pline, in the body of this work, it is said that, "unless some decided advantage is to be gained by a more expensive system (the Pennsylvania plan of separate confinement), it (the Auburn system) ought to be preferred." We believe that the Pennsylvania system affords many advantages which can be but partially attained by the Auburn system, or not at all; and that it is the best suited, of all the prison systems yet devised, to the demands of the age. All persons agree that it is of the first importance to prevent prisoners from contaminating each other. It is a melancholy fact that, wherever a number of persons, who have openly transgressed the laws of society, or whose characters are corrupt, are brought together, and allowed to have free intercourse with each other, each individual has a tendency to sink to the level of the worst. The intercourse of the vicious is mutually corrupting, in the same manner as the intercourse of good men is mutually improving. To prevent this contamination, all agree that, during the night, every prisoner should be separately confined; but many have thought that, during the day time, the criminals engaged in common work may be so strictly watched that no communication can take place among them. In order to effect this which is the system followed at Auburn -a very severe discipline has necessarily been resorted to. No criminal is allowed to speak to a fellow prisoner: the meals are taken in the separate cells. Beating by the keepers must be allowed, or the discipline cannot be enforced; and it can easily be imagined how severe a discipline is required to suppress that desire of communication which is so deeply planted in human nature, and to counteract the artifices of a host of adepts in cunning, to suppress looks, signs, &c. Mr. Lynds, who built the prison at Sing-Sing, in the state of New York, and who must be considered as the inventor of the system of discipline pursued in the prisons of Auburn and Sing-Sing, says that his greatest difficulty has been to find keepers who were not too lenient.-We would also refer the reader to a letter written by Mr. Edward Livingston (the present secretary of state, and the framer of the code of Louisiana) to Mr. Roberts Vaux, Oct. 25, 1828 (and which appeared at the time in the public prints), concurring in the opinion that communication can be prevented only to a certain degree, and only by the use of very great severity, if the convicts work together in the day time. See also

the Introductory Report to the Code of Prison Discipline, explanatory of the Principles on which the Code is founded, being Part of the Penal Law prepared for the State of Louisiana, by Edward Livingston; printed separately by Carey, Lea and Carey (Philadelphia, 1827).—But all this severity is avoided in the system of permanent separate confinement. Communication, and consequent contamination, cannot take place; and yet the system requires neither stripes nor any punishment in order to enforce it. It works calmly and steadily, without subjecting the convict, by continually repeated punishment, to a continual recurrence of disgrace for misdemeanors which the common principles of human nature are sufficient to induce him to commit. But even if we could obtain entirely the desired end

interruption of communication-by the Auburn system, would this system be desirable on other accounts? The article on Prison Discipline, speaking of solitary confinement, says, "In the silence and darkness of night the voice of religious instruction is heard ; and, if any circumstances can be imagined, calculated to impress the warnings, the encouragements, the threats or the hopes of religion upon the mind, it must surely be those of the convict in his cell, where he is unseen and unheard, and where nothing can reach him but the voice which must come to him, as it were, from another world, telling him of things which, perhaps, never entered into his mind; telling him of God, of eternity, of future reward and future punishment, of suffering far greater than the mere physical endurances of the present life, and of joy infinitely beyond the pleasures he may have experienced." This effect certainly may take place; but it cannot occur often if the convict is in his cell only during the night, when his time will be principally spent in sleep; and, though the nights of winter afford much more time than is required for this purpose, men can accustom themselves to very protracted slumbers, especially if they have never been accustomed to reflection, which must be the case with most convicts. The great object referred to in the above passage can be obtained, in our opinion, only by separate confinement day and night. The greatest step, we believe, which a convict of the common sort can make towards reformation, is from thoughtlessness to thoughtfulness. Few of those committed to prisons are accustomed to think it is for want of thought that they became guilty. Surrounded as they are, in the

Auburn system, by a variety of objects during the day, they cannot feel the same inducement to reflection as under the pressure of constant solitude. It is difficult, even for a man accustomed from his youth to reflection, and to a mode of life which offers a great variety of objects and subjects, to entertain himself in long-continued solitude. He must occupy his mind with himself. The writer may be permitted to refer to his own experience, having been imprisoned for a considerable period during a time of political persecution; and, though he was not haunted with remorse, and had more resources, from the habits of his past life, than can fall to the lot of most of the inmates of prisons, he can testify to the power with which solitude forces a man to make himself the subject of his contemplation-a power which can hardly be realized by one who has not felt it. How strongly must it operate on the common convict! Deprived of most of the resources of educated men; constantly reminded of the cause which brought him into this situation; undisturbed by any distracting objects; enveloped in silence-he needs must think. This power of solitude was acknowledged by the wisest and best of antiquity, who retired from the walks of men to prepare themselves for great tasks by undisturbed contemplation. The labor which the convict performs in his cell, and which is indispensably necessary, does not disturb him, because it soon loses the distracting power of novelty; and, though it will engage him sufficiently to prevent him from sinking into torpid sullenness (as experience shows), it does not interrupt his contemplations. When he has once begun to reflect, he must come to the conclusion that virtue is preferable to vice, and can tranquillize his troubled mind only by resolving on reformation: he must at last seek comfort in the mercy of that Being who created him in his goodness, and who will receive him, notwithstanding his guilt, if he is sincere in his repentance. This will be the natural course of most prisoners in uninterrupted solitary confinement, judging from the observation which we have made on convicts thus confined. All agree that prison discipline ought to be such as to afford a possibility for the reformation of the prisoner; and this seems to us possible only in the Pennsylvania penitentiary system. The cases must be very rare in which a person, in the moment of his conviction, feels the entire justice of it, and resolves to become better: it requires a moral en

