The Kansas University Quarterly : $b Vol. I, No. 4, April 1893Various
History
The Kansas University Quarterly : $b Vol. I, No. 4, April 1893
Various
Natural history -- Periodicals; Science -- Periodicals
Within the prison walls classification of individual prisoners
according to crimes, temperament and habits has been of great
assistance in their management. In the United States there are two main
systems in vogue, that known as the Pennsylvania System and that as the
New York System. The former may be defined as the solitary cellular
system, and the latter as the single cell system, with prisoners
working and dining together. The Pennsylvania system had its origin in
the celebrated Cherry Hill prison, built in 1821 to 1829, containing
over 600 separate cells for continuous solitary confinement. This
solitary confinement in large airy rooms is expensive but is considered
as the best treatment of prisoners. Here the prisoner is kept at work,
or instructed in trades or books. Work becomes a necessity to him. The
only punishment is a dark cell with deprivation of work for a period.
The New York system is as has been practiced at Auburn, by which the
prisoners are confined in solitary cells during the night, but have
companionship during the day while at work, and at the dinner table.
Each system has warm advocates. The solitary cell system has had most
practice in Europe but the American plan has made up the lack of proper
classification by the excessive work of prisoners.
Many persons hold that classification of prisoners in groups is a
failure, and that the solitary cellular system is the only commendable
method. Edward Livingston has thus set forth the advantages of this
system:
“Every association of convicts that can be formed will, in a greater
or less degree, corrupt, but will never reform those of which it is
composed, and we are brought to the irresistible conclusion that
classification once admitted to be useful, it is so in an inverse
proportion to the numbers of which each class is composed. But it is
not perfect until we come to the plan at which it loses its name and
nature in the complete separation of individuals. We come then to the
conclusion that each convict is to be separated from his fellows.”[4]
The extent of isolation which each prisoner undergoes must be
determined somewhat by the nature of his case and somewhat by the
conditions and convenience of the prison. It is hardly possible for
many modern prisons to have complete separation on account of the
expense incurred, for this would mean that within the cell itself the
prisoner must perform all labor, and that the cell shall be commodious
enough to carry on this labor by himself, or else that he be given
labor elsewhere alone. Such a system requires an increased amount of
attendance.
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