Prisons in the United States were grim before they became the well managed institutions they are today. Prior to reform, prisons were detestable, an abomination to America. Idealist reformers recognized the need for change and especially helped the mentally ill prisoners. The Auburn system implemented rigid rules to control the incarcerated, and put them to work. The Pennsylvania system took a similar approach, but with even stricter rules. The reformed prisons were safe and efficient, easing the lives of inmates while attracting praise for America. Prison reform in the United States benefited the government just as much as the prisoners.
Leading up to reform, the American prison system was deplorable. Structurally, the buildings were not the impenetrable fortresses they are today. Newgate Prison in Connecticut was a shining example of how not to build a prison. Once a mineshaft for copper ore, the labyrinth of caves was used as a prison when the ore ran out (Mangan). The design was poor, as depicted in Appendix A (Connecticut Historical Society). Newgate’s first prisoner escaped with a rope in less than a month, because the prison was a hole in the ground. Instead of altering the construction of the prison, security was amplified. Criminals ranging from murderers to loyalists in the revolutionary war could be thrown in this dungeon, which was now harder to escape (Mangan). The underground confinement was filthy. One prisoner incarcerated for counterfeit wrote, “armies of fleas, lice, and bedbugs nightly covered every inch of this polluted prison” (Stuart 166). Sending convicts to live out their days in an abyss was cruel, but legal. Insufficient physical conditions were not the only hardships endured by prisoners. Troubled youth, hardened criminals, and the mentally ill were all crammed into overcrowded prisons, regardless of age, gender, or the charges against them (Juvenile). They were caged and chained like animals, left naked, and often physically abused by their jailers (History). Some criminals faced punishment instead of jail time, but the penalty did not always fit the crime. One man, Charles Callahan, “received thirty-five lashes for his sexual assault on a ten year old Philadelphia girl in January 1729/30. Martha Cash suffered forty lashes for stealing six yards of Kersey in 1734” (Marietta, Jack, and Rowe 78). Whipping a pedophile was unlikely to stop him from preying on children again. Whipping a fabric thief more than a child rapist was not just. Petty offenders being subjected to the same ordeals as those who committed heinous crimes was unfair. Subjecting anyone to live chained in squalor or publically whipped was inhumane. The American prison system was not one to be applauded.
The suffering of prisoners did not go unnoticed. Idealists like Dorothea Dix and Louis Dwight were fundamental in reforming prisons. A schoolteacher, Dorothea Dix, was asked to take over her friend’s Sunday school class at a prison in East Cambridge. She was horrified to find that many of the people in the jail were just mentally ill, not guilty of any crime. Her discovery that the insane were dumped into the same place as violent criminals appalled her. Concerned for the wellbeing of the mentally ill, she set out to visit and take record of the conditions at every facility she could. After compiling her findings into a report, she had her friend Samuel Gridley Howe present it to the State House, as women were not allowed to speak to the legislature. She wrote, “I come as the advocate of the helpless, forgotten, insane men and women held in cages, closets, cellars, stalls, pens! Chained, naked, beaten with rods, and lashed into obedience!” (Dorothea). The “voice for the mad,” Dix’s reports were filled with atrocities. When she asked why the jail had no heat, she was told “the insane do not feel heat or cold” (Bumb). This outrageous idea was just one of many Dix sought to disprove. She knew the effect a change in environment could make, referencing “a young woman who was for years ‘a raging maniac’ chained in a cage and whipped to control her acts and words. She was helped by a husband and wife who agreed to take care of her in their home and slowly she recovered her senses.” (Bumb). Her ideas of rehabilitation were radical for the time, most people believed that the mentally ill were condemned to a miserable existence the minute they were born. As her reports spread, so did public outrage. One Massachusetts selectman was in complete denial, claiming she wrote “bare-faced falsehood, false impression, and false statements” (Gollaher). The government was embarrassed by being exposed for their treatment of inmates. Dix had goals of building prison libraries, teaching basic literacy for Bible reading, reducing whipping and beating, increasing the commutation of sentences, and separating women, children and the sick (Prison and Asylum). Reverend Louis Dwight shared similar goals. His introduction to the horrors of prison was similar to Dix’s. He was shocked by what he saw when he took bibles to prisoners, and decided to do something about it. He founded the Boston Prison Discipline Society to advocate for the improvement of prisons in general, and particularly advance care for the mentally ill. Dwight’s actions prompted Massachusetts legislature to form a committee and look into the state’s jails. Upon their investigation, the committee confirmed what Dwight knew. “Lunatics” were being incarcerated and subjected to degrading conditions. The committee’s report told of a man who had been confined for nine years, “He had a wreath of rags around his body and another round his neck. … He had no bed, chair or bench … a heap of filthy straw, like the nest of swine, was in the corner. … The wretched lunatic was indulging [in] some delusive expectations of being soon released from this wretched abode.” (Torrey). Clearly necessary, the committee recommended the mentally ill be transferred to a hospital, leading to the opening of the State Lunatic Asylum at Worcester. Dix and Dwight both defended the mentally ill, to the extent that the government was forced to recognize that there was a problem. Improving the quality of imprisonment, especially for the mentally ill, they were trailblazers for reform in America.