ergy of which very few are capable. The feeling usually produced in any man, by any punishment, is that of offended pride, of irritated self-love. The prisoner, at the moment of conviction, does not reflect on the justice of his punishment, but places himself in opposition to the rest of mankind, as an injured man, or, if he be of a better nature, with the embittered feeling of an outcast. In this state of mind he enters the prison. If uninterrupted solitude awaits him, he will, if he is capable of reformation by any means but the devoted labors of personal friends (in which character, of course, the government cannot address him), become thoughtful. When he has reached this state, no new punishment awaits him; no new shame; no corrupting and degrading company; no new cause for considering himself an outcast, and fit associate for the worst. His solitary confinement hangs over him, indeed, as a severe dispensation, but does not daily renew the irritation of his pride. However much he may have been offended by his sentence, the prison in itself inflicts no further degradation. The keeper appears as a friend rather than a severe overseer. If he is disposed to reform, his weakness is not constantly put to the trial by offended shame, by the consideration that he is an outcast and associate of outcasts. We have asked many prisoners. in permanent solitary confinement, whether they would prefer to be placed together with others; and they have almost invariably answered that they considered it as the greatest privilege to be left alone. It ought not to be supposed that solitude bears so hard upon the mind of the prisoner, that he would exchange it for any other situation which would bring him into contact with other human beings. When the writer, after an imprisonment of eight months, was offered the company of another prisoner in his cell, confined also on political grounds, he refused the offer, though it was repeated at several different times. If the prisoner has made any step towards reformation, be always will wish to remain alone. How different from this is the operation of the Auburn system! As soon as the convict leaves his cell, he sees and feels anew that he is degraded: he knows and is known by his fellow convicts; the keeper is (and necessarily must be) a severe, inexorable overseer. He is treated every day anew as an outcast from society; his pride is constantly offended; or, if he has no pride, no opportunity is afforded for the feeling of self-respect to spring up!

We hardly see how the slow process of reformation can go on under these circumstances. Yet the most humane of all systems of prison disciplines-that of Pennsylvania-has been called, and by an excellent man too (Mr. Roscoe), "the most inhuman and unnatural that the cruelty of a tyrant ever invented, no less derogatory to the character of human nature than it is in direct violation of the leading principles of Christianity." We have already shown why we believe that it is not only not “unnatural," but founded on the deepest principles of human nature; that, so far from being " inhuman,” it is founded on the very principle of mercy, because it affords the fullest opportunity for reformation, and prevents all exposure to shame and contamination. And is it cruel? All agree, that contamination must be prevented at any price, or reformation entirely given up. The question, then, can only be a comparative oneWhat is the cruelty of this compared with the Auburn system? Perfect solitude, alleviated only by the permission to work, and to read the Bible, may be a hard situation; but is it more so than being placed in the company of many fellow-prisoners, with whom all intercourse is prevented by the threat of whipping? This must be torture indeed, like that of Tantalus, with the tempting viands constantly before him, and constantly receding from the approach of his famished lips. Solitary confinement, as practised in the Eastern prison of Pennsylvania, is rather a deprivation of most of the comforts of life, than the infliction of positive punishment. It is severe; it ought to be so; it ought to be feared. Is it cruel in a physical respect? Let us answer this question in the words of Mr. Vaux, page 7 of his Letter to Mr. Roscoe, who represents the cells to be "destined to contain an epitome and concentration of all human misery, of which the Bastile of France, and the Inquisition of Spain, were only prototypes and humble models." To which Mr. Vaux replies "The rooms of the new penitentiary at Philadelphia are fireproof, of comfortable dimensions, with convenient courts to each,* built on the surface of the ground, judiciously lighted from the roof, well ventilated and warmed, and ingeniously provided with means for affording a continual supply of excellent water, to insure the most perfect cleanliness of every prisoner and his *The exact size of the chambers is 8 feet by 12 feet, the highest point of the ceiling 16 feet. The yards are 8 feet by 20 feet.

