and shall not be invested.
5. The Society shall render assistance to all deserving cases on
discharge, irrespective of length of sentence, all prisoners being
deemed to be eligible for assistance provided that they are, in other
respects, worthy of the consideration of the Society, special attention
being paid to the longer sentenced prisoners who formerly earned
gratuity.
6. The Society shall co-operate with the Borstal Committees in giving
special attention to the assistance on discharge of persons treated
under the "Modified" Borstal System.
The new scheme is working satisfactorily, and there are signs
everywhere that the result has been to encourage and stimulate the
action of the Societies by throwing a great and new responsibility
upon them, and by placing in their hands a considerable sum of public
money, to be spent according to their discretion and not according
to a fixed and mechanical rule, as was formerly the case under the
Gratuity system. There is every reason to hope that the system of
aid-on-discharge, both in Convict and Local prisons, is now placed
on a sound and effective basis, and that through its operation, many
cases will be saved from a relapse into criminal ways, owing to the
personal care and individual attention which the new system postulates
as a condition of efficiency. During 1918, 21,388 convicted prisoners
were discharged, of whom 7,719, or 36 per cent., were aided, and of
these latter, 75 per cent. were suitably placed in good employment.
Twenty-eight Aid Societies were able to find employment for over 50 per
cent. of the cases aided by them.
The new system in each case, both for Local and Convict Prisons,
furnishes a remarkable example in the application of what may be
called the new spirit in the Prison Administration of this country,
_i.e._, the cordial and harmonious co-operation between official and
voluntary effort, which experience shows every day to be not only the
best, but the only effective method for dealing with the problem of the
discharged prisoner.
An important change has recently been made in the machinery of the
Central Organization of Aid Societies. Prior to 1917, the central
representation of Aid Societies had been by means of a Committee of
the Reformatory and Refuge Union, known as the Central Committee
of Discharged Prisoners' Aid Societies. The Reformatory and Refuge
Union had, in the early 'sixties, warmly taken up the question of
aid-on-discharge, and, by its energy and initiative, had become the
principal instrument for the organization of Societies dealing with
short-sentenced prisoners. In 1878, soon after the passing of the
Prison Act, an important conference of Aid Societies was convened by
the Union, at which a Committee was appointed having generally for
its purpose to extend the operations of Aid Societies, as well as to
maintain existing Societies and to increase their efficiency. This
historical connection with the Reformatory and Refuge Union remained
till the present time, and of late years, the Central Committee, under
the able direction of its Chairman, Lord Shuttleworth, has rendered
valuable service in calling attention to various reforms by means of
conferences invoked, from time to time, in different centres. There
had, however, been manifested of late years a growing desire on the
part of many Societies for some change in the central organization,
which should have the effect of strengthening the Executive function of
the Central body, so that its influence might be extended and advantage
taken of its large common stock of experience for the investigation of
new methods of development. The Chairman of the Royal Aid Society, Mr.
F.P. Whitbread, acting in agreement with the representatives of some
of the leading Societies, proposed a scheme for the establishment of
such a Central Executive body, to meet periodically for discussion,
and with power to appoint sub-Committees to enquire, and report, and
advise as to the adoption of improved methods of relief for the various
categories of prisoners of both sexes. The new body, known as the
Central Discharged Prisoners' Aid Society, was formally instituted by
general consent at the beginning of 1918, Mr. Whitbread being elected
Chairman of the Central Executive Committee, and the Commissoners were
invited to nominate three members to serve on the Executive. The new
system is only a variation of that hitherto pursued; but its effect
will be to bring a more direct influence on the various Societies,
all of whom will be represented on the Executive. In this way not
only uniformity of procedure, but an agreed policy in the pursuit of
a common purpose, is likely to result. It is only the complement and
the fulfilment of the public-spirited and beneficent work undertaken
in the beginning by the Reformatory and Refuge Union, acting through
the Committee of 1878, and to that body must be given the credit not
only for pioneer work in originating the system of aid-on discharge in
this country, but for the growth of public interest and zeal in the
development of this particular branch of social work, to which the
recent change of methods bears witness.
