By far the most important improvement that followed this report was the adoption of the "mark system;" in other words, of a method by which remission was to be regulated, not by conduct as heretofore, but solely by labour actually performed. For it must be understood that the commissioners unhesitatingly accepted the principle of remissions. In this they were at issue with the Lord Chief Justice, who thought that no prisoner should escape one particle of the whole sentence laid upon him by the judge. "It was most material," he said, "to the full efficiency of punishment that its infliction should be certain." The door was opened to doubt and uncertainty the moment the precise term of the sentence was interfered with. The objection was cogent if the remissions were to be granted in a haphazard, capricious fashion and not by regular rule. But surely, if the scale were drawn up on a regular plan and worked without deviation, a sentence with remission might be just as certain as one without. The former might, perhaps, be shorter than the latter--the judges, being perfectly aware of the possible remission, would regulate their sentences in proportion to this abridgment. And, on the other hand, there was a clear and distinct gain to be expected from the practice of remitting sentences. This was fully recognised by the commissioners, who considered the hope of earning some remission the most powerful incentive to industry and good conduct which could be brought to act upon the minds of prisoners. The commissioners perhaps laid more stress on good conduct than was absolutely imperative, although they pointed out, very pertinently, that "good conduct in a prison (apart from industry) can consist only in abstaining from misconduct, which gives no just claim for reward." But this harping upon good conduct was a weak point in their armour which the Lord Chief Justice quickly discovered. He would not admit the necessity for thus coaxing convicts into obedience by promising them an earlier release if they behaved well. That was no argument, he said, for remissions. Discipline ought to be strong enough to be independent of such questionable support. "I can see no reason to think," he continues,--"considering the powers of coercion, discipline, and reduction of diet, possessed by the prison authorities--that, by the application of firmness and determination with a sufficient force of officers, convicts, especially if not massed in too great numbers, but judiciously distributed, may not be kept under perfect control and discipline."