say they, the discipline cannot produce its proper effect; the men cannot be separated from their old associates, nor finally disposed of out of the country. But there is no evidence of the " proper effect" ever having been produced by this discipline. The only glimmer of effective result seems to come from the Irish intermediate system, so ably carried out under Sir Walter Crofton's auspices. But this is not really a penal, but a post-penal process. There is like evidence of the success of "Discharged Prisoners' Aid Societies," which are of the same kind of post-penal agency; helping a punished man into free life again elsewhere. Both processes are mainly dependent on facility of exit after punishment to other countries; in other words, the boon of transportation. Both processes are, in their proper way, of the highest promise.

The Commissioners thus sum up their recommendations: they are for longer punishments, severer on re-conviction; for the training process of cellular confinement; labour in public works, and power of earning remission; a general consignment of all who commit felonies to Western Australia, or supervision of them at home.

Putting aside from these recommendations the last proposition, which can only be made useful, or even practicable, as not belonging to punishment at all, the Chief Justice takes distinct issue with his colleagues on their penal proposition. Considering reformation of adult criminals in prisons visionary, and beyond the scope of ordinary punishment, and certainly of more value than possible results by a suasive process of remission of sentence, he would condense punishment into its shortest compass, make it rigid, and connect it as closely as possible with its occasion. Control over prisoners he would secure, not by coaxing and humouring them, but by strengthening the prison staff beyond the need of fear or favour. And for reformation, except as incidental to this process of correction, he would not detain masses in prison on the chance of attaining it in such a situation. The opposite theorists would keep a culprit in durance until he is reformed, and deny that any man was ever deterred by punishment from crime. Experience goes against this view. Some crimes have distinctly yielded to adroit modifications of deterrent punishment; e.g., the restriction of capital punishment to murder, led to burglaries being less attended with murder through fear of the gallows. It may be asked, if punishment were abolished altogether, would not crime greatly increase? It may be too much to say that no man ever was reformed, in the sense of imbibing higher principles, in prison; but it is the Chief Justice's point that so great a change is too much for the State to attempt by every punishment, at all events on adults when the mollia tempora of youth are gone by. We must also consider the varieties of men who come under the sentence of punishment. The fears of all may be alike appealed to, and wherever the fences of the law are broken, its sanctions may be made clearly cognizable by all; but to construct an elaborate training apparatus around every point of infraction, and suitable for all infringers, is a scheme for embracing the utmost task of education in one of its least felicitous processes, based on an esti

mate of motives which only exist in the benevolent mind which conceives the idea.

Lord Carnarvon's Committee also give an opinion on the fundamental question of the true scope of punishment. While admitting that its process should be reformatory, as, indeed, a good deterring punishment must incidentally be, and vice versa; they keep clearly distinct the object of punishment per se. They doubt, with the Chief Justice, the general practicability of a more thorough reformation in prisons, and would not sacrifice the rigour and fixity of punishment for that object.

If we abstract the wisdom from all three documents we may collect some such conclusions as the following:

First, that there should be no difference between the treatment in ordinary prisons, and in Government prisons, but that imprisonment should mean the same thing, and be suffered on similar conditions, wherever it is inflicted, and that prisoners should be always separate, though in very few cases solitary.

Secondly, that the severity of punishment should be most intense at first, and gradually relaxed, in a regular and known system made incentive to industry, but that there should be no remission of sentence except, perhaps, such as may be earned by a rigid system of work valued in time and under special circumstances, under authority of the Secretary of State, or by Her Majesty's pardon.

Thirdly, that penal servitude should be an augmentation of the punishment of imprisonment by the addition of a fixed amount of forced labour, of a definite and uniform kind, on public works.

Fourthly, that all such means as are provided by Discharged Prisoners' Aid Societies, and by the intermediate system in Ireland, by which convicts on the completion of their punishment may be assisted to get into fresh employment, at home or abroad, should be encouraged and multiplied. By such agency we may still maintain a kind of transportation. Perhaps some sentences might conclude with imposing exile from this country, under penalty on return to it for a term of years. Such might be the condition of discharge-a condition which is now attached to a Western Australian ticket-ofleave (p. 17). This process would necessitate a short period of surveillance over men out of custody in some cases. Its chief purpose would be facilitating the man's finding employment for himself. It would avoid the evils of the ticket-of-leave system in this country, which system is worthless as it is now conducted, without the power of re-committal to prison on suspicion short of proof of fresh offence.

I have to add my own strong opinion that the adjunct of corporal punishment may be wisely restored in many suitable cases, for which milder forms of punishment prove wholly inapplicable and valueless. The feeling of both Houses of Parliament was so strongly in favour of this view, last Session, with reference to robberies with violence, and garotting, that the opposition of the Government was absolutely overwhelmed.

Experience abundantly proves that the fear of bodily pain effectually checks some kinds of outrage; and Parliament was of opinion that stopping crime is the principal object of punishment, whilst an endless recurrence of both crime and punishment evinces neither safe nor enlightened practice. There is no humanity in paying criminals the compliment to impute to them the finer feelings of honest men, and then make vain appeals to sentiments they do not possess. By repeated ineffectual punishments a large portion of the population may be accumulated in gaols, and become more embittered than reformed in their feelings towards society.

There are still numerous small offences for which the law obliges magistrates to send young persons to prison, which would be more wisely punished by a caning inflicted by a constable under their orders. I believe Edinburgh has the advantage of such a provision under a Scotch enactment. You cannot put a child to a worse place of education than a prison; and you cannot make a worse use of a working man than to imprison him. The Chief Justice's good sense revolts from the very idea of long and unprofitable incarceration of thousands of the working class, and says, "it is obviously the interest of the community that the period of punishment should not be prolonged beyond what is necessary to counteract the inducement to break the law."

