with than the convicted offender,-it excites irritation of mind, and in many cases vindictiveness of spirit in the prisoners,—it is from the impossibility of rendering its operation equable and uniform, utterly unfit for general adoption,-- it is complicated and cumbrous in its construction,-apt to be constantly deranged in its movements,—and requires for its efficient working, a degree of watchfulness and vigilance which is shown to be unattainable, even under the most favour. able circumstances,—and finally, it does not even contemplate the adoption of any means by which the evils of recognition can be prevented.

The inspectors then proceed to consider the advantages presented on the other hand by the Separate' system. They first justly assert it as the right of an untried prisoner, (who has hitherto indeed been too little regarded in prison discipline, but whose position ought manifestly to be widely different from that of the convicted,) to be exempted from the society of those whose company is calculated to injure his morals, outrage his feelings, and debase his character. But not only is seclusion from his contaminated and contaminating associates a right which the untried prisoner is entitled himself to demand, but it is one which we contend the best interests of society are materially concerned in being exercised. The corruption which such a prisoner may have imbibed during his confinement, spreads its pestiferous influence all around him. He becomes the centre of a new circle of depravity. But possibly it may be thought by some persons to be a hardship on the prisoner, who ought at least to have an option. We agree with these gentlemen that he ought not to have such an option. If the interests of the individual and of society alike demand his seclusion, we hold that they justify its imposition. But we do not believe that when the species of confinement practised and contemplated is understood, any innocent prisoner would hesitate for one moment to prefer it to the company of guilty associates. Let it be always borne in mind, that the

. advocates for separation (at least the judicious ones) never intend by that term any solitary confinement, although we believe that much of the prejudice existing against that system is founded on such a misapprehension. Such an isolation would indeed be equally cruel and mischievous ; it would not be reformatory punishment, but absolute torture, and would unquestionably display its mischievous futility in repeated instances of insanity. * If

, therefore, by the system of separation, were intended perfect soli

Miss Martineau, in the First volume of her late popular work, Western Travel,' devotes a chapter to Prisons,--and in it, graphically displays the superiority of the Separate over the Silent system. She bears testimony to some of the evils stated above as existing in the Auburn prison in America; and with the narrative power which she is so well known to possess, details some affecting incidents which vividly show the efficacy of kindness and moral training under the Separate system.

tude, we should be the first to lift up our voice against it, but on the contrary, what is intended ?

• The prisoner is placed in an apartment, at least ten feet square, and ten feet high, sufficiently large to enable him to take exercise. This apartment is well lighted, ventilated, and warmed, -water is laid on,--and in the fitting up, every arrangement is adopted essential to the prisoner's health. To this apartment the prisoner is strictly confined by day ard night,-nor is he allowed to leave it at any time, except for the purpose of attending divine worship. This seclusion, however, is broken by daily and stated visits of the governor, chaplain, surgeon, and other prison officers. The prisoner enjoys the privilege of seeing his friends,—he has every facility afforded him for consulting with his legal adviser,-he may send and receive letters,--he is permitted to have unobjectionable books,-he has the option of any employment that can be conveniently furnished to him,-he is exempted from all discipline that is calculated to create irritation,—he is tempted to commit no violation of prison rules,—he is exposed to no quarrels, and his mind cannot be tainted and demoralized by the relations of the burglar, nor his ears assailed by the language of the blasphemous and obscene.'-Secord Home Report, p. 11.

Such is the seclusion we recommend,-one, which it would be for the benefit of every untried, and would be the wish of every innocent prisoner, to enjoy.

But now let us examine what are the advantages possessed by such a system as respects the guilty?

They are put with great feeling and force by the author of an article on the Penitentiary System of Pennsylvania,' in the · Encyclopædia Americana,' and which is reprinted by him at the conclusion of his translation of the Report by Messrs. De Beaumont and De Tocqueville, to which we have before referred. Mr. Lieber says

• The greatest step we believe which a convict of the common sort can make towards reformation, is from thoughtlessness to thoughtful

Few of those committed to prisons are accustomed to think,it is for want of thought that they become guilty. Surrounded, as they are in the Auburn system by a variety of objects during the day, they cannot feel the same inducement to reflection as under the pressure of constant solitude. It is difficult for a man, even accustomed from his youth to reflection, and to a mode of life which offers a great variety of objects and subjects, to entertain himself in long-continued solitude. He must occupy his mind with himself. The writer may be permitted to refer to his own experience, having been imprisoned for a considerable period during a time of political persecution, -and though he was not haunted by remorse, and had more resources from the habits of his past life than can fall to the lot of most of the inmates of prisons, he can testify to the power with which solitude forces a man to make himself the subject of his contemplation-a power which can hardly be realized by one who has not felt it. How strongly must it

operate on the common convict! Deprived of most of the resources of educated men,-constantly reminded of the cause which brought him into this situation,-undisturbed by any distracting objects, -enveloped in silence—he needs must think. This power of solitude was acknowledged by the wisest and best of antiquity, who retired from the walks of men to prepare themselves for great tasks by undisturbed contemplation.* The labour which the convict performs in his cell, and which is indispensably necessary, does not disturb him, because it soon loses the distracting power of novelty,—and though it will engage him sufficiently to prevent him from sinking into torpid sullenness (as experience shows) it does not interrupt his contemplations. When he has once begun to reflect, he must come to the conclusion that virtue is preferable to vice, and can tranquillize his troubled mind only by resolving on reformation,-he must at last seek comfort in the mercy of that Being who created him in his goodness, and who will receive him, notwithstanding his guilt, if he is sincere in his repentance. This will be the natural course of most prisoners in uninterrupted solitary confinement, judging from the observation we have made on convicts thus confined.'

