# Elizabeth Fry (Pitman 1884)/Chapter 11

CHAPTER XI.
NEW THEORIES OF PRISON DISCIPLINE AND MANAGEMENT.
Mrs. Fry’s opinions on prison discipline and management were necessarily much opposed to those which had obtained prior to her day. No one who has followed her career attentively, can fail to perceive that her course of prison-management was based upon well arranged and carefully worked out principles. In various letters, in evidence before Committees of both Houses of Parliament, and in private intercourse, Mrs. Fry made these principles and rules as fully known and as widely proclaimed as it was possible to do. But, like all reformers, she felt the need of securing a wider dissemination of them. Evidence given before Committees, was, in many points, deferred to; private suggestions and recommendations were frequently adopted, but a large class of inquirers were too far from the sphere of her influence to be moved in this way. For the sake of these, and the general public, she deemed it wise to embody her opinions and rules in a treatise, which gives in small compass, but very clearly, the rationale of her treatment of prisoners; and lays down suggestions, hints, and principles upon ​which others could work. Within about seventy octavo pages, she discourses practically and plainly on the formation of Ladies’ Committees for visiting prisons, on the right method of proceeding in a prison after the formation of such a committee, on female officers in prisons, on separate prisons for females, on inspection and classification, on instruction and employment, on medical attendance, diet, and clothing, and on benevolent efforts for prisoners who have served their sentences. It is easy to recognise in these pages the Quakeress, the woman, and the Christian. She recommends to the attention of ladies, as departments for doing good, not only prisons, but lunatic asylums, hospitals, and workhouses. At the same time she strongly recommends that only orderly and experienced visitors should endeavour to penetrate into the abodes of vice and wickedness, which the prisons of England at that day mostly were. Among other judicious counsels for the conduct of these visitors occur the following, which read as coming from her own experience. That this was the case we may feel assured; Mrs. Fry was too wise and too womanly not to warn others from the pit-falls over which she had stumbled, or to permit anyone to fall into her early mistakes:—
“Much depends on the spirit in which the worker enters upon her work. It must be the spirit not of judgment but of mercy. She must not say in her heart, ‘I am holier than thou’; but must rather keep in perpetual remembrance that ‘all have sinned,’ and that, therefore, great pity is due from us even to the greatest transgressors among our fellow-creatures, and that in meekness and love we ought to labour for their restoration. The good principle in the hearts of many ​abandoned persons may be compared to the few remaining sparks of a nearly extinguished fire. By means of the utmost care and attention, united with the most gentle treatment, these may yet be fanned into a flame; but under the operation of a rough and violent hand they will presently disappear and be lost for ever. In our conduct to these unfortunate females, kindness, gentleness, and true humility ought ever to be united with serenity and firmness. Nor will it be safe ever to descend, in our intercourse with them, to familiarity, for there is a dignity in the Christian character which demands, and will obtain, respect; and which is powerful in its influence even over dissolute minds. . . . Neither is it by any means wise to converse with them on the subject of the crimes of which they are accused or convicted, for such conversation is injurious both to the criminals themselves and to others who hear them; and, moreover, too frequently leads them to add sin to sin, by uttering the grossest falsehoods. And those who engage in the interesting task of visiting criminals must not be impatient if they find the work of reformation a very slow one. . . . Much disadvantage will accrue generally from endeavours on the part of visiting ladies to procure the mitigation of the sentences of criminals. Such endeavours ought never to be made except where the cases are remarkably clear, and then through the official channels. Deeply as we must deplore the baneful effects of the punishment of death, and painful as we must feel it to be that our fellow-creatures, in whose welfare we are interested, should be prematurely plunged into an awful eternity, yet, while our laws continue as they are, unless they can bring forward decided facts in favour of the condemned, it is wiser for the visiting ladies to be ​quiet, and to submit to decrees which they cannot alter.”