In

apartment. They are, moreover, so arranged as to be inspected, and protected, without a military guard, usually, though unnecessarily, employed in establishments of this kind in most other states. these chambers no individual, however humble or elevated, can be confined, so long as the public liberty shall endure, but upon conviction of a known and welldefined offence, by the verdict of a jury of the country, and under the sentence of a court, for a specified time. The terms of imprisonment, it is believed, can be apportioned to the nature of every crime with considerable accuracy, and will, no doubt, be measured in that merciful degree which has uniformly characterized the modern penal legislation of Pennsylvania. Where, then,-allow me to inquire,— is there, in this system, the least resemblance to that dreadful receptacle constructed in Paris during the reign of Charles V, and which, at different periods, through four centuries and a half, was an engine of oppression and torture to thousands of innocent persons? Or by what detortion can it be compared to the inquisitorial courts and prisons that were instituted in Italy, Portugal and Spain, between the years 1251 and 1537 ?" Or is it believed that the influence of solitary confinement on the mind is cruel? that the human mind cannot bear it, and must be driven to madness? We believe this by no means to be the case. Mr. Vaux's testimony on this point is important. sanity, he says, in the pamphlet just quoted, seem not to be more frequent in jails than among the same number of persons in the ordinary condition of life. The cells of the old penitentiary are small and badly contrived, and yet many individuals have, for acts of violence committed in the prison, been confined in them for six, nine, and twelve months in succession, generally in irons, and always on a low diet; but no case of mental alienation has ever occurred there. When the mind becomes hardened by a career of vice, ultimately reaching a point of degradation which fits it for the perpetration of those crimes that are punishable under the penal statutes, no fear of exciting its tender sensibilities need be entertained, by its mere abstraction from equally guilty minds, so as to induce either melancholy or madness. All experience proves how difficult it is to make any impression whatever upon the feelings of the benighted and unhappy subjects of criminal punishment. As to the influ

Cases of in

ence of this system upon the health, we refer the reader to doctor Franklin Bache's letter to Mr. Vaux, contained in No. 8 of the Journal of Law (Philadelphia, October, 1830), which concludes with the words-"We may assert that the entire seclusion of criminals from all association with their fellow criminals, is altogether compatible with their profitable employment at useful trades, and with the preservation of their health." And in his letter to bishop White and others, Mr. Vaux adduces facts to confirm this statement. Not one case of the Asiatic cholera appeared in the Eastern prison of Pennsylvania, whilst the disease swept away numbers in the city of Philadelphia and its environs; and the prison stands close by the city. The report mentioned above will be, we understand, entirely satisfactory on the point of the health of the prisoners. The expense of the Pennsylvania system has always been considered a great objection to it. It is true that the Eastern prison has cost much; but another prison could be built much more cheaply; and, probably, experience will show the possibility of further reductions, though this system may always be more expensive than the other. Yet the advantages are so great; the final saving of the government, by preventing all the prisoners from leaving the prison worse than they were at the time of entering it, and by dismissing many who will return to duty and usefulness, is so decided; and the necessity of the system, if any of the desirable objects are to be obtained, so imperious, that we believe the greater expense ought not to be considered an objection wherever means exist to meet it. We shall quote Mr. Vaux also respecting this point. It is certain that the prisoners do not leave the Pennsylvania penitentiary worse than they entered it, are not irritated and embittered against mankind, and, if they have truly resolved to become better, are not exposed to be driven by associates in the prison to the commission of new crimes, which has hitherto been so common an occurrence, as every one knows who has paid attention to the history of convicts. Men confined in common prisons, or even in those conducted on the Auburn system, find it extremely difficult, after their release, to disentangle themselves from the net of vice, though they may earnestly wish to do so. But the Pennsylvania system does not even allow the convict to know the names of his fellow prisoners. The wish to return to a

*See note, p. 527, post, respecting the report of Messrs. Beaumont and Toqueville to the French gov.