During recent years, the work of Aid Societies has been extended to the
assistance of the wives and families of men undergoing imprisonment,
and the steps taken will insure that, in future, no deserving case will
be overlooked, and the suffering that has been endured by hundreds of
innocent women and children will become a thing of the past. Various
agencies have rendered assistance in making the necessary inquiries,
chief among them being the National Society for the Prevention of
Cruelty to Children, the Church Army, and the Charity Organization
Society.
Owing to the War, no general effect has yet been given to the powers
taken by Section 7 of the Criminal Justice Administration Act, 1914,
to subsidise a society for the care and control of persons under the
age of 21, being either on Probation, or placed out on licence from
a Borstal Institution or Reformatory or Industrial School, or under
supervision within the meaning of Section 1 (3) of the same Act (vide
page 82). As President of the newly-constituted Central Committee of
Discharged Prisoners' Aid Societies, I recently took the opportunity
of appealing for the establishment of a National Society for the
Prevention of Crime and for the Protection of the Young Offender.
All these categories of young persons named are now being attended
to by different Agencies or persons, the same agent often acting for
different classes, though not under the same authority. Such a National
Society, though not interfering with liberty of action of each, would
co-ordinate the whole, and such exchange of voluntary service might
be of the greatest benefit, and would provide the rallying point for
all forces, both secular and religious, now occupied in the task of
rehabilitating those who have fallen under the ban of the criminal law.
So far, I have dealt only with "Patronage," as applied to Convict and
Local Prisons. There are two other categories of prisoners who are
dealt with on discharge in a different way, _i.e._, those discharged
under the Prevention of Crime Act, 1908 (_a_) from Borstal Institutions
(referred to in a former chapter): (_b_) from Preventive Detention.
The Gratuity System still remains in force for both these classes, its
object being, in the former case, that the inmate should have a small
_pécule_ at his disposition, which, taken in conjunction with such
assistance as the Borstal Association are able to give, may furnish
material help towards his reinstatement; and, in the latter, where
a prisoner may be awarded 1d., 2d., or 3d., for every working day
according to the nature of work, and skill, and industry displayed. The
money thus gained may be spent, either in purchasing certain articles
in the canteen, or be sent to a member of his family: if accumulated,
it would, in the event of conditional licence, be paid over on the
prisoner's behalf to the authorities of the Central Association to be
expended in such way as they may think fit for his benefit.
The Gratuity System also remains in force for those young prisoners
who are treated under the "Modified" Borstal System in Local Prisons,
as before explained, the object being not only to provide a stimulus
for labour and good conduct, but to furnish means for material aid on
discharge in cases considered by the Borstal Committee operating at
each Prison, for the purpose of the reinstatement of these lads in
honest industry. Moreover, they are not entitled to earn remission in
the same way as are other prisoners under the provisions of the Prison
Act, 1898. It is because ordinary prisoners have enjoyed this privilege
since 1898 that it was found possible to abolish the Gratuity System
for them, the necessary stimulus for industry with good conduct being
provided for by the hope of remission of sentence, which experience
shows to be more effective for the purposes of discipline than the
fear of losing any portion of the money to which they may have become
entitled under the Progressive Stage System.
* * * * *
For many years prior to the War, statistics of recidivism had
indicated, at least so far as serious crime tried on indictment was
concerned, that the mass of criminality was being confined to one
set of people, who were slowly passing to the later age categories,
and leaving a reduced number to take their place. The Tables printed
below show the remarkable decline in recidivism that has taken place,
especially since the War. A large proportion of this decrease may
doubtless be credited to the extraordinary growth of "Patronage",
or aid-on-discharge, which has taken place during the last quarter
of a century. For many years past, the Borstal Association has been
successful in reclaiming over 70 per cent. of the lads, 16-21, released
to its care; and among hardened convicts, the Central Association is
able to furnish remarkable figures. In their report for 1914-15 they
showed that since its foundation in 1911 the following numbers of
discharged convicts had passed through its hands each year:--1,147,
878, 761, and 792. Of this body, the numbers still out of prison on
the 1st April, 1915 were 527, 474, 449, and 662 respectively. Of those
discharged during 1914-15 the numbers in the "Star," "Intermediate"
and "Recidivist" classes were, respectively, 77, 187, and 528.
