Prison

Modern Theories.

The re-action that became manifest towards the close of the last century against what is known as the "classical" conception of crime and punishments had an echo in England. This re-action came in the early 'eighties from a school of criminologists, known as the "Italian school," of which the chief was Lombroso. Theories of the "born criminal," i.e., a human being foredoomed to crime by atavistic propensity, and distinguishable physical stigmata, created considerable sensation at the time and, though refuted by later enquiry, exercised a pro found influence in Europe and gave a direct impulse to the scientific study of the causes predisposing to criminal acts. At this time, 1869, was founded on the continent of Europe "1"Union internationale de droit penal"—chiefly under Belgian and Ger man influences (Van Hamel, Liszt and Prins). It was an attempt to reconcile the extreme views of the Italian school with the modern doctrine which is known as "preventive treatment," i.e., the scientific study of the causes of crime in each individual case, be they due to internal or external factors, either physiological, concerned with the mental or physical state of the offender, or external, i.e., the result of social conditions.

This theory, which has been strongly endorsed by eminent French writers (e.g., Saleilles), is known generally as that of The individualisation of punishment. Imprisonment, the one and only instrument for the punishment of crime, is flouted as an anachro nism. In other words it is a protest in the general interests of humanity against the mechanical infliction of penalty with the resulting evil of a constant repetition of short sentences. Strangely enough, these controversies received but little attention in Eng land, but their influence contributed to the criticisms made at the end of the century, against the English prison system.

A formal enquiry instituted by the Government in 1894 marks a new and distinct epoch in the prison history of Great Britain.

It declared (a grave indictment) that "prisoners had been treated too much as a hopeless element of the community." These words may be said to mark the passage from the old to the new methods of punishment.

Among many and almost fundamental changes which were suggested, dealing with almost every branch of the administration, the principal was the grave importance attracted to the concen tration of effort on the young or incipient criminal. At this time persons under 16 (even under 12) were being sent to prison in considerable numbers and the average number of youths 16-21 committed annually to prison was about 20,000.

At the same time, it was suggested that as a means of dealing effectively with crime in its later stages, technically known as "professional" crime, i.e., with persons living systematically by

crime and whom experience had shown not to be restrained by the fear of ordinary punishments, a new sentence should be placed at the disposal of judges, which supplementary to a sen tence of penal servitude, might have a deterring or at least a protective effect.

At this time, 189o, on the retirement of Sir E, Du Cane, Sir E. Ruggles Brise succeeded as chairman of the prison commission. The following are the principal statutes which have altered the system since this date.

(I) The Prison Act, 1898.—The most notable changes in troduced by this act are : (a) The triple division of prisoners according to degree and character of offence. (b) The power to earn remission of sentence, not exceeding one-sixth where the sentence is over a, month. (c) The power given to enable a prisoner whose sentence is in default of fine to obtain release by part-payment of the fine. (d) Provision against excessive or un necessary exercise of the powers of corporal punishment. (e) Power given to secretary of State to effect any change in the system by parliamentary rule, without recourse to act of parlia ment. (f) The abolition of all forms of so-called hard labour, treadwheels, cranks, etc.

(2) The Prevention of Crime Act, 1908.—This act achieved two great and startling results. (a) The establishment of the Borstal system. (b) The system of preventive detention as a means of protecting society from the dangerous or habitual criminal.

These were the two objects on which special stress was laid by the inquiry of 1894, and since that date great and special at tention has been given to effect the double purpose, viz.:—to check the criminal habit or tendency in the case of the young offender, and to increase the deterrence of punishments in the case of the older criminal, who could not be restrained by or dinary and repeated sentences.

(a) The new "Borstal" Act created an entirely new category of offenders between the age of 16-21, to be known colloquially as "juvenile-adult" or "adolescent" offenders. For these, where the court was satisfied that "criminal habit and tendency or as sociation was proved," power was given to order detention for any period up to three years in a State reformatory, known as a "Borstal institution," taking its name from the village of Borstal on the Medway, where the first experiments, leading up to the system, were made. The successful efforts of the official staff have been aided by the Borstal association, a society created to safeguard and protect the case of every inmate, of either sex, on discharge from a Borstal institution.