And our Home inspectors, after adopting a similar line of remark, say

• We are well aware that there are those who consider as wild and visionary any hopes which may be entertained of the reformation of a criminal. We trust that it is unnecessary for us to state that we do not concur in this opinion. We feel assured that in this country, little need be urged against a doctrine which regards the convict as an outcast, possessing no interests beyond the grave, and worthy of no more considerations than the beasts which perish. If, as we firmly believe, no human being, however guilty, is excluded from the means of repentance and the hope of mercy, we cannot too strongly condemn opinions which appear to us to be opposed to the spirit and precepts of that Divine Being who desireth not the death of a sinner, but rather that he should turn froni bis wickedness and live.' We have had some experience of the character of criminals, and are persuaded that there are periods in the lives of even the most hardened, when the mind is awakened to reflection, and the heart overwhelmed with sorrow. In these seasons of sensibility, much may be done to eradicate the dominion of vice by the inculcation of Christian principles and the force of good impressions, -and it is the duty of a Christian government to present to every prisoner the means by which instruction may be imparted, and repentance cherished. In the quiet of the prison cell—and when humbled by correction-the warnings, promises, and consolations of the Gospel, come home to the conscience with redoubled force. There is no feature in the Separate system which more favourably distinguishes it, than the facility which it affords to the minister of religion in the discharge of the various duties of his sacred office.'—p. 14.

To all those, therefore, who with us, look confidently to the reformation of the great majority of criminals and of almost all the young, this system presents such favourable opportunities for exerting the proper beneficial influences on a convict, that we must confess ourselves, warm, but not bigoted, advocates for its adoption. Mr. Hill, guiding himself by the experience afforded him in his inspection of Scotland, and, especially, by the admirable results of the separate system, produced at the Glasgow Bridewell, where it was established in 1824, and has been maintained ever since, concurs in strong approbation of it. In his • Third Report,' he says

• The continued experience of the separate system has confirmed my conviction of its reast

asonableness and efficacy; and I am more and more satisfied, that while, on the one hand, it prevents the danger and corruption arising from the associations of criminals, it is not, on the other hand, attended with gloomy depression of the mind or baneful effects on the health ; and that it places the offender in that position in which there is the best opportunity for cultivating the higher feelings of his nature, and raising his ideas to new and superior objects. It has been supposed, that separation leads sometimes to insanity or idiotey; but, under good management, I am satisfied that it has no such effect. Certainly, no instance of the kind ever came to my knowledge; and the governor of the Glasgow Bridewell assures me, that there has not been a single case in that prison during the whole twenty-five years that it has been under his charge.'--p. 7.

Mr. Hill proceeds to detail a most striking proof of the preference even, bestowed upon it by the prisoners. He says

There are now five inmates of the Glasgow Bridewell, who are there of their own free will; some of them having asked permission to remain after the expiration of their sentences, and the others having petitioned to be admitted.'—p. 7.

Mr. Hill's comment appears to us to be extremely judicious.

a

It may be said, indeed, that this fact proves too much, for that a prison ought never to be made a place of attraction. It

appears to me, however, that those who are willing to submit to the restrictions and labour of such a prison, must be in so destitute a state as to be under strong templations to crime; and that it is, therefore, fortunate when they consent to give up their personal liberty for a time.'--p. 7. Mr. Hill, adds

Highly, however, as I think of the plan of separation, I am strongly of opinion, that it should always be accompanied with useful employment, instruction, opportunities of reading, frequent visits of officers, and daily exercise in the open air. Not, however, that I think,

we should always wait until all these necessaries can be obtained; for so great are the evils of association among criminals, that, in my opinion, it is better to dispense with one or two of these desiderata than to allow such evils to continue.-p. 7.

While these three inspectors deriving their experience from the metropolis and its adjoining counties and from Scotland, concur in the propriety of the adoption of the separate' system, it is necessary to inform our readers that the other inspectors, viz., Captain Williams and Dr. Hawkins, seem rather inclined to favor the silent' system, and our desire for an impartial discussion of this important subject, instead of merely one-sided advocacy, induces us to place their arguments before our readers for their careful consideration. The first of these gentlemen says, that to

Those unacquainted with the precision, regularity, and minuteness attained without difficulty under military discipline, the details of the system of silence' must naturally seem cumbrous and prolix; while to myself, after some experience with the army, this does not at all appear to be the case. It must, however, be admitted to possess one superior quality among others-the placing men under trying circumstances where they are compelled to exercise and may acquire the valuable habit of self-control. At the same time, social duties are kept in view; for it exacts respect to authority, order, cleanliness, decency at meals, and industry at labour. The silence, irksome as it may be, is, moreover, gratefully and beneficially mitigated by the consolations of religion and the lessons of instruction.'-Third Report, Northern District, p. 5, 6.

In reference to these remarks, we beg to observe that we do not deny theSilent' System to possess advantages, which would be much greater than they are, if it could be rendered efficacious to its professed object; an assumption which is made in the extract just given, but which is contradicted by all experience hitherto. Nor can we admit the analogy which is drawn by Captain Williams, between the recruits of the army and the inmates of our prisons to be a correct one. The former are men in a state much more open to discipline than the latter; and even if some be refractory, they are surrounded by unsympathising companions, whose professional habits and feelings lead them to discourage any attempts at the breach of discipline.

Dr. Hawkins in his Third Report,' has summed up what he conceives to be very strong objections to the Separate System,

viz.

1. The difficulty and expense of procuring suitable labour for the inmate of each cell.

2. The want of cells sufficiently large, light, and well ventilated in