In reference to the choice of officers, she strongly insists that all officers—superior and inferior—shall be females. She prefers a widow for the post of matron, because of her superior knowledge of the world and of life; and never should she or her subordinates be chosen “because the situation is suited to their wants, but because they are suited to fill the situation.” She holds it of the first importance that the matrons should not only be of a superior station in life, but that they should be decidedly religious. This little book was written in 1827, but from her insistance upon this as a first requisite in proper dealing with female prisoners, it appears likely that the then recent Act of Geo. IV. had not been commonly complied with. This Act provides that a “matron shall be appointed in every prison in which female prisoners shall be confined, who shall reside in the prison; and it shall be the duty of the matron constantly to superintend the female prisoners.” Again, another clause of the Act says, “Females shall in all cases be attended by female officers.” That these provisions had only been partially carried out, is proved by her words relative to this clause: “Since the passing of the late Act of Parliament for the regulations of prisons, our large gaols have been generally provided with a matron and female turnkeys; but it is much to be regretted that in many smaller prisons no such provisions have yet been adopted. Nor ought it to be concealed that the persons selected to fill the office of matron are, in various instances, unsuited to their posts; and in other cases are unfitted for its fulfilment, by residing out of the prison.”
​With respect to the classification of prisoners, Mrs. Fry recommends four classes or divisions which should comprise the total:—1st. Prisoners of previous good character, and guilty only of venial crimes. This class, she suggests, should be allowed to dress a little better and be put to lighter labours than the others. From their ranks, also, should temporary officers be selected, while small pecuniary rewards might be with propriety offered. 2nd. Prisoners convicted of more serious crimes. These should be treated with more strictness; but it should be possible for a prisoner, by constant good conduct and obedience to rules, to rise into the first class. 3rd. In this class the privileges were to be considerably diminished, while the 4th class consisted only of hardened offenders, guilty of serious crimes, and of those who had been frequently committed. “This class must undergo its peculiar privations and hardships.” Still, that hope may not entirely give place to despair, Mrs. Fry recommends that even these criminals should be eligible for promotion to the upper classes upon good behaviour. It will be seen that this system partook somewhat of Captain Machonochie’s merit, or good-mark ⟨s⟩ystem, introduced by him with such remarkable ⟨succe⟩ss into Norfolk Island.
Among other ⟨sug⟩gestions relative to the classification of prisoners ⟨we⟩ find one recommending the wearing of a ticket by each woman. Every ticket was to be inscribed with a number, which number should agree with the corresponding number on the class list. Each class list was to be kept by the matron or visitors, and was to include a register of the conduct of the prisoners. In the case of convicts on board convict-ships proceeding to the penal settlements, Mrs. Fry recommended that not only should the women wear ​these tickets, but that every article of clothing, every book, and every piece of bedding should be similarly numbered; even the convicts’ seats at table should be distinguished by the same numbers in order to prevent disputes, and to promote order and regularity.
She considered the most thorough, vigilant, and unremitting inspection essential to a correct system of prison discipline; by this means she anticipated that an effectual, if slow, change of habits might be produced.
With regard to the instruction of prisoners, she held decided views as to the primary importance of Scriptural knowledge. The Bible, and the Bible alone, was to be the text-book for this purpose, while nothing sectarian was to be admitted; but in their fullest sense, “the essential and saving principles of our common Christianity were to be inculcated.” She recommended reading, writing, arithmetic, and needle-work, the last to carry with it a little remuneration, in order to afford the women some encouragement. While acknowledging the wisdom of the Act of Parliament which provided that prayers should be read daily in all prisons, she strongly urges visitors and chaplains to teach privately “that true religion and saving faith are in their nature practical, and that the reality of repentance can be proved only by good works and by an amendment in life and conversation.”
For the employment of prisoners she recommends such occupations as patchwork, knitting stockings, making articles of plain needlework, washing, ironing, housework, cooking, spinning, and weaving. It should in all cases be constant, and in the worst cases, disciplinary labour. She recommends, under strict ​limitations, the treadmill for hardened, refractory, and depraved women, but only for short periods. All needleworkers especially should receive some remuneration for their work, which remuneration should be allowed to accumulate for their benefit by such time as their sentences expire, in order that when they leave prison they may possess a little money wherewith to commence the world afresh. Her words are: “The greater portion of their allotted share of earnings, however, must be reserved for them against the time of their leaving prison and returning to the world. The possession of a moderate sum of money will then be found of essential importance as the means of preventing an almost irresistible temptation, the temptation of want and money, to the renewal of criminal practices. And if, in labouring for this remuneration the poor criminal has also gained possession of the habit of industry, and has learned to appreciate the sweets of regular employment, it is more than probable that this temptation may never occur again.”
