suggest that the legislature would provide by law for the removal
of such cases to the State Lunatic Asylum. In that institution,
established for the treatment of mental disease, the prisoner who
ought from prudential reasons, to be restrained from society, could
be subjected to remedial discipline, if not cure.
By the report of the warden it would appear, that he has no expectation
of more than a partial relief from this quarter. His language is:
By information derived from the public prints and other sources,
the State Asylum at Harrisburg would appear to be designed as
a hospital for the cure of the insane, to the exclusion of the
_hopeless_ sufferers from this distressing malady, who may offend
against the laws: thereby leaving us still to be the recipients and
guardians of these unhappy people.
If such be the case, I would earnestly inquire whether the subject
should not be at once so understood, and suitable arrangements for
their comfort and security be immediately made, under the sanction
of legislative aid and authority.
One of the physicians in allusion to this topic, calls attention to the
fact that “much of the mortality is composed of prisoners, who, first
go deranged, and then, like Bajazet, literally dash out their brains
against the bars of their cage.”[3]
When will this terrible cruelty end? he asks. I had hoped that
the remedy was at hand, but I regret to learn that the prospect
of transferring our insane to the Stale Asylum seems as yet far
distant. In their behalf, however, I shall make a last appeal. In
the name of justice and mercy, let it be no longer necessary for
the friends of the institution to deplore, or in the power of its
opponents to boast that a number of helpless lunatics are immured
within the cells of the Eastern Penitentiary.
And the other dilates upon the subject in the following terms:
For many years past, I find representations have been made to the
Board by my predecessors, urging the propriety and the necessity
almost, of removing the insane confined in this institution.
I must record my testimony also.--The evil is unabated, and I
cannot consistently with my duty as physician, nor with my own
personal feelings, pass by this matter without at least doing
the little I may be able to have it remedied. Heretofore there
have been difficulties in the way, which happily exist no longer.
The completion of a State Lunatic Asylum, it is to be hoped, has
removed the last obstacle to a course already long approved of by
every one, and urgently demanded by all the material and moral
circumstances concerned in the case. For the object of prisons,
if I understand it, is the punishment and prevention of crime,
and, possibly the reformation of criminals. But the mischief that
irresponsibles may do, is not crime, nor are they criminals: they
may be restrained, but not punished. We punish and endeavor to
reform the criminal, the imbecile and insane, we confine sometimes,
but at all times, should endeavor to protect, to foster, to cure.
It may often be very proper, in regard to these, to turn their
hospital into a temporary prison, but it can hardly be deemed
compatible with the objects and discipline, or the material
arrangements and accommodations of penitentiaries, to make them
serve the double purpose of prison and hospital--confounding in a
common receptacle those that society ought to protect, and those it
is obliged to punish.
At the present time, we have a number of these unfortunates in
a truly pitiable condition; and it is not only with a painful,
but also with a mortifying and humiliating feeling, that we are
continually obliged to reflect, that it is not in our power to
improve it.
Turning from the State Penitentiary to the State Hospital, we are met
with the following passage in the first annual report of the trustees:
“There are at the present time in the State penitentiaries, and
in the different jails of the commonwealth, a considerable number
of insane,--alleged criminals--who ought to be transferred to
the State hospital as soon as its buildings are completed. There
are also in these institutions a few, who, from their peculiarly
dangerous character, and the utter hopelessness of benefiting
them by treatment, can never with propriety become inmates of the
hospital. To protect the community and the ordinary insane from the
dangerous propensities of these individuals, it would be necessary
to introduce into our wards, intended for the treatment of disease,
all the most repulsive features of a prison, or that a separate
building, having strictly a prison character, should be erected
upon the grounds. Some legislation will be required before any of
these cases can be admitted, and some mode of proceeding should be
adopted which will prevent any but proper cases being received from
these sources.”
It is obvious that different constructions are put upon the language
of the report of the trustees, by the different officers of the
penitentiary. The inspectors evidently regard the State Lunatic Asylum
as the proper place to which insane prisoners should be removed,
whether for safe keeping or for treatment. The warden apprehends,
that one class of the insane convicts would be received at the State
Hospital, though the other may be excluded. Dr. Given regards the
prospect of transferring any of them as far distant, while Dr. Lassiter
thinks the completion of the hospital has disposed of the last obstacle
to the removal of all.
