The Sun.
London, England, 1818-11-13 00:00:00

It E PORT,

That they were prevented, by circumstances, from assem-
bling during the recess of the Legislature, and have there-
fore not given to the subject that protracted considei at tall
which its importance would seem to require. The result,
however, of such enquiries as the Committee have been able
to matte since the commencement of the present Session, they
now beg leave to submit; leaving it to the Legislature to de-
termine whether further information be necessary to an ulti•
mate decision.

An alteration of the Penal Code of the State appears, from
reiterated executive recommendations, to have been much
desired, and long expected :—as yet, legislative caution has
not yielded to executive importunity. This caution, it is be-
lieved, has been the effect, not of any supposed perfection in
our criminal law, but of doubts as to the policy of adopting
the particular alterations recommended. That some altera-
tions were required, has never beeis denied; that some altera-
tions are now necessary, the returns of convictions prove.
Many offences are frequently committed which our Penal
Code was intended to suppress, and which, it is believed, can
be suppressed, or very much lessened.
For these evils, two remedies have been suggested. The
adoption of the Penitentiary System, or only SO to alter our
present laws, as to increase or diminish the quantum of pu-
nishment now apportioned.
Each of these remedies has its advocates; both in the opi-
nion of your Committee are entitled to consideration. The
Penitent: I.y System will be first examined.
Before, however, we proceed to this examination, a few ob.
nervations will be suggested. intended to establish certain
propositions, which, without pretending to axiomatic truth,
are supposed sutficiently correct to induce general acquies-

tenet.
Although the novel situation in which the people of the
United States have been placed, has rendered the lessons of
experience of less universal importance here than elsewhere,
it is nevertheless believed that experience here, as elsewhere,
will ever prove the best source of wisdom, and surest founda-
tion of policy. This truth, though seldom denied, is not un-
freqnently forgotten, or totally disregarded.
It may not be unimportant on this occasion, to recall to
mind a memorable instance of the fallacy of human wisdom.
When speculating upon laws and Goverment, recorded in
the early annals of our own country, Mr. Locke, the pro-
foundest philosopher of his age, furnished a form of Govern-
ment and system of laws for South Carolina. Mr. Locke's
Government and laws are known to have failed in every re-
spect. The only laws which have been able to stand the test
of ages have grown out of the progressive exigencies of man-
kind. are the lessons of experience, not the sugges-
tions of speculation. The laws of Solon and Lycurgus hare
passed away. The common acid civil laws have lasted for
ages, and will probably continue of force for ages to come.
That the only proper object of punisltrpent is the preven-
tion of crimes, is a proposition, though Not universally ad-.
witted, essentially correct in the estimation of your COUP'
mittee.

Vindictive justice is disclaimed. The law, which punishes,
cannot feel ; the law therefore cannot he vindictive. If the
most enormous crime could not be repeated by the offender
or another, that crime the law ought nut to punish.
Retributive justice is regarded as fanciful, not practical :
society cannot he compensated for a crime : felony cannot be
worked out—and if felony could he worked out, it must al-
ways cost more labour, or what is equivaleut to labour,
to secure the labour of a criminal, than his labour can be
worth.
Any other proportion between punishment and crime, theta
that which effects the suppression of the crime, is regarded
as visionary. Could the smallest offence be suppressed by
the greatest punishment, it ought to be attached. If the
greatest crimes could be ptevented by the smallest punish-
ment, they ought to be apportioned ; would the same penalty
prevent every crime, there should be but one penalty.
To proportion the punishments with any degree of preci-
sion to the crime, would appear to involve the following
difficulties :
In the first place, the sensibility of the criminal ought to
be ascertained ; for the same punishment would affect very
differently persons of different degrees of sensibility : to one,
that punishment might be tort Ore, which to another would
be little more than unpleasant.
2dly. The effect of each crime on society ought to be ascer-
tained, and this, it is apprehended, can only be approached
in a very remote degree. To kill A, who is a virtuous, intel..
and active member of society, is much more injurious
than to hill 13, who is a worthless vagrant; on the life of the
first the happiness of society may materially depend—the
death of the last may be so far beneficial, as to disencumber
society of a drone. No lawgiver, however, has ever yen.
tared to discriminate between these cases. Extremely dan-
gerous would it be to discriminate, and yet without such dis-
criminatirni, what pretension catethere be to proportion ?
silly. Difficult' as it is to ascertain with any precision the
sensibility of the criminal and the effect of the crime, more
difficult dust it be to penetrate the motives of the criminal,
Man is seltiol influenced by a simple motive, and yet when
so influenced, it is difficult of detection. The more complex
his motives, the more difficult is the task of fixing his crimi-
nality, and yet if proportion between punishment and crisis
mean any thing more than the quantum of punishment. ne-
cessary to the suppression of the crime, it would seem to
refer to the sensibility of the criminal, the effect of the crime,
and the motives with which it was perpetrated But if the
exact proportion could be ascertained, it is difficult to perceive
the benefit that would result. We admire proportion in
architecture; the mind is gratified when all the parts of a
building appear calculated .to effect the purpose for which
the.), were intended. That a criminal, however, has been
puiiished exactly in proportion to his •ensibility, the effect of
his crime, and the motives with which he perpetrated the
crime, would afford no pleasure, it is apprehended, argon-
ne'eted with the hope that the crime would not be repeated.
On the other hand, it would appear fastidious in the extreme,
to object to a punishment which suppressed the crime, only
because it was not in enact proportion to the sensibility of the
criminal, the effect of the offence, and the motives with which
it bad been perpetrated.
With these observations, your Committee will proceed to
the consideration of the penitentiary system.
The reltictance with which this subject has always beers
considered by the legislatoreatheff pressed upon their atten-
tion by executive recommendations, was the effect it is be-
Bared (as before stated) of great doubts as to fhe' practical
effects of a theory, which though brilliant had not heen fully
tried, and upon which the growing experience of other
states would iu no protracted length of time shed a light
which mould dissipate all doubt, and procure a decision in
every respect satisfactory. It is to the experience of those