Mrs. Fry quotes largely from the Act of Parliament, relative to the matters of diet, medical attendance, clothing, bedding, and firing. It seemed to be the fact that the provisions of this Act did not extend to prisons which were exclusively under local jurisdiction; she therefore recommends lady visitors and committees to see them enforced as much as possible. While preserving even-handed justice between criminals and the country whose laws they have outraged, by suggesting that their treatment should be sufficiently penal to be humiliating, that their hair should be cut short, and all personal ornaments forbidden, she pleads earnestly for proper bedding and firing. She says: “During inclement weather, diseases are sometimes ​contracted by the unfortunate inmates of our gaols, which can never afterwards be removed. I believe it has sometimes happened that poor creatures committed to prison for trial, have left the place of their confinement, acquitted of crime, and yet crippled for life.”
From the same volume we find that Government had then inaugurated a wiser, kinder system of dealing with the female convicts destined for the colonies. By the new regulations, females were allowed to take out with them all children under the age of seven years; while a mother suckling an infant was not compelled to leave England until the child was old enough to be weaned. Again, the convicts were not to be manacled in any way during their removal from the prison to the convict-ship; “but as the rule is often infringed, it is desirable that ladies of the Committee should be vigilant on the subject, and should represent all cases to the governor of the prison, and afterwards, if needful, to the visiting magistrates.” Further, the Government, or the boroughs, had to provide the transports with needful clothing for the voyage; and, at the end of it, the surgeon's or matron's certificate of good behaviour was sufficient to ensure employment for most of the women. Altogether it seems certain that a new era for prisons had dawned, and new ideas prevailed in regard to them. How much Mrs. Fry’s labours had contributed to this state of things will never be fully known; but her work was almost accomplished.
This little book, which is a perfect Vade Mecum of prison management, was written in the interest of lady visitors, and for their use. It is still interesting, as showing Mrs. Fry’s own mode of procedure, and the principles upon which she acted. The few quotations given in this chapter will, however, suffice for the ​general reader. She concludes with the pregnant sentence: “Let our prison discipline be severe in proportion to the enormity of the crimes of those on whom it is exercised, and let its strictness be such as to deter others from a similar course of iniquity, but let us ever aim at the diminution of crime through the just and happy medium of the REFORMATION OF CRIMINALS.”
Not only in the published page, but in other ways—in fact in every possible way—did Mrs. Fry continue to proclaim the need of a new method of ordering criminals, and also of so treating them, that they should be fitted to return to society improved and not degraded by their experience of penal measures. In 1832, she was called upon to give evidence before another Committee of the House of Commons, upon the best mode of enforcing “secondary punishments” so as to repress crime. On this occasion she dwelt particularly upon the points noticed in her book published five years previously, and added one or two more. For instance, while advocating complete separation at night, she quite as earnestly contended against what was known as the “solitary system.” On this point she maintained that “solitude does not prepare women for returning to social and domestic life, or tend so much to real improvement, as carefully arranged intercourse during part of the day with one another under the closest superintendence and inspection, combined with constant occupation, and solitude at night.” In her evidence there occurs the following passage:—
Every matron should live upon the spot, and be able to inspect them closely by night and by day; and when there are sufficient female prisoners to require it, female officers should be appointed, and a male turnkey never permitted to go into the women's apartments. I am convinced when a prison is properly managed it is unnecessary, because, by firm and gentle management, the most ​refractory may be controlled by their own sex. But here I must put in a word respecting ladies’ visiting. I find a remarkable difference depending upon whether female officers are superintended by ladies or not. I can tell almost as soon as I go into the prison whether they are or not, from the general appearance both of the women and their officers. One reason is that many of the latter are not very superior women, not very high, either in principle or habits, and are liable to be contaminated; they soon get familiar with the prisoners, and cease to excite the respect due to their office; whereas, where ladies go in