The number reconvicted in each category was 2, 21, and 107. As we
pass, therefore, from the "Star," or First Offender category, the
difficulty of successful after-care becomes manifest; thus, while
only two First Offenders were reconvicted, the reconvictions in the
case of "Intermediates" and "Recidivists" were 11 and 20 per cent.
respectively. It is clear, however, from the Annual Report of the
Association, that they are far from being dismayed by what must be, in
many cases, a hopeless struggle with this resisting mass of recidivism.
They look forward, and with good reason, to the hope that lies in
the future, _viz_:--that what they describe as "the stage army of
recidivist outlaws" will be steadily and permanently reduced in Convict
Prisons, not only in consequence of a better system of after-care,
which, under new methods, now awaits the convict on his first discharge
from penal servitude, but as the certain result of concentration of
effort on the young, or adolescent offender. To find work for 366
out of 792 discharged convicts is by itself striking evidence of the
vigour, method, and real zeal which characterizes the work of the
Association; to be able to report that 662 of these men were known to
be satisfactory at the end of the year furnishes proof of a work which
must, from the character and antecedents of these cases, be extremely
difficult and unpromising, and shows that the men must have been the
subject of much careful shepherding.
About ten years have elapsed since the formation of the Central
Association, and since that date the actual number of persons convicted
on indictment with _six or more_ previous convictions has fallen by
80 per cent. In 1910, there were 1,066 prisoners convicted who had
previously served a sentence of penal servitude, while in 1918 there
were only 297. A great reduction has also taken place in the number of
male convicts classified as Recidivist after reception into prison.
Prior to 1911, the number frequently exceeded 900 annually, while in
1918 it was only 191.
* * * * *
The following tables show (a) the actual fall that has taken place in
the numbers sentenced on indictment who had been previously convicted,
and (b) the decrease in the number of male convicts classified as
recidivist:--
(a)
-----+---------------+-----------------------------------
|Total convicted| Number previously convicted
| +---------+---------+---------------
Year| on indictment |1-3 times|4-5 times|6 times & over
-----+---------------+---------+---------+---------------
1910| 11,317 | 3,954 | 1,215 | 3,828
1913| 10,165 | 2,459 | 998 | 3,462
1918| 4,694 | 1,153 | 287 | 786
+------------+
Decrease per cent.|
since 1900 |59| 71 | 76 | 80
------------------+--+---------+---------+----------------
(b) Classification of Male Convicts received into Convict Prisons.
----------------------+---------+-------------+-----------+-------
Year |Star, or |Intermediate.|Recidivist.|Total.
| First | | |
|Offender.| | |
----------------------+---------+-------------+-----------+-------
Average for five years| | | |
ended 1910-11| 99 | 245 | 948 | 1,292
" " 1915-16| 104 | 160 | 579 | 843
For year 1916-17| 18 | 55 | 279 | 352
" " 1917-18| 63 | 49 | 298 | 410
" " 1918-19| 40 | 70 | 191 | 301
Decrease per cent. | | | |
since 1910-11| 60 | 71 | 80 | 77
----------------------+---------+-------------+-----------+-------
CHAPTER XV.
THE MEDICAL SERVICE.