rites where the penitentiary systemlias been lnmge,.!
:rat yoer ommil tee nose propose to look for that light whiLb
ttlalcorifirm or dissipate those doubts which have hitherto
existed-on this subject.
In Pennsylvania. where the first American Penitentiary
Horse was erected, it appears front a recent publication en-
titled, " A Statistical View of the Operations of the Penal
Code of Pennsylvania," that its operation had `6O been ex-
tremely beneficial for the first two years after its establish-
; that of 200 persons who had been pardoned, only four
bad returned." At that period it appears further,l' that the
'number of convicts was so small in proportion talbe build-
ing, that the apartments in the prison and the prison-yard
afforded convenient and ample room for the separation of the
convicts."
. .

The Grand Jury of Philadelphia, in a recent presentment,
say, " that while they notice with pleasure the high degree
sit order and cleanliness, they are compelled by a sense of
duty to present as an evil of considerable magnitude, the pre-
sent very crowded state of the penitentiary : the number of
pr;soners of all classes continues to increase, so that from
t.in to 40 are lodged in rooms of Is fret square,; 'sq many ate
thus crowded together, that the institution already begins to
a.asinve the character of an European pi icon and a seminary
for every vice, in which the unfortunate being who commits
fiat offence, and knows none of the arts of metborlized vil-
lainy, can scarcely avoid the contamination which leads to
extreme depravity•
It-appears further, from the same publication, " that of
dot convicts now in the penitentiary of Pennsylvania, 161
have been confined there hefoie."
The Commissioners appoioted to examine into the state of
the New Yorlc prison in their report observe, 4, it has for
some time past, not only failed of effecting the nh.iect chiefly.
in view, but has subjected the treasury to a.serirs of tli,borse-
71,v1ItS, ton (ilwre,ive to be coin inued it they C.. 114 in any way
lie prevented." The cause of this failure is said to be the
ei ',wiling together of the prisoners, and a relaxation of disci•
pline. It appears further, that a very large proportion If
those who hare been committed for the last tire or six years
had been confined there before.

The Cottimlssioners appointed to examine the state prison
of Mass:kin:setts 'in their report complain, " that the prison
is so crowded as to defeat the object for which the institution
was erected." They state further, " that the only advan-
tages which the commonweath appears to derive from the
est ablishiaent, are—
-Ist. The protection afforded the community against the cri-
minals doting their confinement
stdly..The value of the earnings of the convicts, which may
be supposed to be so much gain, since the greater part of
this class of men, when at large,, were at the expence of the
community without labour. But there appears," say these
Commissioners, " great reason to suppose that the advantage
first-mentioned is more than counterbalanced by the greater
hardihood and more settled corruption which a promiscuous
association among the convicts must produce, particularly the
young."
It is thought unnecessary to make further quotations from
these publications, as they arc in the possession of the legis-
lature, and can be procured by all.
The most attentive examination of these documents, on
the part of the Committee, has been followed by a thorough
conviction that the penitentiary system, as far as it has been
yet tried, has failed. It is not, however, to be concealed, that
some hope yet exists that solitary confinement may be so ap-
portioned, as to restore to the system the confidence which it
once possessed, but of which, for some time past, it has been
deprived.
Should it succeed, it will be gratifying to humanity to see
its benefits extended to every portion of the habitable world ;
and it is not doubted that in such an event, the Legislatura
of this state will avail itself of the earliest opportunity of
adopting the system ; hut until it has been well tried, and has
fully answered, your Committee cannot but believe it would
he unwise in the legislature to attempt it. The experiments
already commenced are so numerous, and will probably be
conducted with so much ability, as will leave noalouht as to
the results that may be afforded. It may indeed be necessary,
to a.full and fair experiment of the system, that some states
should not adopt it; for to asee.tain its value, it may be ne-
cessary to contrast it with other systems, and this cannot be
done with advantage if all the states were to adopt it.
It may not be unimportant, even on the present occasion,
to contrast the operations and effects of the penitentiary
system with the operations and effects of the system of cri-
minal lay. now of force in this state. To effect this object,
returns of the convictions which hare taken place since 1799,
have been procured from most of the clerks of.the district
courts. It is to he lamented that all the clerks have not com-
plied with the requisitions made upon them in August last.—
A sufficient windier however have been procured, it is be-
lieved, to answer the purpose intended- The comparison
will be confined to the last 17 years, as prior to 1600, the
county court system was of force, under which, justice was
not only imperfectly administered, but the records of which
were so badly kept as to furnish at this period' no data front
which the number of convictions can be ascertained. .

