The journal of prison discipline and philanthropy (New series, No. 57), March, 1918Pennsylvania Prison Society
History
The journal of prison discipline and philanthropy (New series, No. 57), March, 1918
Pennsylvania Prison Society
Charities -- Periodicals; Prisons -- Periodicals
“A modern prison should be a beehive of industrial activity and should
be _more than self-supporting_. Indeed, men should be able to serve
their sentences and earn enough overtime money during their terms to
support their dependents--in part at least. A trade should be taught
when practicable, but even more important than a trade is the idea of
inculcating industrious habits. It is not a misfortune for men to have
to labor, but it is a blessing both for them and for us.
“Discipline should be strict but not arbitrary. The rules should be
based on experience and should be obviously sound.
“Punishment has a place in prison, but it should be logical; should, as
far as possible, flow as a natural consequence from the transgression
according to the pedagogical rule of Spencer.
“The industrial training should be correlated with the didactic
instruction and the prison library. The three should form the
tripartite educative force of the institution.”
THE HONOR SYSTEM.
As was naturally to be expected, the so-called Honor System received
a large share of attention, especially in the Wardens’ meetings. The
Wardens generally are opposed to that feature of the Honor System which
involves placing the discipline to any great extent in the hands of
the convicts. The experiments of Mr. Osborne at Auburn, Sing Sing and
Portsmouth are regarded as sporadic efforts largely affected by the
personality of a masterful, though sentimental, empiricist. Men who
have never governed themselves should not be elected to govern one
another. Mr. Erskine, of Connecticut, argued that it was wrong to base
any system on emotional appeal. “Twenty per cent. of the men in prison
are entirely bad and vicious; 20 per cent. would wield a good influence
if they had the opportunity, and the remaining 60 per cent. could be
swayed by either the good or the bad element.”
On the other hand it was stoutly contended that the prison was the
proper place for men to learn to govern themselves. Necessarily they
were confined to a limited area, and still subject to watchful care
by big-hearted, efficient advisers. Let them learn that discipline in
life is an essential feature of any community. Let them learn this
lesson by personal experimentation. Thus they may recover some sense
of self-respect. They will rejoin the outer world with some measure
of responsibility. They will return to freedom with a different
understanding of life.
Dr. Bernard Glueck, director of the psychological clinic at Sing Sing,
asserted that in general prison officials, through limitations to their
work, were not fully qualified to pass judgment on the subject, and had
not availed themselves of opportunities to carry out a comprehensive
system of self-government. He stated that such a system had proven to
be distinctly successful at Preston, California, and asked Mr. Calvin
Derrick, the founder of the School of Industry at Preston, to present
some account of this institution.
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account