inspectors were appointed by the governor and council during pleasure. No salaries were paid to them; actuated by principles of benevolence, and a love of justice and humanity, they offered the voluntary contribution of their services. They sought no other recompense than those feelings which accompany the exertions of good men for the benefit of society. It was their duty to enquire into and inspect the general state of the prison; to see that the keepers were attentive and faithful in the discharge of their several duties; that cleanliness, decency, and order, were every where maintained; that the prisoners were treated with justice and humanity; to listen to their complaints and communications; to admonish the bad, applaud the good, and encourage all to amendment and reformation; and to give them such advice as might awake virtuous sensibility, and promote their moral and religious improvement.*

Under such directions, the Penitentiary at New York was as successful in its operation as

*See the Account of the State Prison, or Penitentiary in the City of New York, for the year 1817, Appendix, No. IV; the chief part of which is reprinted from the first account of that Penitentiary, drawn up by Mr. Eddy, and published in 1801, in which are many judicious and excellent observations respecting the management of that and similar institutions; well deserving the attention of all persons who interest themselves on this subject.

that at Philadelphia; and similar establishments, under the name of State prisons, have since been founded in Massachusetts, Vermont, Connecticut, New Jersey, Maryland, Virginia, and other places.

For some time after their commencement, these establishments appear to have answered every purpose which their promoters had in view. Most of them were conducted by persons who undertook their management without the inducement of salaries, or any other interested motive, and under their direction they continued for a course of years to be productive of the most beneficial effects. There is, however, reason to apprehend, that as these institutions were, from various causes, deprived of this assistance, a relaxation of discipline took place; and that as the terms of commitment began to expire, or the prisoners were discharged on pardon as reformed, the number of those recommitted for new offences began to increase. This circumstance, combining with the rapid increase of population in every part of the United States, occasioned such an influx of prisoners, that the buildings became inadequate to their reception, or at least to afford that accommodation which is indispensable to their utility.

The State prison of Massachusetts had been established at Charlestown, in the vicinity of

Boston in 1805, and was placed under the superintendence of a board of visitors, which, after frequent changes in their number, was exchanged in 1811, for the government of a warden and three directors, under which it still continues. From the reports of this institution, it appears to have struggled with considerable difficulties. The convicts were sentenced to hard labour, "and it was a fond, though false expectation of some of the advocates for such an institution, that the proceeds of this labour would pay all the expense of the establishment.” Disappointed in the hope of compelling convicts to become industrious, without an inducement, and alarmed at the unfavourable state of the prison, and the increase of expense, it became a matter of doubt," whether it had answered the purpose for which it was intended?" which question we are informed, "might be answered negatively or affirmatively, as various sentiments and opinions predominate."* In this situation, the Legislature of Massachusetts thought it expedient, in the year 1817, to appoint three commissioners, " to inquire into the mode of governing the Penitentiary of Pennsylvania, and others of a similar nature; to consider at large the subject of the

* See the Report of the State Prison of Massachusetts for 1817, in the Appendix, No. V.

State prison (of Massachusetts), and to report any improvement which can be made in the government, organization, or enlargement of that establishment.”

Thus authorised, "the Commissioners inspected by one or more of the board, the several Penitentiaries or State Prisons of Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Maryland," and have since made their Report respecting the same; which, as it contains matter highly interesting to other countries, as well as to the United States, is given at length in the Appendix to the present volume.* From this Report, it will be seen with regret, by those who have supposed that the American establishments have been attended with uniform success, that this has not been the case; and that considerable difficulties have occurred, and are yet to be surmounted, before the object they have in view can be accomplished. Such is the nature of these documents, that their publication, at the present season, may be thought ‹ likely to operate with an unfavourable effect on the measures in agitation in this country for the adoption of a similar system; but considerations of this nature are, in fact, an additional motive for laying them before the public without delay: as they may serve to point out, and

* Appendix, No. VI.

thereby enable us to avoid the causes which have led to this situation.

With respect to the Penitentiary at Philadelphia, the Commissioners observe, that "during a few years after its establishment, it was provided with sufficient room, and proper accommodations for the separation of the convicts from each other. By the vigilance of the keepers all intercourse and communication was prevented by day; and at night the prisoners were lodged in solitary cells." During this period, the establishment was productive of the happy effects before described; but in the year 1817,"it afforded a striking contrast. The building in which the prisoners were confined, and the yard in which they were employed, were the same used for those purposes in the year 1795. No addi tional accommodations, either for the lodging, or employment of the convicts, had been provided." The consequences were, that "the very crowded state of the Penitentiary became an evil of considerable magnitude.”—“ The number of persons of all classes continued to increase, so that from twenty to forty were lodged in rooms of eighteen feet square. So many are thus crowded together in a small space, that the institution already begins to assume the character of an European prison, and a seminary for every vice-in which the unfortunate being who commits a first offence, and knows none of the arts