life of honest industry is not so rare in released convicts as most persons suppose, provided the prisoner has not been kept in a state of constant contamination. A vicious life is not comfortable; generally the causes which make a wicked person prefer the path of crime to an honorable life, are twofold-idleness, reluctance to regular labor, and the love of excitement. If you can overcome these two dispositions; if you can instil into the convict a love of labor, and make it a habit with him; and if you can cure him of the craving for excitement, you will, in most cases, have laid the firmest foundation for a thorough reformation. Now, labor appears to the prisoner in solitary confinement as the sweetest comfort. He asks, he begs for it; and no punishment could be harder than denying him the comfort of labor in his lonely cell. They all will tell you so. And as regards the second point, what more effectual means can be found of curing a man of a vitiated love of excitement (such as is found in robbers, pirates, burglars, &c.) than uninterrupted confinement in solitude for years? It is a severe infliction, indeed; but it is effectual, and not more severe than is necessary. Another objection to perpetual solitude is, that the convicts cannot worship together; but in the Eastern prison of Pennsylvania, they have preaching addressed to them. A curtain is drawn along the corridor, the sound-hole of each cell is opened (see the description of the building in the article Prison Discipline), and the preacher stands at one end of the corridor, from which he may be heard by all the prisoners in that corridor, though no convict can see into the opposite cell, being prevented by the curtain.-In our opinion, the Pennsylvania penitentiary system is the creation of a spirit of enlightened humanity, which reflects the greatest honor on the disciples of Penn, and has solved one of the most difficult problems presented to the lover of mankind. If widely adopted, as it probably will be, it bids fair to accomplish all that can be attained in the way of prison discipline. We would direct our reader's attention to an interesting letter on the subject of solitary confinement, written by a convict, and appended to Mr. Vaux's letter, quoted above, and will conclude our remarks with a summary taken from Mr. Vaux's letter to Mr. Roscoe :-" By sepa rate confinement, it is intended to punish those who will not control their wicked passions and propensities, and, moreover, to effect this punishment without ter

minating the life of the culprit in the midst of his wickedness, or making a mockery of justice by forming such into communities of hardened and corrupting transgressors, who enjoy each other's society, and contemn the very power which thus vainly seeks their restoration, and idly calculates to afford security to the state, from their outrages in future. In separate confinement, every prisoner is placed beyond the possibility of being made more corrupt by his imprisonment. In separate confinement, the prisoners will not know who are undergoing punishment at the same time with themselves, and thus will be afforded one of the greatest protections to such as may happily be enabled to form resolutions to behave well when they are discharged. In separate confinement, it is especially intended to furnish the criminal with every opportunity which Christian duty enjoins, for promoting his restoration to the path of virtue; because seclusion is believed to be an essential ingredient in moral treatment, and, with religious instruction and advice superadded, is calculated to achieve more than has ever yet been done for the miserable tenants of our penitentiaries. In separate confinement, a specific graduation of punishment can be obtained, as surely, and with as much facility, as by any other system. Some prisoners may laborsome may be kept without labor-some may have the privilege of books-others may be deprived of it-some may experience total seclusion-others may enjoy such intercourse as shall comport with an entire separation of prisoners. In separate confinement, the same variety of discipline, for offences committed after convicts are introduced into prison, which any other mode affords, can be obtained (though irregularities must necessarily be less frequent), by denying the refractory individual the benefit of his yard, by taking from him his books or labor, and lastly, in extreme cases, by diminishing his diet to the lowest rate. By the last means, the most fierce, hardened and desperate offender can be subdued. From separate confinement other advantages of an economical nature will result: among these may be mentioned a great reduction of the terms of imprisonment; for, instead of from three to twenty years, and sometimes longer, as many months, excepting for very atrocious crimes, will answer all the ends of retributive justice, and penitential experience, which, on the actual plan, the greatest detention in prison alto

gether fails to accomplish. Besides this abatement of expense in maintaining prisoners, very few keepers will be required on the new system; and the females should be intrusted wholly to the custody of suitable individuals of their own sex, whose services can, of course, be secured for less compensation than those of men. Such of the prisoners as may be employed, will necessarily labor alone; and, the kinds of business in which they will be engaged not being as rough and exposing as those now adopted, the expenditure for clothing must be much diminished. On the score of cost, therefore, if that indeed be an object in a work of this magnitude,—the solitary plan recommends itself to the regard of the public economist. But the problem of expense, in my opinion, can only be truly solved by showing the cheapest method of keeping prisoners to be, that which is most likely to reform them, to deter others, by the imposing character of the punishment, from preying upon the honest and unoffending members of society, afterwards involving heavy judicial costs to establish their guilt, and becoming, at last, a charge to the country as convicted felons."

PÉRIER, Casimir, died at Paris, May 16, 1832.

PETS. (See Funfkirchen.)
PHANARIOTS. (See Fanariots.)

PHANSYGURS, or THUGS; a remarkable race of professional murderers in some parts of Hindoostan. Having been compelled, in a great measure, to abandon their sanguinary trade in the original territories of the British government, they have, of late years, pursued their operations principally in the newly-acquired provinces of North-western and Central India, where, from the scantier population, and comparatively backward state of the country, they run less hazard of interruption. A thug is a Hindoo of a low caste, or a Mussulman, who, at the conclusion of his agricultural labors, about the commencement of the hot season, in March and April, quits his village, and goes forth to make a little money by strangling-an art in which he sometimes becomes a great proficient, always, if dexterous, performing it with a pockethandkerchief, in preference to a noose, to avoid suspicion. The hot season is chosen for this excursion, because then people travel by night, and thus afford better opportunities for attack. When the rainy season begins, in July or August, the thug returns, with his share of