11.4: American History

American History

With both the police and the court components of our justice system we saw how developments in England took place before improvements in our system. However, institutional correction is one instance where American developments were more advanced than developments in England. While most of the change to the English system happened at the end of the 18^th century, many notable changes taking place in the American system by the end of the 17^th century.

Willam Penn

In many ways, William Penn of Pennsylvania was the leader ahead of his time. William Penn was a devout Quaker and he believed that we should treat other human being as we would want to be treated. Under his leadership, the typical practices of torture and mutilation were instead replaced by imprisonment at hard labor. These early houses of correction were much like a typical county jail however the condition were rather sparse and the inmates spent much of their day doing physical labor.

These houses of corrections seemed to be working and so William Penn ordered each county in Pennsylvania to build one. This method of correction lasted until 1718, shortly after his death. After William Penn died and thus no longer provided leadership many of the counties reverted to the use of public punishment and physical brutality rather than the relatively humane conditions in the houses of correction.

Image 11.1

Dr. Rush

Around 1787, the Quakers once again tried to bring humane and orderly treatment to the growing penal system. This movement was led by Dr. Benjamin Rush. Dr. Rush was given the opportunity to develop a penitentiary system which he attempted to do with the Walnut Street Jail. The method developed by Dr. Benjamin Rush is often referred to as the Pennsylvania system. The Pennsylvania system emphasized solitary confinement with the in-cell labor. The cell were fairly large by existing standards and included a bad, table, chair, fecal waste bucket, and Quaker Bible. It was hoped that in this place the convict would reflect on their wrongdoings and try to improve their moral character and thereby get right with God.

Before too long, a couple of problems began to surface. Fairly quickly the institution became overcrowded. By putting one inmate per cell, and making the cells somewhat large, it was not long before the institution ran out of space for the incoming inmates. Another problem that became evident little later was the understanding that humans are social creatures. To force humans to live by themselves in silence for an extended period of time with little to occupy them was a terrible psychological ordeal. In the present day, solitary confinement is actually used as a specific type of punishment because it is psychologically difficult to endure. In the case of the Walnut Street Jail, many of the inmates were psychologically much worse off when they left the institution then when they entered.

Image 11.2

Auburn System

In 1816, in Auburn New York a new type of prison system was being developed. With this new system the decision was to change the architecture of the building by making the building several floors tall. Inside the institution, this meant that the cells were stacked vertically one over another, floor after floor. This stacking of cells became known as a tier system. In the tier system rather the cells were smaller and rather than bringing food and work to each cell, the inmates were moved in small groups from one place to another such as to eat, to work, to shower, and back to the cells. This small group system became known as the congregate system. Moving the inmates around meant there had to be strict regimentation about how to eat, how to sit, how to walk in step, and how to stay silent at all times unless spoken to by a person in authority. Discipline was maintained through fear of harsh physical punishment and fear of solitary confinement.

Over time the Auburn system became more common than the Pennsylvania system though features of both types of systems are still found within our modern institutions. There is some debate whether prisons, and especially the early prisons, were any better than corporal punishment or was it simply that the harsh violence and torture was moved indoors where it was not seen by others and it could be even more savage.

Reforms

Some individuals in free society encouraged reform within the institutions. These individuals thought that rather than isolating prisoners from society, they could try to bring the best of society in to the prisoners. So, pastors were allowed to provide services, educators were allowed to offer classes, and professional are hired to provide treatment to some inmates. Eventually, the whip and lash were replaced by solitary confinement that was typically in a “hole” which was bare and dark so the inmate could not tell the passage of time, and they were served water and bread rations.

By the 1930s, the code of silence was eliminated and inmates were allowed to mingle with each other in common spaces such as where food was served or inmates could exercise. Because the inmates were now allowed to mingle, uniforms were introduced so inmates could be quickly identified compared to guards or civilians that might be in the institution. Over time, movies and radios were brought into the institutions and first-time offenders were separated from the hard-core offenders on the various floors of the institution.

By the 1960s, a prisoner’s rights movement had begun. Some states and numerous court decisions guaranteed to certain rights to the offender rather than always having guards or prison administrators determine what would or would not be allowed. It was at about this same time that the violence taking place in prisons either by guards on inmates or by inmates on each other became a national concern. By the late 1980s, there was concern about overcrowding in the institutions. The situation had grown so dire that at times 37 states have been under court order relating to inhumane overcrowding in the institutions. Even rural states such as North Dakota are not immune, being at 150% over capacity at the present time.