The penitentiary system of Pennsylvania has been selected
for comparisnn, as it is supposed to he the oldest and best
managed in the United States, and with the operations and
effects of which we are best acquainted.
It will appear on a reference to the statistical view of the
operations of the penal code of that state, that the convic-
tions from 1800 to 1809, both inclusive (for penitentiary of-
fences) were 1045, giving an average of more than 104.
The population of that state in 1800 (as appears by the
census then • taken) was 602,545. In 1810, the population
had increased to 810,091, which affords an annual increase
of about 20,754, and an average population of 628,299, for
the ten years prior to 1810. For this period, therefore,
convictions were to population as 404 are to 632,299, or as 1
to A 993. .

From 1810 to 1815 inclusive, the convictions were 890,
giving an average of more than 148 for each year.
The population probably increased in each year from 1310
to 1815, in greater numbers than from 1800 to 1810, hut as
the exact increase Cannot be ascertained, it will be computed
at the same ; the difference cannot be very great. This
would Make the average population front 1810 to 1815, about
8:30,845.
For this period, therefore, convictions were to population
a 3 148 to 830,845, or as i to 5613. •
It would/appear front this statement, that crimes bad not
only increased numerically, but in a greater ratio than po-
pulation.
It will appear further, on reference being bad to the sta-
tistical view, that the number of untried prisoners, returned
on the calendars at the different sessions of the city tied
quarter sessions of the county of Philadelphia, was—
For the year 181:3 516
1814 538
1815 829
1816 1058 _

Had these prisoners 14-en tried as usual, the number of
Convicts would have been greater for these years, which
would consequently have increased the average number of Con-
victions from 1810 to 1816, and thereby increase the ratio of
crimes for the last period selected for comparison. Why a
greater number of prisoners were left untried for these years
than usual, is nut explained. It is difficult not to attribute it
to t he svAtem. .

It is stated in the publication above alluded to, that the
number of convicts from 1779 to 17136, both inclusive, were
greater than from 1786 to 1793; and that the penitentiary sys-
tem was nut commenced before 1736. This statement is made
to show that convictions diminished undo the penitentiary
system. This effect, however, may have been produced by
other adequate causes which existed at the time. From 1779 to
3782, the United States were engaged in a bloody civil war, the
anwst prolific parent of crimes ; mid although we were enjoying
many of the blessings of peace from 82 to 86, yet it cannot he
supposed that dnrlog this period society did not continue to
feel many of the evils which the licentious habits of a civil
war are calculated 1., engender. To compare these two pe-
riods then is to aid the penitentiary system with all the ad-
vantages of peace,- order, and good government, and to clog
the former penal code of Pennsylvania with all the crimes
of a civil war. Our object, however, is not to compare
the penitentiary system of Pennsylvania with the former
penal code of that State, but to compare it with the penal
code of this State.
by the returns of convictions front 1800 to 1810 both
inclusive, it appears there were in this State 113 convic-
tions for penitentiary offences, which gives an average of 14
per year.
Front 1800 to 1815, the convictions were 62, which gives an
average of 12 per year.
The population of this tiltate in the year 1800 was 199,140;
in 1810, the population had increased to 218,750, which af-
fords a small annual increase.
From this statement it appears that convictions have not
only not Im:revert in a ratio with the population, but have
numerically dituished.
As we are unacquainted with even any circumstances pe-
culiar to this State, which were calculated to lessen crimes,
or with any cirenmstianees peculiar to Pennsylvania, which
were calculated to increase them, we are induced to conclude
that the penal code of this State, imperfect as it is, has been
productive of more benefit than that of Pennsylvania.
Your Committee are therefore induced to recommend, that
the penitentiary system be not adopted, and that the penal
code of this State be amended, as the bill herewith reported
provides for. DANIEL F. HUGER.
Chairman of Committee of Penal Code.