once, or twice, or three times a week, the effect produced is decided. Their attendance keeps the female officers in their places, makes them attend to their duty, and has a constant influence on the minds of the prisoners themselves. In short, I may say, after sixteen years’ experience, that the result of ladies of principle and respectability superintending the female officers in prisons, and the prisoners themselves, has far exceeded my most sanguine expectations. In no instance have I more clearly seen the beneficial effects of ladies’ visiting and superintending prisoners than on board convict-ships. I have witnessed the alterations since ladies have visited them constantly in the river. I heard formerly of the most dreadful iniquity, confusion, and frequently great distress; latterly I have seen a very wonderful improvement in their conduct. And on the voyage, I have most valuable certificates to show the difference of their condition on their arrival in the colony. I can produce, if necessary, extracts from letters. Samuel Marsden, who has been chaplain there a good many years, says it is quite a different thing: that they used to come in a most filthy, abominable state, hardly fit for anything; now they arrive in good order, in a totally different situation. And I have heard the same thing from others. General Darling’s wife, a very valuable lady, has adopted the same system there: she has visited the prison at Paramatta, and the same thing respecting the officers is felt there as it is here. On the Continent of Europe, in various parts—St. Petersburg, Geneva, Turin, Berne, Basle, and some other places—there are corresponding societies, and the result is the same in every part. In Berlin they are doing wonders—I hear a most satisfactory account; and in St. Petersburg, where, from the barbarous state of the people, it was said it could not be done, the conduct of the prisoners has been perfectly astonishing—an entire change has been produced.
On the 22nd of May, 1835, Mrs. Fry was desired to attend the Select Committee of the House of Lords, ​appointed to enquire into the state of the several gaols and houses of correction in England and Wales. She went, accompanied by three ladies, co-workers, and escorted by Sir T. Fowell Buxton. The Duke of Richmond was Chairman of the Committee, which included some twelve or fifteen noblemen. An eye-witness wrote afterwards respecting Mrs. Fry’s behaviour and manner: “Never, should I think, was the calm dignity of her character more conspicuous. Perfectly self-possessed, her speech flowed melodiously, her ideas were clearly expressed, and if another thought possessed her besides that of delivering her opinions faithfully and judiciously upon the subjects brought before her, it was that she might speak for her Lord and Master in that noble company.”
The principal topics treated of in her evidence before this Committee were connected with the general state of female prisons: among other things, she urged the want of more instruction, but that such instruction should not be given privately and alone to women; that the treadmill was an undesirable punishment for women; that matrons were required to be suitable in character, age, and capability for the post; that equality in labour and diet was needed; and she insisted on the imperative necessity of Government inspectors in both Scotch and English prisons and convict-ships. She enlarged upon these matters in the manner the subject demanded, and gave the Committee the impression of being in solemn earnest. Her quiet, Christian dignity impressed all who listened to her voice, while the most respectful consideration was paid to her suggestions. In reply to a question touching the instruction of the prisoners, she said:—
I believe the effect of religious and other instruction is hardly to ​be calculated on; and I may further say that, notwithstanding the high estimation and reverence in which I held the Holy Scriptures, before I went to the prisons, as believing them to be written by inspiration of God, and therefore calculated to produce the greatest good, I have seen, in reading the Scripture to those women, such a Power attending them, and such an effect on the minds of the most reprobate, as I could not have conceived. If anyone wants a confirmation of the truth of Christianity, let him go and read the Scriptures in prison to poor sinners; you there see how the Gospel is exactly adapted to the fallen condition of man. It has strongly confirmed my faith; and I feel it to be the bounden duty of the Government and the country that these truths shall be administered in the manner most likely to conduce to the real reformation of the prisoner. You then go to the root of the matter, for though severe punishment may in a measure deter them and others from crime, it does not amend the character and change the heart; but if you have altered the principles of the individual, they are not only deterred from crime because of the fear of punishment, but they go out, and set a bright example to others.
