Swansea and Glamorgan Herald, and South Wales Free Press. — 1862-11-26 (Swansea, West Glamorgan, Wales)

PUNCH'S PRISON DISCIPLINE.  Confinement and low diet are the punishment of paupers in the workhouse. The workhouse system is said to work well in the prevention, to some extent, of pauperism. What if paupers and convicts were made to change places? It is probable that pauperises would increase enormously, and that crime would greatly diminish.  The treatment of criminals in gaols appears to be based on the humane theory that crime is the result of moral disease. The heads of the patients, or prisoners, are closely cropped, they are kept upon a wholesome and nutritious, though not stimulating, diet, and made to perform an amount of labour not exceeding the bounds of healthy exercise. All this would be very well, provided that it answered; that the effect of prism-discipline was in general the eon,' of orimiutdo, verontion of r.. that case the benevolent system of treating offenders might be carried further; the convalescent might be allowed light and savoury soups, broths, jellies, and made-dishes, with wine and bear in moderation. They might be encouraged to amuse themselves with music and dancing, to get up private theatricals, and practicc. sundry other elegant and innocent recreations. The. only limit to improvement in this direction would be that of the expense which it might necessitate. But the regimen to which convicts are now subjected unfortunately does by no means operate in curing thieves of roguery and felony, thereby deterring their Associates from following their example. Is it, then, advisable to punish them with the same severity as that which paupers are punished with ? If they are to be reduced to workhouse-diet, their exercise mud be discontinued, lest it should kill them. The cheaper and more merciful plan would be to hang them at once. _ . .  The present keep of convicts is so dear that the Government, for economy's sake, lets them out of gaol long before their sentences have expired. As soon as they have been turned loose with tickets of leave, they go about the streets knocking passengers down, gazotting them, and rifling their pockets. How to avoid the expense of keeping a felon comfortably, correct the offender himself, and constitute him a caution to other villains ? That is the question. There seems at present to be only one answer to it. Imprison him on pauper's allowance, and whip him. Tie bins up and flog him, as you flog a bad soldier. If iUs right to flog a soldier it cannot be wrong to flog a ruffian. Does flogging in the army answer its purpose Is the power of inflicting it necessary to be retained at least in the face of the enemy? If the fear of flogging will control soldiers, it will restrain civilian scoundrels. The lash is not too bad for the back of the miscreant who cracks your skull. Robberies accompanied with violence, and all brutal assaults, at any rate, might deservedly be rendered punishable by whipping. That chastisement the convicted savage might undergo upon a public scaffold, or it might be inflicted on him in the prison-yard; and tickets of leave for admission to see it might be distributed by the police amongst the frequenters of thieves' lodging-houses and taverns. The spectacle of one sound flogging administered to a garotte-robber would prevent many a ferocious outrage and cruel murder. Benevolence might accept the execution as an economy of pain. It would not, probably, have to be repeated very soon.