"Causing punishment." What an idea!

The chaplain saw the changes attempted to be brought upon the prisoners, and thought he understood something of the effects which the move would produce on their minds and the results likely to follow. He knew that to some extent he had the confidence of the men, that they were looking to him as their friend, and as working for their best good; that, therefore, he could, by carefully using his influence in a quiet, una.s.suming way, help slide the matters round the very sharp corner which was being turned, and thus, on the one hand, make things more endurable to the inmates, and, on the other, easier for the rulers. With an eye single to this purpose he acted, and has the satisfaction of possessing pretty clear evidence that he prevented a measure of trouble in the prison, and thus rendered the warden some aid at least, and made his task somewhat easier. Indeed, he did what he could in that direction, though with no blowing of trumpets. And, after doing all this, to be held up in this light by the agent is a pretty hard cut.

Now, one of two things is true in regard to all the quotations above made. The a.s.sertors either believed they were telling the truth or they did not. If the former be taken, if they really thought they could purchase the articles they did and from them make the best quality of food; if they really supposed the chaplain's moves were as deleterious as they represent, what does it show in regard to their judgment as fitting them for place and trust? or, if the other, what of their character as to truth and veracity? Let them take which horn of the dilemma they may choose.

One perhaps says, "The writers were so informed about the chaplain."

Could that be any extenuation of their wrong? If such insinuations had been made to them, why did they not first give some intimation of it to him, thus giving him the opportunity of showing their falsity? Why did they not have the parties face to face, and thus learn the truth? But, instead of this, they published what they did, and that to the injury of an innocent man, so far as their influence could go.

But what could have impelled the a.s.sertors to such a course? The author does not pretend to know, but it looks as though the object was in this way to push the chaplain to resign, and they thus be rid of those reform efforts. Hence p. 13,--"The prison is a penal inst.i.tution, and is intended for punishment, not primarily as a reformative one, as some people think." Here is, undoubtedly, the key to this raid on the chaplain. But what is its full import? These reformers fully believe that the sentence of the court must be strictly carried out, and that, too, as an element of reform. The above sentence must mean that the prisoner is put there to be punished as the State directs by its laws and courts, and, in addition, for the managers to "use him so that he will not wish to come back," or to punish him as they may choose. If the sentence means anything, it must mean that. This being the true way, let us have it so understood, and, next summer, let the legislature recognize the idea by a specific act, and then let the judge change his sentence accordingly, putting it, "Your sentence is, that you be confined at hard labor in the State Prison at Concord for ---- years, and that you there be further punished at the discretion of the prison officers acting for the time being." Let this be announced to all evildoers; and, further, let the warden, agent and all, give a true account of the severity of their several punishments, to be published yearly, that the prison may thus appear as deterring to crime as possible. Away with this covering up and pretending to the best living and best usage generally, thus making the inst.i.tution appear so attractive. A lady visited a friend there and returned, having been made, by the warden's palaver, perfectly reconciled to the friend's condition, remarking, "They are kept so well there, and used so kindly, that one can not feel bad at all about a friend in the prison, except from the fact that he can not have his liberty to go out as he chooses."

I protest against such proceedings. But let the truth stand forth, just as it is, that the wicked may really know upon what they must depend.

Why not put out the sentiment squarely that reform moves have no place in the prison? Let us be truthful in this, too. Then dismiss the chaplain and save that expense to the State, for he can be of no use.

It is made evident that the writers would banish from prison all reform moves from this a.s.sertion, p. 13,--"We think, sometimes, the matter of reform or sympathy for the prisoners is carried so far, in attempting to reform, as to lead the prisoners to believe that they are injured persons instead of transgressors, which is, in our opinion, wrong, and has a bad tendency." Is not the writer here a little muddled? or would he hold up these reformers as so absurd a set as to think of reforming men by making them believe they are good already and really sinned against? Indeed, would not the labors of such men of straw be bad? True, the writer pretends to found his objections to the reform efforts on the fact that they are carried too far, not perhaps, feeling exactly ready, at this late day, to come out squarely against efforts to raise the fallen, and to induce the erring to become good citizens. No, but it is "carrying the matter too far." Just as though we could go too far in efforts for saving the drowning man. Away with such a sham!

