Inspectors have also sometimes been removed, (shame ful to tell,) upon the mere principle of party spirit, not withstanding it was known that they were deeply interest ed in the success of the institution, and had greatly dimi nished its expenses by their economical arrangements and profitable purchases, the effect of their watchful attention and meritorious zeal. Upon other occasions, owing to the pride of shewing a little of the " brief authority" with which they were invested; or to their being the dupes of the ingenious and hypocritical ; prisoners have been released from the solitary cells in which they were confin ed for some gross outrage, by order of an inspector, whose time of service had recently expired, and permitted to enjoy the luxury of labouring and sleeping in society, or had the nature of their work changed and lightened. Such interference with the orders of a predecessor defeats the law, and encourages the obdurate in their breaches of good conduct ; and is a triumph to the bad passions of a favoured convict, which cannot fail of doing away any im pression which confinement might have produced upon his mind. A discretionary power would seem to be pro perly lodged with the inspectors, respecting the length of time necessary to break down an obdurate spirit by soli tary confinement ; and if they were not so often changed, no evil might arise from trusting them with it ; but as it has been, and will be, injudiciously exercised, provision ought to be made to prevent the intentions of the law from being defeated thereby. Prisoners are commonly doomed to undergo a certain period of confinement in the solitary cells : but the inspectors do not enforce this part of of the sentence to the full extent. One reason for this omission is the want of a sufficient number of cells ; but often solitary confinement is entirely dispensed with, al though expressly enjoined ; or, if imposed, it is not for a twentieth part of the time ordered by the judges.
But the principle itself of the penitentiary system, that is, of the moral effect of labour in society, on convicts, is, I fear, the reformation of most crimi nals. It was a plausible theory, that constant labour for several years, uninterrupted sobriety, mild diet, regula rity of conduct, and the habit of work acquired by the convicts during their confinement, with the aid of reli gious instruction, would work such a revolution in their moral faculties, that they would prefer a life of honest industry, and pursue it after their liberation; but, un fortunately, these desirable effects have not been produ ced. The documents Of the prison of Philadelphia, and of those in the other states in which the penal code of Pennsylvania have been tried, show that, with two or three exceptions, it has failed to reform criminals, even after repeated and long trials of its salutary effects on the same person. As it is important to establish this point, I shall proceed to give the proofs.
I. The number of convicts received into the Peniten tiary of Philadelphia, from the year 1790, until the year 1616, amount to two thousand four hundred and ninety. I am unable to state precisely the number of individuals included in that amount, who were convicted a second timt, or oftener, in Pennsylvania, by reason of no note having been taken of the fact by the keepers of the pri son; but I have it in my power to give a partial state ment on this point, made at my request, from the actual examination of the convicts; and the fact of such annual reconvictions is notorious.—"'The whole number of con
victs in the prison on the 24th of August, 1819, was four hundred and sixteen, of whom seventy-three had been twice convicted; twenty-five, three times; seven, four times; and two, five times ! Of three hundred and nine, who were then imprisoned for the first time in Philadel phia, many were known to have been convicts in other states, but the precise number cannot be given. Of sixty three women convicts, seventeen have been twice convict ed; and two, three times." The report compiled for the " American Sentinel," of Philadelphia, and published January, 1819, of the session of over and terminer, then recently closed, stated, that of twenty-seven persons on whom true bills were found, sixteen were old offenders. In January, 1817, of four hundred and fifty-one convicts then in prison, one hundred and sixty-two had been before committed.* Even in 1795, four years after the introduction of the new penal code, and when there was sufficient room in the prison for the separation of the convicts day and night, five reconvic tions took From the year 1810 to 1819, both inclusive, the num ber of convicts were 2824, of these there had been convicted once - 2352 twice - 409 three times - 54 four times - 7 six times - 2 In the year 1820, 182 were discharged, having served out their times. Of these 18 were readmitted during the same year, and one of 51 who had been pardoned.
In the year 1821, 182 served out their time : 24 of whom were reconvicted during the same year.
Other states have not been more fortunate in the refor mation of criminals by the same mode.—In the report first transmitted by the warden of the state prison of Massachusetts, the whole number of persons committed since its establishment in December, 1805, to October 1, 1819, amounted to 1305, viz. 1216 males, and 89 females. Of these, one hundred and eighteen had been twice con victed in Massachusetts ; and eight had been once, or oftener, in some other penitentiary ; fifteen had been con victed a third time, three of whom had been previously in some other penitentiary ; seven were in on a fourth con • viction, one of whom had undergone a similar discipline ; and two are in on a fifth conviction ! Total committed from 1805 to January 1821; 1471 Of these there were committed a second time - 133 A third do. 17 A fourth do. 8 Sentenced for life 126 Seven of these arc so sentenced under a new law, being " third comers." To these must be added 20 of 242 who had been pardoned./ New total amount of convicts admitted in to the state prison from 1797, to the 31st of December, 1814, was three thousand and sixty-two; of which num ber there had returned for the second time, two hundred and eighteen ; for the third time, thirty-three; for the fifth, one l§ New Jersey.—From September, 1798, to October 15, 1819, eight hundred and five prisoners were received; of whom, thirty-seven are in on second convictions, four on a third, and one on a fourth. Of the whole number, forty six are known to have been in other prisons, and probably more.