No account of the English Prison System would be complete without
reference to the place and duty of the Medical Officer in the daily
administration of a Prison. The English law requires that a Medical
Officer shall be appointed to each prison. The appointment is made
by the Secretary of State on the recommendation of the Prison
Commissioners, and office is held subject to the approval of the
Secretary of State. Great care is taken in selecting suitable men with
high medical qualifications, and who are possessed of proved tact and
discretion; a practical knowledge of insanity is also requisite. As
the size of the prison varies very considerably, in the smaller prison
the Medical Officer is generally a medical practitioner residing in
the vicinity of the prison, who devotes a part only of his time to
prison duties: at least one visit daily is required. In the larger
prisons one or more medical men are appointed, whose whole time is at
the service of the Commissioners, the senior appointments being filled
by promotion from the junior rank. The prisons are frequently visited
by a Medical Inspector who not only supervises and advises the Medical
Officers, but forms a link with the whole of the Medical Staff, thus
tending to standardize the medical work carried out in prisons. He is
also available to visit and report on any individual prisoner when any
difficulty arises necessitating special inquiry. He works under the
Medical Commissioner, who represents the medical side of the service on
the Prison Board, and deals with the administration of the Department.
The mere enumeration of his statutory duties reveals the great and
varying responsibility imposed upon the Medical Officer:--examination
on reception and discharge; visitation of the sick and those under
punishment; the sanitary condition of the buildings; ventilation; food;
water; clothing and bedding:--all these things are combined in the
daily round. He classifies prisoners for labour according to their
physical fitness. He carefully notes the effect of imprisonment on
the mental or physical state of prisoners, and advises when, in his
opinion, life or reason is likely to be endangered by the continuance
of imprisonment, and it is satisfactory to record that no abuse of this
great responsibility has occurred since the prisons were taken over by
the State in 1878. He takes under special observation any case where
he has reason to suspect that the mental state is becoming impaired or
enfeebled by imprisonment, and carefully notes any sign of incipient
insanity. The health of the prison officers and their families, and the
sanitary condition of their quarters are also his special concern.
It is a striking testimony to the skill and care with which these
duties are performed that, with receptions in a normal year, we will
say, of 200,000 persons, and with some 15,000 serious cases treated
annually in hospital, of both sexes, and some 25,000 under continuous
medical treatment for seven days or over, the death-rate in prison
should be generally less than ·50 per 1,000 receptions.
Our prisons have been described by a high medical authority as among
the best sanatoria in England. This praise is well deserved, but it
does not mean that illness is rare or only trivial, but that the skill,
industry, and patience of the medical staff, operating in healthy
sanitary conditions, equipped with modern knowledge and resource
in dealing with the great variety of disease, which diagnosis on
reception, or individual care during detention, reveals, is effective
in maintaining a high standard of general health with a comparatively
low death-rate, so far as prison conditions admit a comparison with the
general death-rate of England and Wales.
For instance heart disease, pneumonia, and phthisis claim a regular
roll of victims, though, in most cases, death would be due to chronic
complaints in old, or prematurely old persons, with broken-down
constitutions.
The incidence of infectious disease in prisons has, for some years
past, been remarkably low. In a prison community, any illness of an
infectious character is naturally viewed with great apprehension,
and is always made the subject of strict inquiry--the danger of
infection being, of course, very great when so many persons are daily
received and brought into association at chapel, exercise, labour,
&c. Against this danger, the chief prophylactic must be in the exact
and unerring skill of the Medical Officer, who is able to detect
symptoms on reception which, unless detected, might spread an epidemic
throughout the prison. Thus, at the time of the small-pox epidemic of
1902, it was due to the precautions taken that, with few exceptions,
this highly infectious disease was prevented from spreading. When the
epidemic of enteric fever raged at Lincoln in 1905, not a single case
occurred in the prison, though prisoners were being received daily from
various parts of the city. Erysipelas is disease which is not uncommon
in prisons in the early days of imprisonment. Prisoners are not
infrequently received with cut hands and other wounds in a neglected
or septic condition, and with a probable predisposition to the disease
arising from a weak or unhealthy physical condition. Isolation, and the
usual precautions, however, generally prevent the disease, which has a
tendency to recur, from spreading.