This indirect charge must have been aimed at the chaplain, for he was the only prison officer, that year, who could rightly be accused of such a crime as attempting reform moves.

We are again told that Mr. P. had brought the inst.i.tution to where it was "with firmness, but with kindness and a Christian spirit," which unfolds the writer's views of "kindness" and the "Christian spirit." No doubt the prisoners were just wicked enough to say, "Lord, deliver us from all such 'Christian spirit.'"

We are further a.s.sured, that Mr. P. "has accomplished wonders in this direction, for, in our view, there is now no better disciplined prison in the N. E. states."

That is a very comfortable feeling, very much more so than the emotions of some, who, going into others States, are made to blush at the taunts thrown out about our prison management, that "such things will do for you N. H. folks, for those so far on the background."

But let us turn to the financial part of the Report. Long before the doc.u.ment made its appearance, it had been heralded far and wide in the papers that those now running the prison had made it produce a clear gain of over five thousand dollars in nine months. Of course, making this announcement was for personal popularity. Let us look at the figures after the Report comes to hand. Number of prisoners, 85 males and 6 females. Profits reported for nine months and twenty days, $5173.51, including $396.65 paid on roofing shop. Without deducting this item, we have $5570.16 gain over the real running expenses, which, for a whole year, would amount to $6914.67. Let us compare this with the gain of the Ma.s.sachusetts State Prison for '72, that Report being at hand.

Its number of inmates were 543. If our 91 prisoners gained what they are represented, then 543, in that proportion, would gain $41,260.06, without considering the advantage in larger numbers. Reckoning that in, it would raise this gain to some $45,000, no doubt, the gain of Ma.s.sachusetts in proportion to ours. But what was her gain? It was $14,635.23, ours being, in proportion, more than three times as much as hers, we thus leaving her all out of sight.

The writers say, p. 11, in regard to Mr. P., "His management has been perfectly satisfactory to your committee. The results of his administration are the most conclusive proofs of its efficiency." Do any wonder that the committee should be satisfied with such showing, if looking to nothing but to the dollars and cents?

But does not the announcement itself show an aggravated wrong to the prisoners, or a false representation? It must be one or the other, if not both. There is no possible way to accomplish all this by honest shrewdness in financiering and rightful treatment to the convicts. All articles of food have their market value. If really suitable for use, the value is fixed for the time being, from which no material deduction can be had. Things have their wholesale and retail prices. True, these vary more or less, from accidental causes, such as the abundance or scarcity of the article, the state of the money market, or the season of the year. Buyers, by watching these accidental influences, may purchase more or less to their advantage. And one can look to these points, and profit from them, as well as another. Prison providers, especially in large establishments, will purchase, of course, at wholesale, and those at Charlestown enjoy quite as good advantages, to say the least, for sharing in these accidentals as those at Concord; and they no doubt look out quite as shrewdly. If, however, one is willing to turn from articles fit for use, he can find those as cheap as he desires, going down from thirteen cents to three or one, if he likes.

Then this boast of great gains at our prison gives a suspicious look, to say the least. If we allow for all that cruel cutting off, previously depicted, and even more, that would not bring the accounts to what would appear probable. The agent, in purchasing legitimate articles, manifested no skill beyond others. He certainly ran behind on wood as as I happened to learn by experience. The man who furnished the prison with this, agreed to supply some for me, of the same quality and price, but failed to bring it at the time, which forced me to look elsewhere for what I needed and which I found, with no extra painstaking and at a bargain, reckoning price and quality, better by one dollar at least per cord.