If we understand the language of the trustees, it admits that a
considerable number of “ordinarily” insane persons now in our State
Penitentiary and in the different jails, ought to be transferred to
the hospital as soon as it is so far completed as to secure them;
while they maintain that there is another class of insane prisoners
of “dangerous propensities,” who ought not to be received into any
hospital, but for whom a separate building should be provided, on the
grounds belonging to the State institution, entirely distinct from it,
though doubtless under the same supervision and attendance with the
main hospital.
In giving this construction to the passage, we assume that the phrase
“_any of these cases_” in the last clause, is limited to the dangerous
and hopeless class, who can never with propriety become inmates of a
general hospital.
An insane man, whether a convict or not, must always be an object of
deep sympathy. Whatever guilt attaches to him, we lose sight of it in
the terrible calamity by which he is overwhelmed. The moment it becomes
manifest that he has, through the visitation of God, lost the control
of his intellectual faculties, so as to be exempt from the ordinary
responsibilities of a reasonable being, all his relations to society
are changed. The government which stood ready to charge home his
guilt and demand his punishment as an offender, offers him protection
and sympathy as a sufferer. The sword of justice is converted into a
sceptre of mercy, and so long as this dark cloud overshadows him, the
voice of the accuser is silent.
We apprehend there would be much difficulty in distinguishing
practically between those insane convicts, who might be received
into the State Hospital as ordinary patients, and those who would
require to be kept by themselves. So far as the safe custody of the
dangerous class is concerned, the number would seem to be too small to
justify the expense of “a separate building, (having strictly a prison
character,) erected upon the (hospital) grounds,” as the trustees
suggest. No class of prisoners are more ingenious or more untiring in
their efforts to escape than the insane; and hence their safe keeping
would be the chief point of consideration in the construction of a
building for their reception. If separate provision is not made for all
classes of insane convicts, we should much question the expediency of
making it simply for the safe keeping of the dangerous. We would rather
ameliorate, as far as possible, their condition as convicts in the
cell, affording them extra diet, appropriate association, amusement,
&c. Nothing would be gained by transferring them from a cell in
Philadelphia to a cell in Harrisburg, provided they are to be strictly
confined to either; and any relaxation of this rigor which their
convalescence might warrant, would be attended with much less hazard in
the prison-yard, than on the hospital grounds.
But we have serious doubts, whether a general State Lunatic Hospital
should receive convicts of any class. We are aware, that the practice
obtains to some extent, but whether, in a majority of cases, the
parties received can be properly called convicts, there is much ground
to question.
In the report of the New York State Lunatic Asylum, for 1851, we notice
ten cases returned under the head of “imprisonment,” eight of which
are declared to be cases of “feigned insanity,” and of course though
“convicts,” they were not “insane.” Of the other two, one became insane
before trial, and was of course, though insane, never properly a
“convict.” “Besides these ten,” says the report, “there have been sent
to us from prisons and gaols several others, who were cases of genuine
insanity, but who were doubtless insane when committed.” Then they were
never proper subjects of penal suffering, and should not have been
imprisoned, except for safe keeping. In most of our State hospitals
pay-patients are received to some extent, and those who resort to them
as institutions of charity, should not be forced into discreditable
association. It is of great importance, that every thing attractive
should be presented in them, and every thing repulsive avoided. The
poverty-stricken are sometimes quite sensitive on these subjects, and
it is as inhuman as it is impolitic to violate their feelings.
The attention of the British Parliament has been recently called to
this subject by a proposition of the commissioners of lunacy, to
establish a central asylum for “criminal lunatics” in England and
Wales, similar in character to that for Ireland, at Dundrum, near
Dublin. The commissioners say, that “it has been frequently brought
under their notice, that the friends and relatives of patients, and
also the patients themselves, when conscious of being associated
with “criminal lunatics,” have considered such association a great
and unnecessary aggravation of their calamity.” There is some doubt
expressed, whether such feelings prevail to any considerable extent in
institutions where convict-patients are received; and to the question,
whether the dislike to the society of criminal lunatics ascribed to
patients and their friends, exists generally or only in those cases
which were brought specifically under the notice of the commissioners,
one medical witness says, that his own experience is directly the
reverse; that he has carefully watched, in order to detect any
repugnance or unfriendly feeling among the inmates of a county asylum,
of which he has charge, towards their fellow-patients, who were known
to have committed offences against the laws, and had not only failed to
do so, but had heard expressions of sympathy and pity. He thinks there
is much more tenderness felt for them by their fellow sufferers, than
by their sane neighbors.