Both the silent and solitary systems were condemned by her as being particularly liable to abuse. She considered the silent system cruel, and especially adapted to harden the heart of a criminal even to moral petrifaction. But the strongest protest was made against solitary confinement. Upon every available opportunity she spoke against it to those who were in power. Unless the offence was of a very aggravated nature, she doubted the right of any man to place a fellow-creature in such misery. Some intercourse with his fellow-creatures seemed imperatively necessary if the prisoner's life and reason were to be preserved to him, and his mind to be kept from feeding upon the dark past. To dark cells she had an unconquerable aversion. Sometimes she would picture the possibility of the return of days of persecution, and urge one consideration founded upon the self-interest of the authorities themselves. "They may be building, ​though they little think it, dungeons for their children and their children’s children if times of religious persecution or political disturbance should return.” For this reason, if for no other, she urged upon those who were contemplating the erection of new prisons, the prime necessity of constructing those prisons so as to enable them to conform to the requirements of humanity.
Her opinions and reasons for and against the solitary system of confinement are well given in a communication sent to M. de Béranger after a visit to Paris, during which the subject of prison-management had formed a staple theme of discussion in the salons of that city. With much practical insight and clearness of reasoning, Mrs. Fry marshalled all the stock arguments, adding thereto such as her own experience taught.
In favour of the solitary system were to be urged—
1st. The prevention of all contamination by their fellow-prisoners.
2nd. The impossibility of forming intimacies calculated to be injurious in after life.
3rd. The increased solitude, which afforded larger opportunities for serious reflection and, if so disposed, repentance and prayer by the criminal.
4th. The prevention of total loss of character on the part of the prisoner, seeing that the privacy of the confinement would operate against the recognition of him by fellow-prisoners upon regaining his liberty.
Against it the following reasons could be urged:—
1st. The extreme liability to ill-treatment or indulgence, according to the mood and disposition of the officers in charge.
2nd. The extreme difficulty of obtaining a sufficiently ​large number of honest, high-principled, just men and women, to carry out the solitary system with impartiality, firmness, and, at the same time, kindness. This reason was strongly corroborated by the governors of Cold Bath Fields Prison, and the great Central Prison at Beaulieu. Their own large experience had taught them the difficulty of securing officers in all respects fit to be trusted with the administration of such a system.
3rd. The very frequent result of the administration of this system by incompetent or unfit officers would be the moral contamination of the prisoners.
4th. The enormous expense of providing officers and accommodation sufficient to include all the criminals of a country.
5th. The certainty of injury to body and mind from the continuance of solitude for life. The digestive and vocal organs, and the reason would inevitably suffer. In proof she quoted the notorious imbecility of the aged monks of La Trappe: “We are credibly informed of the fact (in addition to what we have known at home) that amongst the monks of La Trappe few attain the age of sixty years without having suffered an absolute decay of their mental powers, and fallen into premature childishness.”
6th. The danger lest increased solitude instead of promoting repentance, should furnish favourable hours for the premeditation of new crimes, and so confirm the criminal in hardened sin.
7th. The impossibily of fitting the prisoners for returning to society under the system; whereas by teaching them useful employments and trades, and training them to work in company for remuneration, habits and customs may be induced which should aid in a life-long reformation.
​Two or three years after the enunciation of these principles and reasons, Mrs. Fry addressed a valuable communication to Colonel Jebb in reference to the new Model Prison at Pentonville, then (1841,) in course of construction:—
“We were much interested by our visit to this new prison. We think the building generally does credit to the architect, particularly in some important points, as ventilation, the plan of the galleries, the chapel, &c. and we were also much pleased to observe the arrangement for water in each cell, and that the prisoner could ring a bell in case of wanting help.
“The points that made us uneasy were, first, the dark cells, which we consider should never exist in a Christian and civilised country. I think having prisoners placed in these cells a punishment peculiarly liable to abuse. Whatever restrictions may be made for the governor of a gaol, and however lenient those who now govern, we can little calculate upon the change the future may produce, or how these very cells may one day be made use of in case of either political or religious disturbance in the country, or how any poor prisoner may be placed in them in case of a more severe administration of justice.
“I think no person should be placed in total darkness; there should be a ray of light admitted. These cells appear to me calculated to excite such awful terror in the mind, not merely from their darkness but from the circumstance of their being placed within another cell, as well as being in such a dismal situation.