But if this withholding from the prisoners what they so greatly needed and what was their just due, will not bring the accounts within the region of probability, to what source shall we look for the discrepancy?

Let us examine the accounts carefully and see what we thus find. True, it is said, "Figures won't lie," but men, when disposed, may so use them as to lead wide of the truth. In our examination we find the same dealing as before pointed out. Important items of expense in running the inst.i.tution are deliberately omitted in reckoning. Thus, there is the warden's salary of $1000, the chaplain's, $750, printing the Report, $121,98, appraisers', $78, amounting to $1949,98. Subtracting this from the pretended gain, $6914,67 - 1949,98, gives 4964,69. Let us see what this would be with the Charlestown number of men, $29,625,56, over two times the comparative gain at Charlestown, a very large margin to be accounted for in our withholding.

Certainly we can not afford to boast very loudly over these figures, but should rather blush. The reader should bear in mind, that the prisoners are let at both places on contract, ours at ninety cents per day, and those in Ma.s.sachusetts for over one dollar, so that her prison managers enjoy an advantage over ours for rolling up gains. And when we talk of gaining more than twice as much as she, we have reason to fear that those hearing us will say, that too many of those dollars were ground out of the flesh, and blood, and sinews, and life even of the prisoners,--not a very welcome sentiment.

45. _Efforts of the Prison Aid a.s.sociation for legislation in favor of the prison._ The Governor, in his message of '69, proposed that the prison be put under the management of a Board especially appointed to that purpose. But, instead of this, and in connection, making such other provisions for the inst.i.tution as were really needed, the legislature simply pa.s.sed the whole matter over into the hands of the Governor and Council, as this Board, an improvement somewhat, no doubt, over the former system, but an arrangement, which, in the views of many of our best citizens, carries with it grave objections.

The Board, thus const.i.tuted, is a changeable body, the members never remaining in office more than two years, and sometimes but one. As a result, the prison must necessarily be managed largely by the inexperienced, for the men, generally, no doubt, come to the office without having given any special attention to the subject. This is much like setting a company of untaught landsmen to navigate a ship.

Again, the prison is liable to no little changeableness in its mode of being directed, a great detriment to its welfare, unless it be from bad to good. Men will possess their varying notions, and some, though lacking a knowledge of the best prison interests, will persist in having their peculiar views put in practice, however conflicting and contradictory. It is also now liable to be left largely in the hands of the warden to be run as he wills, besides being exposed to the unfavorable effects of political party influence. Finally, the inst.i.tution can receive only its part of the largely divided attention of its managers, and thereby, at times, be liable to inconvenience.

But the best interest of the prison evidently demands the control of men especially adapted to their task, men who shall form a body with all possible permanence, possess ripe experience, be free in their rule from partisan control, who shall make the inst.i.tution their speciality, and manage after some fixed policy involving the most enlightened principles, principles of true reform.

The a.s.sociation took up these matters, and for the purpose of obtaining legislation looking as undividedly in this direction as possible, appointed a committee, of which Rev. Mr. Sanborn of Concord served as chairman, who should, after due investigation and correspondence with other States, prepare the requisite bill for legislative consideration.

After much labor, the following, as subsequently amended, was presented to the legislature at its session in '71.

STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE.

IN THE YEAR OF OUR LORD ONE THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED AND SEVENTY-ONE.

An act in relation to the Penal Inst.i.tutions.

_Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court convened:_

SECTION 1. There shall be a Board of directors of Prisons to consist of five persons appointed by the Governor, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, who shall hold office for five years, except that the five first appointed shall hold their office for 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 years respectively, the commission of each designating his term of office. Thereafter one Director shall be appointed annually in the month of June, to hold his office five years. Such Board shall have charge and superintendence of the State Prison, and shall have such power, and perform such duties in respect to County Jails, the Reform School and other penal and reformatory inst.i.tutions within the State, as the Legislature may by law impose upon it. The Board may, from time to time, elect from its own members or otherwise, a Secretary, who shall perform such duties as the Board may prescribe, and shall receive such salary as the Legislature may determine. The other members of the Board shall receive no compensation, other than reasonable and other traveling expenses, while engaged in the performance of official duty. And the limit of such expenses shall be in amount ---- to each individual, which shall not be changed except at intervals of five years.