There is also a considerable difference of opinion, not only as to the
classes of lunatics which the proposed asylum should receive, but also
as to the name both of place and patients. Some would call it the State
asylum, and would open it to all criminal offenders of every station
and degree, who are exempted from the penalties of the law on the
ground of insanity. Of course it would have the character of a general,
and not of a pauper asylum, so as to afford superior accommodation for
those who could afford to pay. Others would confine the use of such
an asylum to the detention and treatment of all lunatics of criminal
disposition, whether they have actually committed a crime or not.
Some would completely separate criminals who have become insane after
conviction, from those who have committed crimes under the influence
of insanity--the former, of whom only would be properly called insane
convicts. The distinction is obvious, viz., that an insane person
cannot become a convict, though a convict may become insane. Others
would make no distinction, but would put “all lunatics detained under
warrant from the government, on the same footing.”
The discussion of the matter has awakened parliamentary inquiry. On
the 18th of March last, in the House of Lords, the Earl of Shaftsbury
moved an address to the Crown, touching “the expediency of establishing
a State asylum for the care and custody of those who are denominated
criminal lunatics,” and he adduced several facts, to show the
inexpediency of detaining criminal lunatics in the same asylum with
other patients.
The Earl of Derby thought any movement in this direction would be
premature, as a revision of the whole subject was needful, before it
could be determined what new legislation would be expedient.
Lord Cranworth said, that nothing could be more mischievous than mixing
criminal lunatics with other lunatics; and he also contended that the
question of lunacy in criminal prosecutions, should not be determined
by juries; but that the only point for them to decide, should be the
fact--guilty, or not guilty--leaving the question of sanity to be
inquired into before another tribunal, the constitution of which he was
not then prepared to define.
On an assurance from Lord Derby that the subject should receive
deliberate consideration, the motion was withdrawn.
As it seems unlikely that any provision will be presently made in
our State Hospital, either for convicts who become insane, or who
manifest insanity after they are received, or for those who were
insane when received, but were committed as convicts, or for those who
are committed for safe keeping merely, or as lunatics with criminal
intentions, or propensities, we will venture to suggest a more minute
classification of the register of prisoners, and some specific
recognition of these classes in the arrangements of the Eastern
Penitentiary.
If that institution is to serve the double purpose of a penitentiary
for convicts, and a house of detention or hospital for lunatics of
dangerous or criminal tendencies, let the departments be kept distinct,
and each be furnished with such attendance, supervision, &c., as their
circumstances require. This arrangement would very nearly resemble that
at the Blockley Almshouse, under which the two thousand paupers are
received and provided for in the appropriate wards of the house, while
the two or three hundred lunatics of various classes have a distinct
department, though all are under the same general superintendence.
So in the reports, the same distinction would be made between the
convicts proper, who are undergoing the process of punishment, and
those who from alienation of mind, antecedent or subsequent to their
reception as prisoners, are not proper subjects of penal suffering,
though they are proper subjects of personal restraint, and, as such,
have a lodging within the prison walls. In a word, if our penitentiary
must be used for the detention or custody of lunatics whatever their
character or grade, let it have due credit as a hospital, and not
suffer undeserved reproach as a penitentiary.
ART. V.--FINAL REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE ERECTION OF THE NEW GAOL
FOR SUFFOLK COUNTY (MASS.), pp. 44.
This document was presented, not long since, to the authorities of the
City of Boston; and, as it gives us the history of a prison structure
quite unique, in some respects, we think our readers will be interested
in a brief notice of it.
The County of Suffolk is made up of the City of Boston, with a
population of 140,000, and the town of Chelsea, with a population of
7,000. The County Gaol, situated in Leverett street, in the heart of
the city, was, for almost twenty years, the subject of complaint. It
was irremediably defective in construction, and incapable of being
warmed or ventilated, and afforded no means of classification. The site
of it was ill adapted to the purpose. It embraced 4800 square feet of
land, valued at $1.50 or $2.00 a foot.
