Elizabeth Fry (Pitman 1884)/Chapter 16
CHAPTER XVI.
FINIS.
Since the days when John Howard, Elizabeth Fry, and other prison-reformers first commenced to grapple with the great problems of how to treat criminals, many, animated by the purest motives, have followed in the same path. To Captain Maconochie, perhaps, is due the system of rewards awarded to convicts who manifest a desire to amend, and show by their exemplary conduct that they are anxious to regain once more a fair position in society. Some anonymous writers have recently treated the public to books bearing on the convict system of our country; and professedly written, as they are, by men who have endured longer or shorter periods of penal servitude, their opinions and suggestions certainly count for something. The author of Five Years' Penal Servitude seems to entertain very decided opinions upon the present system and its faults. He speaks strongly against long sentences for first offences, but urges that they should be made more severe. He thinks that short sentences, made as severe as possible, consistent with safety to life, would act as a deterrent more effectually than the long punishments, which are, to a certain degree, mild to all well-conducted prisoners. He also most strongly advocates separation of prisoners; insisting that "the mixing of prisoners together is radically bad, and should at all costs be done away with. Men who are imprisoned for first offences, whether it be in a county gaol or a convict prison, should most certainly be kept perfectly distinct from 'second-timers,' and not on any account be brought into contact with old offenders, who, in too many cases, simply complete their education in vice." He further states, in a concise form, what, in his estimation, should be the aim of all penal measures. 1st. The punishment of those who have transgressed the laws of the country, and the deterring others from crime; 2nd. The getting rid of the troublesome and criminal class of the population; 3rd. The doing of this in the most efficient and least costly way to the tax-paying British public. He even quotes the opinion that New Guinea would be suitable as a place of disposal for the convict class. But many and good reasons have been given against shipping off criminals to be pests to other people; this system has been already tried, and failed to a large extent, although it certainly had redeeming features. Looking at the matter all round, it seems utterly impossible to devise a convict-system which shall meet fairly and justly all cases. Could some system be set in operation which should afford opportunity for the thoughtless and unwary criminal, who has heedlessly fallen into temptation, to retrace his steps and attain once more the height whence he has fallen, it would be a boon to society. On the other hand, the members of the really criminal class only anticipate liberty in order to use it for fresh crimes, for, in their opinion, the shame lies in detection, not in sinning. What can be done with such but to deal stringently with them, as with enemies against society? This writer can fully bear out Mrs. Fry's emphatic recommendations as to the imperative necessity that exists for complete separation and classification of the prisoners, in all our penal establishments. Association of the prisoners one with another, only carries on and completes their criminal and vicious education.
There is, however, a general consensus of opinion as to the desirability of reformatory, rather than punitive measures, being dealt out to children, and very young persons. This system has, in almost every case, been found to work well. The authors of The Gaol Cradle, Who Rocks It? and In Prison and Out, have dealt with the problem of juvenile crime—and not in vain. From the latter work, the following paragraph proves that in this matter, as in many others, Germany is abreast of the age:—
In Germany, no child under twelve years of age can suffer a penal sentence Between twelve and eighteen years of age, youthful criminals are free to declare whether, while committing the offence, they were fully aware of their culpability against the laws of their country. In every case, every term of imprisonment above one month is carried out, not in a gaol, but in an institution specially set apart and adapted for old offenders. These institutions serve not only for the purpose of punishment, but also provide for the education of the prisoners, the neglect of education being recognised as one of the chief sources crime.
Mrs. Fry dealt with women principally, and it was only in a very limited degree that she could benefit the children of these fallen ones. Still there can be no doubt that she did a large service to society by taking possession of them and educating them while with their mothers. What that work involved has been fully told in the preceding pages: its results no pen can compute. Woman-like, she aimed at the improvement of her own sex; but the reform which she inaugurated did not stop there. Like a circle caused by the descent of a pebble into a lake, it widened and extended and spread until she and her work became household words among all classes of society, and in all civilised countries. Most women would have shrunk back appalled at the terrible scene of degradation which Newgate presented when she first entered its wards as a visitor; others would have deemed it impossible to accomplish anything, save under the auspices of Government, and by the aid of public funds. Not thus did she regard the matter, but with earnest, oft-repeated endeavours, she set herself to stem the tide of sin and suffering to be found at that period in Government gaols, and so successfully that a radical change passed over the whole system before she died. Probably it is not too much to say that no labourer in the cause of prison-reform ever won a larger share of success. Certainly none ever received a larger meed of reverential love.
London: Printed by W. H. Allen & Co., 13 Waterloo Place, Pall Mall. S. W.