“I am always fearful of any punishment, beyond what the law publicly authorises, being privately inflicted by any keeper or officer of a prison; for my experience most strongly proves that there are few men ​who are themselves sufficiently governed and regulated by Christian principle to be fit to have such power entrusted to their hands; and further, I observe that officers in prisons have generally so much to try and to provoke them that they themselves are apt to become hardened to the more tender feelings of humanity. They necessarily also see so much through the eyes of those under them, turnkeys and inferior officers, (too many of whom are little removed either in education or morals from the prisoners themselves,) that their judgments are not always just.
“The next point that struck us was, that in the cells generally the windows have that description of glass in them that even the sight of the sky is entirely precluded. I am aware that the motive is to prevent the possibility of seeing a fellow-prisoner; but I think a prison for separate confinement should be so constructed that the culprits may at least see the sky—indeed, I should prefer more than the sky—without the liability of seeing fellow-prisoners. My reason for this opinion is, that I consider it a very important object to preserve the health of mind and body in these poor creatures, and I am certain that separate confinement produces an unhealthy state both of mind and body. Therefore everything should be done to counteract this influence, which I am sure is baneful in its moral tendency; for I am satisfied that a sinful course of life increases the tendency to mental derangement, as well as to bodily disease; and I am as certain that an unhealthy state of mind and body has generally a demoralising influence; and I consider light, air, and the power of seeing something beyond the mere monotonous walls of a cell highly important. I am aware that air is properly admitted, also light; still I do think they ​ought to see the sky, the changes in which make it a most pleasant object for those who are closely confined.
“When speaking of health of body and mind, I also mean health of soul, which is of the first importance, for I do not believe that a despairing or stupefied state is suitable for leading poor sinners to a Saviour’s feet for pardon and salvation.”
Mrs. Fry held quite as decided opinions upon lunatic asylums and their keepers. It was something terrible to her to know that poor demented creatures lay pining, chained and ill-treated, in dungeons; knowing no will but the caprice of their keepers. She spared no efforts to improve their condition; by tongue and pen she sought to enforce new principles and modes of action, in relation to lunatics, into the mind of those who had to govern them. So incessant were her labours to attain the ends she had set before her, that there was not a country in Europe which she did not influence. Almost daily communications were coming in from France, Denmark, Germany, Russia, Switzerland, and other countries, detailing the success of the new plans which she had introduced and recommended to the respective Governments. A regular correspondence was kept up between her and Mr. Venning of St. Petersburg, by order of the Empress of Russia, who took the greatest interest in the benevolent enterprise. From some letters given in the Memoirs of Mrs. Fry it seems that the Empress felt a true womanly compassion for the inmates of the Government Lunatic Asylum, and inaugurated a system of more rational treatment. How far her influence on behalf of the imprisoned and insane was induced and fostered by the English Quakeress, was never fully ​known until after her death, when a most interesting letter, addressed to the children of Mrs. Fry, was published. This letter was sent to them by Mr. John Venning, brother to the Walter Venning who had opened the correspondence, but who had, like the benevolent lady with whom it was maintained, “passed over to the majority.” From this correspondence it was found that the Emperor and Empress of Russia, the Princess Sophia Mestchersky, Prince Galitzin, and many ladies of high rank, had been stirred up to befriend those who had fallen under the strong arm of the law, and to make their captivity more productive, if possible, of good results. Not only so, but lunatics, more helpless than prisoners, had been cared for, as the outcome of Mrs. Fry’s visits to St. Petersburg, and her communications with the powers that were at that era. With these preliminary words of explanation, the subjoined letter speaks for itself:—
