The Delinquent (Vol. IV, No. 1), January, 1914Various
History
The Delinquent (Vol. IV, No. 1), January, 1914
Various
Prisons -- Periodicals
The reluctance of these prison officers to shape their course to the
new requirements, I believe, was based upon sincere conviction. The
influence of their attitude upon results can only be conjectured. In
this connection it ought to be stated that these officers asserted
that whipping was less inhuman than the substitutes provided. These
substitutes were chaining-up and dark-celling. The former consists of
fettering the convict’s wrists at the end of chains suspended from
above at such height as to cause him to stand erect, but flat-footed,
with his arms extended as high as they will go. There have been some
complaints that convicts have been chained so high as to require them
to stand tip-toe. The possibilities in the use of the dark-cell were
illustrated in the Harlem farm tragedy.
A part of the prison system’s losses from operation were admittedly due
to the following named causes:
1. Heavy damage to cane crop of 1911 by freeze.
2. Damage to cane and other crops in 1912 by drouth.
3. Burning of certain shops in Rusk and Huntsville
prisons, the losses aggregating $286,931. Neither the
indebtedness nor operating account were affected to the
full amount of this loss, for only about $60,000 was
expended in replacements. But both indebtedness and
operating loss were further swelled, to an unmeasured
extent, by reason of the interruption and disorganization
of industries; for a time there was no work for many of
the convicts to do.
There was also evidence in the investigation to show that the plan
of organization was imperfect. For one thing, the commissioners were
serving under the statute, with their terms limited to two years, and
they were therefore subject to removal in the event of change in the
office of governor. Also, under this law, they were serving in the dual
capacity of directors and executive officials. The system, therefore,
had three heads of co-equal authority. Much of the testimony indicated
that this system did not work well. The men who wrote the prison bill
in 1910 did not originally intend to provide such a system, but at the
last moment they changed their bill in response to an eloquent plea in
behalf of the “commission form of government.”
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account