Deaths from phthisis average from ten to twenty a year. It is very
rare indeed for the disease to manifest itself for the first time
during imprisonment, but is already existing on reception, and more
often than not in a far advanced condition. It had been observed that
for the ten years ending 1901, there had been an average death-rate
of 16·7 from this cause, and in that year, special instructions
were issued for the segregation and special treatment of tubercular
disease. Cases were to be treated in the most airy cells, with southern
aspect, and special precautions taken with regard to the provision of
spittoons, disinfection of clothing, utensils, fumigation of cells,
&c. To carry out the spirit of these instructions necessarily entails
much circumspection and good-will on the part of all concerned, both
officers and patients. The effect of these regulations is not easy to
discern in Local, or short-sentence, prisons, owing to the fugitive
character of the population, but in convict, or long-sentence, prisons,
where the conditions incident to imprisonment are operative over a
sufficiently long period, evidence may be found as to the measure of
the effect of prison life on this particular disease. An inquiry made
in 1906-7 shows that the death-rate from phthisis among males (cases
very rarely occur among females) sentenced to penal servitude (_i.e._
not less than three years) was 1·38 per 1,000 of the daily average
population. Previously to the regulations of 1901, the mortality was
nearly double, amounting to 2·00 per 1,000. Since 1901, also, another
cause has been operating towards a decline in the amount of tubercular
disease, _i.e._, the more generous prison dietary of that year, with an
increase in the proportion of fatty elements.
Inquiries made at the time of the appointment of the Royal Commission
to inquire into the prevalence of Venereal disease in 1913 showed
that of the receptions into prison during the six months between
November and April 1914, 64,023 males and 17,161 females were received
into prison. Of the males 1·58 per cent., and of the females, 1·98
were found to be suffering from some form of venereal disease. Full
advantage is taken of the modern methods of treatment, and practically
at all the larger prisons there is a clinic. Where facilities do not
exist in the smaller prisons, prisoners are treated at an outside
clinic, or transferred to a prison where there is one.
Medical Officers also have very important duties and responsibilities
in connection with the feeding of prisoners. Prison dietaries in this
country have always been prescribed by Statute, but these definite
prescriptions--what a prisoner shall eat and drink--are always subject
to the moderating discretion of a Medical Officer. Formerly, the prison
dietary was regarded as an element of penal discipline. Sir J. Graham,
when Home Secretary, had repudiated this principle as long ago as 1843,
but the Secretary of State of those days had no power to enforce his
views on the local Justices, who gave effect to the popular idea that
the ordinary prison diet might properly be regarded as an instrument
of punishment. It must not be supposed, however, that the elimination
of the penal element necessarily connotes an attractiveness of prison
fare. This is not the case; but the difficulties of framing a dietary
which shall be sufficient and not more than sufficient, for the varying
needs of many thousands of human beings of different ages and physique
is admittedly very great.
The dietary of 1900 has, at least, removed one grave reproach against
the system, _viz_:--that prisoners habitually, and almost invariably,
lost weight. Under the old dietary, no less than 80 per cent. of
prisoners engaged on hard labour for a month or less lost weight. The
progressive improvement of dietary scale, proportioned to length of
sentence, has been effective in mitigating the ill-effects arising from
the application of the principle of punitive diet as a part of the
sentence of imprisonment.
The skill and care of the medical staff would, however, be less
positive in its results but for the sanitary condition of the interior
of prisons, which has, for many years past, engaged the closest
attention. Great improvements have taken place of late years in the
construction of hospitals, and in the ventilation of halls and of
cells, and in the reconstruction of drains on the most up-to-date
lines. Formerly, the gas-lights, which are now in the corridors, were
inside the cell--in many cases, naked lights,--an objectionable system
from a sanitary point of view, and affording an easy means for mischief
or self-destruction, while giving inadequate light for reading or
working. It is not only with regard to artificial light that progress
has been made. The opaque window glass excluding the light of day,
and the hermetically closed window are now only memories of the past.