The Auburn system lead the way in prison reform. A new model was followed when New York’s second state prison in Auburn was established. The Auburn plan enforced “industry, obedience, and silence” as its guiding principles. The prisoners did hard labor in separate workshops, unable to communicate with each other. Their names were replaced by a prison number for identification. Movement from each individual cell to the workshops was performed in a lockstep, a military-style march (Prisons: Auburn). A Boston clergyman described it as “a specimen of neatness. The unremitted industry, the entire subordination and subdued feelings of the convicts, have probably no parallel among an equal number of criminals.” (Shaler, King, and Wharton 63) The success of the Auburn plan spread, and Sing Sing prison was built using the same model. The image in Appendix B shows Sing Sing prisoners in the lockstep during dining hall, prohibited from speaking (Dining Hall). While the Auburn system seemed bleak with the strict rules and inability to socialize at all, it was better than pure neglect. The aforementioned reformer Reverend Louis Dwight mostly approved of the Auburn Plan. In his annual report with the Boston Prison Discipline Society, he wrote, “on the whole, the institution is immensely elevated above the old penitentiaries” (Dwight). The tiny individual cells at Auburn were much more comfortable than previous prison accommodations; cages, cellars, closets. The prisoners lives were enhanced by the Auburn plan’s harsh protocols. They went from having no structure and being chained up in a hole, to having a clear daily schedule and work to do. The government also enjoyed the rewards of the new system. The inmates spent all day making goods to be sold by the state, and all of that free labor resulted in a larger profit (Capo). Additional profit was made when Americans came to see their tax dollars at work, and paid a fee to tour the prison (Prisons: Auburn). The Auburn plan improved the lives of prisoners while making money for the government.
The Pennsylvania system made another attempt at reform, which was not as successful as the Auburn system. Shaped on Quaker beliefs, the Pennsylvania system provided prisoners time to reflect on the crime that landed them there, read the Bible, and work. Jails today are often called penitentiaries, stemming from the idea that prisoners could repent their wrongdoings. The time to reflect was always, as the system implemented complete solitary confinement. The Auburn system required silence amongst prisoners and solitary confinement at night, but there was human contact during the day. The Pennsylvania system isolated prisoners in their cells day and night (Capo). Charles Dickens visited Pennsylvania’s Eastern Penitentiary, and disapproved of the utter loneliness, saying, “this slow and daily tampering with the mysteries of the brain, [is] immeasurably worse than any torture of the body” (Prisons: Pennsylvania). Before reform, physical punishment like beating, whipping, or even death could be the consequence for committing a crime. The Pennsylvania system provided mental punishment. The goal was to rehabilitate inmates, while the outcome left them much worse off. From the outside, the prison seemed state of the art, “with central heating, flush toilets, and shower baths in each private cell, the penitentiary boasted luxuries that not even President Andrew Jackson could enjoy at the White House”(Woodham). The actual building was an improvement for the physical quality of life, but the practice of seclusion inside was deeply damaging. The government looked humane at first, giving convicts a chance to atone for their sins. When the realities of solitude were brought to light, it became a sparingly used form of punishment, and prisons like the Eastern Penitentiary were shut down. Prisoners gained material wellness from the Pennsylvania system, and the government gained a temporary appearance of being compassionate.
Nobody benefitted from the old prison system. Connecticut’s Newgate prison was easily escapable and unsanitary. Dorothea Dix and Louis Dwight fought for the betterment of the environment of prisons. Their requests were met with the Auburn and Pennsylvania systems. The Auburn system was strict, but far superior to previous quarters. The severity of the Auburn plan was taken to another level by the Pennsylvania system, with ceaseless solitude. Prisoners attained some relief through reform, because it was more comfortable to be in a cell or doing labor than it was to be locked in a dungeon. The government profited by seeming more humane while they reaped the benefits of providing the inmates with work to do. When prisons improved, so did the American perception of the government.