I conclude with words of sound philosophy from a recent number of the Economist :

"There is a tendency in civilized communities to elaborate punishments, which exceedingly weakens their force. The danger is a growing one of adapting our penal legislation more to the taste and culture of the society which inflicts punishments than of the class on whom they are mainly inflicted."

Organised Associations on the part of the Public necessary for the satisfactory Development of our Secondary Punishments. By SIR WALTER CROFTON, C.B.

IMPORTANT events connected with this Department have occurred since the last annual meeting of the Association-events which I submit call for the most earnest consideration, the most energetic action. The lawless and outrageous conduct of our criminal population during last winter, so justly incensed the public as, not unnaturally, to awaken a clamour as to the impunity with which these crimes could be committed, and a desire to revise our manner of inflicting penal servitude. The Government, as is well known, delegated the inquiry to a Royal Commission, which, after deliberating during the entire Session, published a report with which all who study this subject are now conversant.

The report recommends the introduction of principles in our convict management which this Association, in common with the "Law

Amendment Society," has always advocated. It urges the necessity of more stringent punishment, and the carrying out such important reforms as the following:-A better classification of prisoners-the substitution of a stricter system and more monotonous labour during the separate or early stage of imprisonment-the introduction of the "mark system" into the public works or second stage-lower gratuities-dealing with convicts in smaller numbers-longer sentences, with the strict supervision of licensed convicts during the unexpired portion-and the detention at home, in special prisons, of convicts guilty of the most grave crimes.

It will be remembered that the changes here recommended have been for several years introduced into the convict prisons in Ireland, and that for a considerable period it has been my duty continually to urge their importance.

But, however much we may approve the recommendation to adopt these sound principles, we must, I think, feel that the conclusion at which the Commissioners have arrived, viz., that we can send all our convicts to Western Australia, save those incapacitated mentally or physically, or through having been guilty of the gravest crimes, is a very fatal error. I say a fatal error, because, with this impression upon their minds, they have considered it unnecessary to seriously grapple with the difficult question of "What are we to do with our convicts at home?" and have omitted to examine some of the most practical and eminent witnesses in the country.

That, until our home machinery is improved and in working order, we may have to send a large number of convicts to Western Australia is quite true, and is a wise course; but it is merely shelving a difficulty, with which we must shortly close, to set forth that we can send all convicts, not incapacitated as before stated. Such a procedure would be unwise as far as Western Australia is concerned, and therefore unwise for ourselves. It would lead to the closing of our only outlet for convicts sooner than any course of which I am aware, and assuredly long before we shall be in a position to deal satisfactorily with them at home.

It is well known that, with the view of modifying the difficulties caused by the diminution of transportation in 1853, establishments called "Intermediate Prisons," for male convicts, and "Refuges" for females were introduced into Ireland. I have, from time to time, heard objections made to their introduction into England, but I have not heard of any substitute calculated to facilitate the absorption of the well-intentioned convict in the home community.

I have repeatedly heard the proposition of another penal colony, but the question is not one between a new penal colony and the establishment of" Intermediate Prisons," because, after official inquiry, no new penal colony has been recommended.

The question is, that if a large number of convicts must be discharged in the United Kingdom, whether it is not a wise and sound policy so to train them as to induce their absorption into the labour market.

In Ireland it has been found that the exhibition of convict labour in a state of comparative freedom from restraint, tends to give confidence to employers, and conduces to this end. Common sense, I think, points to the same result in whatever country it is tried. As we shall be obliged to liberate a large number of convicts at home, I feel assured that some such course as this must sooner or later be adopted in England, in order to promote the employment of the wellintentioned. I am satisfied that hutting convicts and utilising their labour over the country in harbours of refuge and fortifications (and who can look at the wreck chart and our estimates for fortifications and not feel that these works are abundant ?) will be the means of improving the convicts, assisting their employment, and prove a great economy to the public. If it is considered to be too hazardous to try the plan exactly in the same form as in Ireland, let the male convicts pass the early periods of their licences to be at large in these huts. If they don't conduct themselves well in this their first taste of liberty, let them be returned to prison instead of having their licences extended.

Apart from the Commissioners' erroneous estimate of the absorbing power of Western Australia, we shall have unquestionably gained by their report, if the Government adopt their views; for the convicts will certainly be better trained, and prepared for release; and the public will assuredly be better protected during the unexpired terms of their sentences. I am not unmindful that there are advocates of short fixed sentences, and if I thought there was to be no improvement in checking the criminal classes by supervision, I should also, in the interests of the public, advocate fixed, although not short sentences. But I have the greatest hope that this check will be instituted and rigidly maintained, and that the public will have cause to rejoice at the adoption of this and other principles recommended by the Commissioners. We must remember that short fixed sentences have been tried, and have failed-that both the Committee of the House of Commons in 1856 and the Royal Commissioners have, after inquiry, condemned them.

At the present day public opinion will not admit of penal infliction to the extent which would operate as a deterrent to "habitual criminals" during a short sentence. We must therefore look to another and a better mode of decreasing crime by the incapacitation of the criminal through an active interference in his vocation; and the placing him under such restraints as to make it almost impracticable for him to follow it.

By all means, say the advocates of longer sentences and remissions, let there be a minimum term of imprisonment strictly carried out, which term should be made known to the judge at the time of his passing sentence; but they want something more, viz., a period during which they can have a check on the future career of the criminal.

I stated in my Lecture at Bristol last winter, that I trusted that