All these things of late years have had the effect of improving the
sanitary condition of prisons and the health of prisoners, and have, no
doubt, contributed to the remarkable bill of health which our prisons
present.
But it is not only with the physical state of prisoners and the
sanitation of prisons that the medical staff is concerned. The prison
Medical Officer has justly acquired a reputation as an expert in mental
disease. Although a practical acquaintance with lunacy is expected of
a candidate for the Medical Service, it is owing to the exceptional
opportunities afforded for diagnosis of the varying and often peculiar
mental states of prisoners that he is expected, and is able, to give
an expert opinion, not only in the grave cases where sanity is in
question, but also in those difficult and doubtful cases of mental
defectiveness which are continually occurring in every mode and degree.
Especially is great importance attached to the opinion of the Medical
Officer of prisons as that of an unbiassed expert witness on the mental
condition of cases charged with a capital offence. The growing practice
of the Courts to remand for medical observation in prisons when any
doubt exists as to the state of mind, has the desired result of
preventing the commitment to prison of persons who would be certified
to be insane almost as soon as received. Thus, twenty years ago the
number certified insane after reception into prison was a little over
one per cent. of the total receptions. To-day it is about half that
number.
It is, however, with regard to a class of prisoner, who, for want of a
more precise and descriptive term, is designated "mental defective",
that the Medical Officer is called upon to exercise all his vigilance
and powers of diagnosis. There are persons who cannot be deemed
sufficiently irresponsible as to warrant certification, but who, from
obvious mental deficiency, cannot be considered fit subjects for penal
discipline. In 1901, a special treatment was established for this class
in local and in convict prisons. The effect of the new regulations was
largely to increase the rôle and responsibility of Medical Officers
in controlling the daily routine in respect of food, labour, and
punishment. It was about this time that the question of the best method
of dealing with mentally defective persons, other than those certified
under the Lunacy and Idiots Acts, came prominently before the public,
and a Royal Commission was appointed to inquire into the matter. At the
same time, an attempt was made to ascertain the number of persons in
prison who, on account of mental defect, were deemed unfit for ordinary
penal discipline. Medical Officers were requested to note down for six
months the number of persons received into their respective prisons
who, in their opinion, were of such a low order of intelligence as
would be likely, by want of normal self-control, to get into mischief,
or commit crime. The result was that 3 per cent. of both sexes of the
total number of prisoners received were shown to fall within this
category. Writing on this subject in 1912, Sir Herbert Smalley, until
lately the Head of the Prison Medical Service, states:--
"The number of prisoners who are mentally defective is the subject of
the very widest difference of opinion. There are some who would have
us believe that all prisoners are mentally affected, in fact they urge
that the mere fact of their committing crime is a proof of this. There
are others, who, whilst not going this length, yet put the number at
a very high figure. One well known writer recently alleged in the
daily press that probably 40 per cent. of our criminals are mentally
defective. A well known alienist writing to the "Times" some years ago
stated that at least 20 per cent. of all police court cases belonged
to the class of mental defectives. The Medical Investigators appointed
by the Royal Commission for the care and control of the feeble-minded,
after visiting several prisons and having seen some 2,553 prisoners,
estimated the number as mentally defective at 10·28 per cent. This
is again a higher rate than is generally returned by the prison
authorities as the number of mentally defective persons amongst the
prison population (irrespective of those certifiably insane who are
obviously unfit to be at large), _viz._, 3 per cent.
"Here at once is a wide divergence of opinion and the reason for the
great discrepancy is that so much depends on the view that is taken
as to the degree of mental deficiency which justifies an individual
being regarded as "Feeble-minded." There is no hard and fast line
of demarcation, as has been asserted, between feeble-mindedness and
sanity, any more than there is between a great many cases of insanity
and sanity; from the normal down to the lowest idiot, or dement, it is
only the question of degree of deficiency of mental power. This was
pointed out by the Departmental Committee on Defective and Epileptic
Children as far back as 1898."
