The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1866-07-28

SpeCt OF society," SnOQlQ De allowed 70
shine upon his darkness, and sweeten
the bitter cup of his penal sorrows.
How all this can be done, when he
is daily mingling not only in the
Hcompanionship of acknowledged and
mostly hardened criminals, but ex-
posed as criminal himself, to the GU
Fious gaze of unthinking and unsympa-
thizing crowds,-branded publicly and
by name as u convict, and, liable any
where and at any time to be recognized
as such,--how such a discipline as this
Is compatible with any reasonable hope
of regaining virtue and responsibility,
passes all our comprehension" !" = Prince
ton Revielc, July, 1S49. q
5. EEpe1Se.-lt may cost more to build
Penitentiary on the separate than on
the silent plan, because the apartments
must each be in themselves stronger
and more complete. It is also possible
that the labor of the convicts may be
less lucrative to the State. The pro-
ceeds OF the prison at Philadelphia have
always fallen little short of the eX-
penses. On the other, hand the institu-
tion at Trenton, which is on the separ-
ate plan, some years ago had more
than paid the necessary expenses and
had secured to the credit of the State a
surplus of several thousand dollars.
Some of the eongregate prisons have
also had deficiencies, while others have
PEcSEuGeu II DhAEHC0 III LAGlE AhNOEs H
is difficult to say which plan is the most
lucrative. But if, it should be neces.
sary to admit that the silent system
has in this respect slightly the advan-
tage, shall we, for the sake of saving a
little money, sacrifice all the other
blessings of the separate institutions ?
Shall few dollars outweigh with us
the greater temporal and eternal well
fare of the convicts =
Such are some of the elements which
must be taken into account in the esti-
mate of any system of discipline for a
penitentiaTy, and such are the conclu-
sions to which we are brought by a
candid comparison of the two principal
plans now in use among civilized ma
dons. The writer is gratitied TO know
that large number of these nations
have adopted the plan which to him
seems preferable. The Auburn system
with some variations in matters of
detail has been followed, perhaps, in
most of the United States. When the
this country, and discussions arose con-
cerning their respective merits, Euro
pean nations were SO much interested
that they sent embassies to investigate
the working of our prisons. First
came NJ. De Beaumont aud NJ. De Toe
queville from France. They, as the re-
salt of their enquiries, decidedly recon-
mended the system of separation. Inas-
much as the prejudice against this plan
WINS not readily overcome, a second de-
putation came over, and although they
were beforehand disposed to look by
far the least favorably on the system at
work in Pennsylvania, they were COM
PEELED upon Witnessing it 10 admit that
their opinions had undergone COM
plete change, SO, that they felt in COM
science bound to propose and advocate
1t. AT a still later period another depu-
tati0u went TO England to inspect the
Model Prison at Pentonville, construct
ed on the PennsylyRnia plan; and they
having again commemorative system, a
bill was passed by the national legisla-
ture providing for the adoption of it,
and q large number of prisons have
since been constructed on the principle
OF separation. In 1882, England sent a
commissioner to this country for the
same general object, and the result was
that the government of that country
erected the institution at PentonVille,
which is modelled, even to its architec-
ture after the Philadelphia penitentiary.
From Prussia came Doctor Julius, who
spent three years among us col
lectinR information on the subject, He
was converted into stauuch friend of
the separate system, and the King of
Prussia himself having visited the
prison at Pentonville, England, and
having minutely inspected 1t, declared
on the Snot, "MY determination is now
fixed" and proceeded to build his
prisons according to the same plan.
The same system has the preference
also in Ireland, Belgium, Holland,
Denmark, Sweden and Norway. In
1915, a general Congress of the friends
of humanity who were especially in
terested in the welfare of prisoners, met
at Frankfort-on-the-M Main, for the pur-
pose of comparing their views. Here
were present from the various nations,
seventy-hye members, all of whom
were men of education and we'll pre-
pared to form a correct opinion on the
subject under discussion. After care
full comparison OF views, at the close
of their sessions, a series of resolutions
were passed, "fully recognizing the
separation ofall prisoners, accused and
convicted, on long or short sentences,
as an essential feature ofthe discipline"
This decision was fully approved and
confirmed by a second Congress called
for the same purpose which was held at
Brussels the next year, and which was
composed of representatives from six
teen different nations. y -
1nview OF the reasons which have been
given, and in view of the Judgment of
SO many eminent men of all nations,
would IL not be proper for the authori-
ties OF this State 10 inquire carefully.
whether they should not introduce the
separation plan into the penitentiary at
MOundsyille3
WHEN any body is presented with a
service OF silver plate, or gold watch,
or something else for which the recipient
has been very likely the largest con-
tributor, accounts generally say that