“I cheerfully comply with your desire to be furnished with some of the most striking and useful points contained in your late beloved mother’s correspondence with myself in Russia, relative to the improvement of the Lunatic Asylum in St. Petersburg. I the more readily engage in this duty, because I am persuaded that its publication may, under the Lord’s blessing, prove of great service to many such institutions on the Continent, as well as in Great Britain. . . . I begin by stating that her correspondence was invaluable, as regarded the treatment and management of both prisoners and insane people. It was the fruit of her own rich practical experience communicated with touching simplicity, and it produced lasting benefits to these institutions in Russia. In 1827, I informed your dear mother that I had presented to the Emperor ​Nicholas a statement of the defects of the Government Lunatic Asylum, which could only be compared to our own old Bedlam in London, fifty years since; and that the dowager Empress had sent for me to the Winter Palace, when she most kindly, and I may say, joyfully, informed me that she and her august son, the Emperor, had visited together this abode of misery. They were convinced of the necessity not only of having a new building, but also of a complete reform in the management of the insane; and further that the Emperor had requested her to take it under her own care, and to appoint me the governor of it. I must observe that in the meantime the old asylum was immediately improved, as much as the building allowed, for the introduction of your dear mother's admirable system. Shortly after, I had the pleasure of accompanying the Empress to examine a palace-like house—Prince Sherbatoff’s—having above two miles of garden, and a fine stream of water running through the grounds, situated only five miles from St. Petersburg. The next day an order was given to purchase it. I was permitted to send the plan of this immense building to your dear mother for her inspection, as well as to ask from her hints for its improvement. Two extensive wings were recommended, and subsequently added for dormitories. The wings cost about £15,000, and in addition to this sum from the Government, the Emperor, who was always ready to promote the cause of benevolence, gave three thousand pounds for cast-iron window-frames, recommended by your dear mother, as the clumsy iron bars which had been used in the old Institution had induced many a poor inmate, when looking at them, to say with a sigh, ‘Sir, prison, prison!’ Your dear mother also strongly ​recommended that all, except the violent lunatics, should dine together at a table covered with a cloth, and furnished with plates and spoons.
“The former method of serving out the food was most disgusting. This new plan delighted the Empress, and I soon received an order to meet her at the asylum. On her arrival, she requested that a table should be covered, and then desired me to go round and invite the inmates to come and dine. Sixteen came immediately, and sat down. The Empress approached the table, and ordered one of the upper servants to sit at the head of it and to ask a blessing. When the servant rose to do this, they all stood up. The soup, with small pieces of meat, was then regularly served; and as soon as dinner was finished, they all rose up spontaneously and thanked the Empress for her motherly kindness. I saw that the kind Empress was deeply moved, and turning to me she said, ‘Mon Cher, this is one of the happiest days of my life.’ The next day the number increased at table, and so it continued increasing. After your dear mother’s return from Ireland, where she had been visiting, among other Institutions, the lunatic asylums, she wrote me a letter on the great importance of supplying the lunatics with the Scriptures. This letter deserved to be written in letters of gold; I sent it to the Imperial family; it excited the most pleasing feelings and marked approbation. The Court physician, His Excellency Dr. Riehl, a most enlightened and devoted philanthropist, came to me for a copy of it. It removed all the difficulty there had been respecting giving the Holy Scriptures to the inmates. I was therefore permitted to furnish them with copies, in their various languages. It may be useful to state the result of this measure, ​which was considered by some to be a wild and dangerous proceeding. I soon found groups collected together, listening patiently and quietly to one of their number reading the New Testament. Instead of disturbing their minds, it soothed and delighted them. I have witnessed a poor lunatic, a Frenchman, during an interval of returning reason, reading the New Testament in his bed-room, with tears running down his cheeks; also a Russian priest, a lunatic, collect a number together, while he read to them the Word of God.
“On one occasion I witnessed a most interesting scene. On entering the Institution, I found a young woman dying; her eyes were closed, and she was apparently breathing her last breath. I ordered one of the servants of the Institution to read very loud to her that verse, ‘For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.’ Dr. K—— observed, ‘Sir, she is almost dead, and it is useless.’ On my urging its being done, lo! to the astonishment of all present, she opened her eyes and smiled. I said: ‘Is it sweet, my dear?’ She nodded assent. ‘Shall it be read to you again?’ A smile and nod of the head followed. She evidently possessed her reason at that moment, and who can trace, or limit, the operations of the Holy Spirit, on the reading of God’s own Word even in her circumstances?