"One of the Medical Investigators of the Royal Commission alleges that
"the higher grade aments" are sometimes not recognised by the prison
authorities, who are apt to think a man who works well and behaves well
in prison must be normal. There is some truth, no doubt, in this, for
in prison there is strict and close supervision, there is the daily
routine and the absence of "stress," "alcohol" and "temptation," to
which people are subject in the outer world; moreover, in many cases,
their time in prison is very short and their true mental condition is
masked by the condition in which they are received (as, for instance,
under the influence of drink and deprivation) so that the medical
officer very naturally hesitates before reporting them feeble-minded."
The Mental Deficiency Act, 1913, came into operation on the 1st April
1914. It provides for three forms of supervision for defectives,
_viz_:--State Institutions for defectives of dangerous or violent
propensities, Certified Institutions, and Guardianship. The last named
can be ignored in considering criminal defectives.
When the Act came into force there were no State Institutions, and the
accommodation in Certified Institutions was totally inadequate to meet
the needs of the situation. A State Institution was secured towards
the end of 1914, but was almost immediately handed over to the War
Office. Little, or nothing, could be done in the way of provision of
further accommodation, State or otherwise, during the continuance of
the Great War, and, as a result, very few criminal defectives could be
dealt with. Since the termination of hostilities, a State Institution
for male and female defectives has been established, and further
institutional accommodation provided, and it is hoped that in the near
future full provision will be made for dealing with all defectives,
guilty of criminal offences, who are certifiable under the Act.
From 1st April 1914 to 31st March 1919, 871 cases were certified under
the Act, the total receptions into local prisons for this period being
376,000, _i.e._, 2·3 per 1,000 receptions. The prisoners certified in
prison do not comprise the whole number of cases of criminal defectives
dealt with, as Courts have power under the Act to send such defectives
direct to Institutions, instead of to prison, and, as the working of
the Act becomes more stabilised, advantage is taken of this power to
an increasing extent.
But even so, there is a considerable discrepancy between the defectives
dealt with under the Act and the official ante-Act estimate, which was
considerably greater, and this is mainly due to the strict requirement
of the Act that the defect must have existed from birth or from early
age. Here at once a large number of prisoners regarded as mentally
defective, forming 30 per cent. of the whole, were excluded from the
operation of the Act owing to the fact that the mental defect from
which they were suffering, _e.g._, senility, alcoholism, arose from
causes operating later in life. Again, of the number of prisoners whose
mental defect was regarded as of congenital origin, 77 per cent. were
over 25 years of age, thus making it difficult to obtain proof of the
existence of the defect from early age, without which a certificate
cannot be given.
But the Mental Deficiency Act, limited as it is in its scope, and
disappointing in its results, is a pioneer piece of legislation of
considerable importance. Many Voluntary Associations and other bodies
in this country interested in its administration are advocating an
extension of its provisions, and I think we can anticipate with every
confidence the time, to which the prison reformer has so long looked
forward, when those unhappy persons, who through mental affliction
drift inevitably into criminal courses, are removed from prison
surroundings to the more appropriate atmosphere of institutions where
they can remain under proper care and control.
The operation of the Mental Deficiency Act, 1913, and the discharge
from Naval and Military Hospitals of numbers of men suffering from
mental and physical disabilities arising out of the war, have
accentuated the already growing interest shown by Justices, and others
engaged in the administration of the Criminal Law, as to whether the
means hitherto taken for dealing with persons committing offences
are the best and most humane which could be adopted. The opinion has
been growing in intensity for some years that mental and physical
disabilities may largely contribute to the commission of crime, and
that it is the duty of the community to investigate thoroughly such
causes, when they exist, to determine whether they are beyond the
ability of the individual to control, whether they do not limit wholly,
or in part, the responsibility for the commission of the offence, and
to what extent they should be taken into account in determining the
question of punishment: and whether some form of _treatment_, rather
than _punishment_, by imprisonment, cannot be devised, which shall be
more scientific, efficacious and humane.
