Dickens was not the only European commentator to be concerned about the
effects of solitary confinement on prisoners' sanity. The Swiss prison
system had been much influenced by American developments, and during the
1830s the regimes in Swiss prisons came to resemble more and more closely
the Pennsylvania system of solitary. In 1838 two Swiss doctors published
critiques of the Swiss prisons ort the basis of their effects on the prisoners'
mental health. In particular, they stated that in the prisons in Geneva
and Lausanne the number of deaths and mental disturbances increased in
direct relation to the shift in the Swiss institutions from the Auburn
to the Pennsylvania system.50 However, in
a report by an investigating committee in Philadelphia in 1837 it was
maintained that comparison of the records in the North American correctional
institutions revealed that there were fewer rather than more cases of
mental illness in Cherry Hill than in other prisons. The committee was
of the view that however greatly one might fear for the prisoners' sanity
under the pres sure of absolute and continuous solitude without labour,
without books, without instruction, and without daily association with
prison employees and visitors, the regime at Cherry Hill was such that
no one was in danger of losing his mind because of isolation.51
Although the debates in the United States and in Europe pivoted around
the respective advantages of the two models of penitentiary discipline,
it is important to realize that, notwithstanding their diversity, the
separate and silent systems had a common basis. In a report made to the
New York legislature in 1867, E.C. Wines and Theodore Dwight described
that common basis in this way:
Isolation and labour lie at the foundation of both.
They are fundamental principles of both, according to the ideal on which
they were formed. The difference is one of application; of mode, and not
of principle. In one the isolation is effected by an absolute bodily separation
by day as well as by night. and labour is performed in the cell of each
individual convict. In the other, labour is performed in common workshops
and the isolation at night is secured by the confinement of the prisoners
in separate cells, but during the day is of a moral species, being effected
by the enforcement, so far as such a thing is possible, of an absolute
silence. The bodies of the prisoners are together, but their souls are
apart; and, while there is a material society, there is a mental solitude.52
Michel Foucault, while agreeing that isolation and labour were the common
principles around which both the Auburn and Pennsylvania systems were
organized, expressed the differences in more graphic terms: 'Auburn was
society itself reduced to its bare essentials. Cherry Hill was life annihilated
and begun again.'53
The debate that took place on both sides of the Atlantic about the relative
advantages of the two systems was not an empty one, however. As Foucault
states, 'a whole series of different conflicts stemmed from the opposition
between these two models: religious (must conversion be the principal
element of correction?), medical (does total isolation drive convicts
insane?), economic (which method costs less?), architectural and administrative
(which form guarantees the best surveillance?). This, no doubt, was why
the argument lasted so long.'54
While the influence of the American experience with the two models of
penitentiary disciplines was to be felt throughout Europe, it was particularly
influential in England. It is important to consider the way in which the
American experience was evaluated and implemented in England, because
in turn that system came to influence events in Canada. The overcrowding
in the English prisons brought about by an increase in the crime rate
in the wake of demobilization after the Napoleonic Wars led to the abandonment
of the regime of solitary confinement in the institutions that had sought
to introduce it. In its place and under the influence of the American
experience in Auburn and Sing Sing the rule of silence was extended, and
in the 1820s and 1830s the silent system, along with the introduction
of the bread-and-water diet and the tread wheel, ushered in an era characterized
by an escalation in repressive measures directed against prisoners.55
Page 10 of 11
|