SECTION 2. Such Board shall have power,

I. To appoint the Warden, Deputy Warden, Chaplain, Physician and Surgeon of the State Prison, and shall have power to remove either of such officers, for cause only, after opportunity to be heard in his own defense upon written charges. All other officers and guards of the prison shall be appointed by the Warden thereof, and shall be removable at his pleasure.

II. To define the powers, duties and compensation of such officers, except the compensation of the Warden.

III. To establish by-laws for the government of the prison.

IV. To provide for the purchase of all articles necessary for the use of the prison, or the health and comfort of the officers and prisoners.

V. To provide for the sale of all articles manufactured in the prison or not needed for the use thereof.

VI. To make contracts, if expedient, for the support and employment of the prisoners or any portion of them.

VII. To make all necessary additions, alterations and repairs within the prison or its inclosure.

VIII. To provide such books and instruction as may be considered necessary for the convicts.

IX. To draw its warrant through its Secretary upon the State Treasurer in favor of the Warden for all appropriations made by the Legislature for the State Prison.

SECTION 3. Such Board shall visit the State Prison at least once every month, and oftener, when thought necessary, for the purposes of ascertaining whether the laws, rules and regulations are faithfully observed.

SECTION 4. The Governor may remove either of the Directors of the Prison for malfeasance or misfeasance in office, after having furnished him with a copy of the charges against him, and giving him an opportunity to be heard in his own defense.

SECTION 5. All acts and parts of acts, inconsistent with this act, are hereby repealed, and this act shall take effect from and after its pa.s.sage.

This bill was presented and went to the judiciary committee of the House, a body composed of two ex-judges and other gentlemen of influence, all of whom favored it, some saying to me, privately, that it was the very thing needed. The committee reported it unanimously. It pa.s.sed the House with no opposition, and so also the Senate, the final vote having been taken when some private interest in Concord started up to defeat the measure and induced a member of the Senate to move a reconsideration of that vote. His move prevailed, and the bill was referred back to the Senate committee, before which this interest appeared in objection to the measure, while friends were present in its advocacy. The committee again reported unanimously in favor of the pa.s.sage of the doc.u.ment, but on taking final action it was postponed to the next session of the legislature.

Here was the point where the story circulated of the warden and chaplain quarrel, that this bill was the embodiment of certain peculiar notions of the latter which he was pushing to the disadvantage of the former, muddling some of the Senate, and thus leading them to think it not best to be "mixed up in the matter," and so to vote that the measure be put over.

It is wonderful to think how slight an influence will sometimes thwart an important measure in pa.s.sage at the legislature. A mere whisper of some whim, a little prejudice against another, perhaps may put it all aside. How little attention is given to merit! This is true even of Hon.

Senators. To one of these I spoke about his vote within ten minutes after he had given it, and he replied,--"I don't know, I am sure, how I voted, for I did not care anything about it."

The fact is, this bill did not originate with me. I had nothing to do with it, not being on the committee who framed it. But, as Agent of the a.s.sociation, I spent more or less time at the State House, looking after the interest of the measure.

The next session the bill came up in the Senate again, and, through the same interest as before, probably, it was indefinitely postponed and another put on pa.s.sage in its stead, which went to the House committee on prisons. But they did not think it worthy of being reported, and that died. A member of the committee remarked that it appeared to be a scheme started by one for the purpose of making a comfortable place for himself. And he, no doubt, had the right of it, for the prominent provision was that the Board should consist of three, one of whom must be a resident of Concord, and not be allowed over four hundred dollars.

That would be a nice thing for the Concord man. Thus matters stand at present so far as legislation is concerned.