“When I received a letter from your mother I always wrote it out in French, and presented it in that language to the Empress; and when she had read it, it was very encouraging to see with what alacrity she ordered one of her secretaries to translate it into ​Russian, and then deliver it to me to be conveyed to the Asylum, and entered into the journal there, for immediate adoption. I remember, on one occasion, taking a list of rules, at least fourteen in number, and the same day they were confirmed by the Empress. These rules introduced the following important arrangements; viz., the treating the inmates, as far as possible, as sane persons, both in conversation and manners toward them; to allow them as much liberty as possible; to engage them daily to take exercise in the open air; to allow them to wear their own clothes and no uniform prison-dress; also to break up the inhuman system of permitting the promiscuous idle curiosity of the public, so that no one was allowed to see them without permission; a room, on entering the asylum, was prepared for one at a time, on certain days, to see their relations. The old cruel system drew forth many angry expressions from the poor lunatics: ‘Are we, then, wild beasts, to be gazed at?’
“The Empress made a present to the Institution of a pianoforte; it had also a hand-organ, which pleased the poor inmates exceedingly. On one occasion the Empress, on entering the asylum, observed that the inmates appeared unusually dull, when she called them near, and played on the hand-organ herself an enlivening tune.
“Another important rule of your mother’s was, most strictly to fulfil whatever you promise to any of the inmates, and, above all, to exercise patience, gentleness, kindness, and love towards them; therefore, to be exceedingly careful as to the character of the keepers you appoint. These are some of the pleasing results of your mother’s work. The dowager Empress, on one occasion, conversing about your mother, said: ‘How ​much I should like to see that excellent woman, Madame Fry, in Russia’; and often did I indulge that wish. What a meeting it would have been, between two such devoted philanthropists as your mother and the dowager Empress, who was daily devoting her time and fortune to doing good. . . . Although the Empress was in her sixty-ninth year, I had the felicity of accompanying her in no less than eleven of her personal visits to the Lunatic Asylum, say from February to October, 1828. On the 24th of October she died, to the deep-felt regret of the whole empire. Rozoff, a young lunatic, as soon as he heard it, burst into tears. She would visit each lunatic, when bodily afflicted, and send an easy chair for one, and nicely-dressed meat for others; and weekly send from the palace wine, coffee, tea, sugar, and fruit for their use.
“Among the many striking features in your mother’s correspondence, her love to the Word of God, and her desire for its general circulation, were very apparent. Evidently, that sacred book was the fountain whence she herself derived all that strength and grace to carry on her work of faith and labour of love, which her Divine Master so richly blessed. . . . In December 1827, when accompanying the Emperor Nicholas through the new Litoffsky Prison, he was not only well pleased to find every cell fully supplied with the Scriptures—the rich result of his having confirmed the late Emperor Alexander’s orders to give the Scriptures gratis to all the prisoners—but on seeing some Jews in the prison he said to me: ‘I hope you also furnish these poor people with them, that they may become Christians; I pity them.’ I witnessed a most touching scene on the Emperor’s cutting the Debtor’s Room; three old, venerable, grey-headed men fell on their knees and ​cried, ‘Father, have mercy on us!’ The Emperor stretched out his hand in the peculiar grandeur of his manner, and said: ‘Rise; all your debts are paid; from this moment you are free’; without knowing the amount of the debts, one of which was very considerable. I hope this feeble attempt to detail a little of your dear mother’s useful work may be acceptable, leaving you to make what use of it you think proper.”
Such testimonies as these must have been peculiarly grateful to Mrs. Fry’s family, because it is natural to desire not only success in any good work, but also grateful remembrance and appreciation of it. Sometimes, however, the reverse was the case; even those whom she had endeavoured to serve had turned out ungrateful, impudent, and hardened. Yet her loving pity followed even them: still, like the Lord whom she served, she loved them in spite of their repulsiveness and ingratitude. And when some notably ungrateful things were reported to her respecting the female convicts on board the Amphitrite, she only prayed and sorrowed for them the more. Especially was this the case when she heard that the ship had gone down on the French coast, bearing to their tomb beneath the sad sea waves, the 120 women, with their children, being conveyed in her to New South Wales. Not one hard thought did she entertain of them: all was charity sorrow, and tenderness. And if for one little moment her new theories as to the treatment of criminals seemed to be broken down, never for an instant did she set them aside. She knew that perfection could only be attained after many long years of trial and probation. While undermining the old ideas, she set herself an equally gigantic task in establishing the new.