The Justices of the City of Birmingham, early in 1919, took action and
approached the Prison Commissioners in the matter and asked that a
whole-time Medical Officer might be appointed to the Prison, and that
portions of the hospitals, on both the male and female side, might be
entirely partitioned off from the rest of the Prison and adapted for
the reception of persons on remand whose mental condition appeared such
as to require investigation.
Effect has been given to the recommendations of the Justices and,
at the time of writing, the scheme has been in operation for some
12 months with valuable results. The Medical Officer of the Prison
works in the closest co-operation with the Justices and no person,
in whose case there is any suspected mental element, is sentenced to
imprisonment until after full investigation of his condition of mind
and all other avenues of dealing with the case have been exploited. The
"Birmingham" experiment, as it is termed, has aroused great interest
throughout the country and an extention to other centres, in a modified
form, has already resulted.
The institution of the Borstal System has given a new and additional
importance to the rôle of the Medical Officer, who plays an important
part in the daily administration of these Institutions. From the
medical point of view, the system commends itself more particularly
by its insistence on the influences which promote sound physical
development. Special inquiries made by the Medical Staff in 1903
and 1907 furnish positive proof of the physical inferiority of the
adolescent criminal, 16-21, relatively to the free population, notably
in height and weight. These inquiries furnish a striking argument in
favour of the soundness of the principles on which the Borstal System,
as explained in a previous chapter, has been established.
The foregoing observations merely indicate generally the direction
in which the manifold activities of the Medical Prison Service are
exercised. I have laid stress on the part played in the discernment
and investigation of mental disorder. That the question of guilt is
identical with the question of mental soundness is a commonplace
not only with those who seek to analyse by scientific inquiry the
mysterious and subtle working of the human mind, but with those who,
working in the name of humanity, are forced by personal observation,
unaided by science, to the conclusion that many whom the law strikes
are not fully responsible for their actions, and are not justly
punished. In the United States of America, where science and humanity
march hand-in-hand in exploring prisons and places of punishment, and
in surveying the whole field of crime, we find that practical steps
have been taken by the establishment of criminal laboratories, as
at Chicago and Boston, to classify offenders, especially the young,
according to the nature and degree of their mental capacity for
distinguishing right from wrong. There is nothing so elaborate as
this in England, but this is not because public opinion is not keenly
alive to the importance of the medical aspect of cases, but because
it would not be disposed to admit that the causes of a criminal act
are discoverable by physical observation, or by the precise research
of a criminal or clinical laboratory. It would be the duty, and the
pride, of any civilized State to maintain a high standard of medical
work in Prisons: it is a question whether the establishment of criminal
laboratories does more than illustrate the practical benefits to be
derived from good and thorough medical work in prisons, and whether
experimental psychology, with its instruments of precision for testing
the human mind, is a really effective auxiliary for the Court of Law
in deciding guilt. It may be of value, as a supplementary aid to such
diagnosis as a conscientious Medical Officer would apply, and it could
be used as a means to support and justify opinion, but it cannot, by
itself, be a substitute for other methods of observation. Though
public opinion in England is increasingly sensitive to degrees of
responsibility, as affecting punishment of crime, it would be more
disposed to place its faith in a medical man having experience of
mental disease than in the conclusions drawn from the employment of the
precise methods of experimental psychology alone. It is disposed to
take the view expressed by no less an authority than Dr. Binet, which
is to the effect that the complex phenomena of human action cannot
be expressed in a few terse formulas,--"_c'est de la littérature: ce
n'est pas de la science_." He inclines to the view that the essential
characteristic of normal man is in the _direction_ of choice. The want
of direction is due to a disordered _moral_ nature. Of this moral
degeneracy little is known. The subjective valuation of the alienist
cannot in practical life be the test of responsibility--the Judge, as
representing 'common sense,' must decide.