In July, 1845, a plan of a new gaol, to be erected at South Boston,
was presented, and an order passed to proceed with the work; but the
people in the vicinity objecting to the measure, it was not prosecuted
farther; and nothing more was done till, at the beginning of 1847, a
letter[4] was addressed to the city authorities by Mr. George Sumner,
then in Paris, earnestly remonstrating against the adoption of the
associate or Auburn system of discipline, and urging the construction
of a County Prison on the separate plan. The next year, it was
determined to rebuild on Leverett street; but before the work was
commenced a proposition was submitted for the purchase of an eligible
site on the margin of Charles river, which was adopted; a purchase of
nearly 200,000 superficial feet was made, at a cost (with filling up,
enclosing and protecting), of a fraction less than $179,000; and a
plan of construction agreed upon. From this time the work went bravely
on, till its completion, on the 25th day of November last, when the
prisoners were transferred from the old gaol, in Leverett street, to
their new quarters.
The cost of the building, exclusive of site, is a little short of
$200,000--the total expense being $373,525.90.
There is a centre octagonal building, with four wings--three of
which contain the cells--and the fourth is taken up by the officers’
apartments. Each of the north and south wings measures 80 feet 6 inches
in length, and 55 feet in width, and 56 feet in height above the
surface of the ground, and is divided into five stories, each story
containing ten cells, thus giving to each of these two wings 50 cells.
The east wing measures 164 feet 6 inches in length; 55 feet in width,
and 56 feet in height above the surface of the ground, divided into
five stories, each with 24 cells, thus giving to this wing 120 cells.
The cells in all the wings are 8 by 11 feet, and 10 feet high. The
hospital and chapel occupy the fourth story of the west, or officers’
wing. Each cell contains a window and a door; and the interior of the
whole prison is lighted from 28 windows in the outer walls, each 10
feet wide and 33½ feet in length. The lower apartment of the centre
octagonal building contains the kitchen, bakery and laundry, and in the
upper is the central guard and inspecting room. This apartment is 76⅓
feet square, and stretches upward to the roof, in a clear, unoccupied
space of 83⅔d feet above the surface of the ground! The exterior walls
of the prison are of Quincy granite.
The opportunity was afforded us, some few days since, to take a general
view of this new and imposing structure. At the time we were there
workmen were engaged in erecting a new furnace--the method of warming
the cells having proved quite inadequate. One might have supposed that
this branch of the science of prison architecture was sufficiently
understood to prevent such a disappointment. The inmates of the prison
were evidently suffering from this defect.
The _Separate System_ is strictly enforced, except that no labor is
introduced, the prison being chiefly a house of detention for debtors,
witnesses and untried prisoners, upon whom labor or other prison
service may not be enforced. Thirty or forty convicts were there, but
under sentences so short as to render it unprofitable to put them
to work. Many were committed for non-payment of fine and costs. The
debtors have a separate ward, as have also females and minors. Among
the most obvious and important deficiencies may be mentioned that of
water. Tubs and cans are used in the cells. The rates allowed for the
board of witnesses are liberal, and an instance was mentioned to us of
a case so unimportant that the defendant was bailed in the sum of only
$30, while several witnesses were then in confinement at the rate of
$2.25 per week for their board!
Whoever forms a judgment of the new gaol for Suffolk County from the
description in the Report of the Committee, will find much cause to
modify it upon a view of the premises; and if we were not misinformed
by resident officials, the structure fails, in some very important
particulars, to answer the purpose which its projectors had in view.
Some attribute its defects to the unsteady counsels that presided over
its erection, and others to radical errors in the plan. As it has great
advantages over the old gaol, however, we are disposed to consider it a
step in advance, though certainly a very costly one.
Miscellaneous Notices.
FOREIGN.
CRIME AND PAUPERISM COUNTERACTED.
“It is a trite argument now, that the reformation of one child,
while it is far more hopeful than the reclamation of one old
offender, is many degrees cheaper than the punishment of that one.
Experience proves that there is scarcely a single case out of a
thousand where the incipient disease of vice has not yielded to
the ameliorating treatment of kindness, and the removal of the
cause--poverty. Cheaper; because directly diminishing pauperism,
it, in the first place, reduces the amount we, as a community, pay
for its support; cheaper, because trying, catching and punishing
one criminal, costs, in some cases, an amount equal to the whole
annual expense to feed, clothe, and instruct a school-full of
those who are to be prevented, by a simple process, from becoming
criminals; and cheaper, in this far higher sense, that the
reformation of one individual infinitely more than counterbalances
the expense of attempts, even where ineffectual, at reforming many.”
Let the doubter of these positions call at some school where the lowest
order of human kind finds shelter, food and friends. We have seen such
an one--in the old country. We will introduce our readers to one of its
pupils: