SW_WH1793_Page_073

were four years in our state prison, and, on account of orderly conduct and good behaviour, pardoned. Third—Has there been sufficient experience of solitary confinement, to enable you to answer the same question in relation to that mode of punish-ment? And so far as your experience or observation may extend, please to state the result? Answer—There has been no experience in the state prison of New-York, that would serve to ascertain how far continual solitary confinement may eventu-ally produce reformation; recourse has only been had to it, as a temporary punishment for bad conduct in the prison—in this way it has produced good effects, and has generally been the means of enforcing clean-liness, preserving order, and good behaviour, even among the most hardened convicts. When I was a member of the Board of Inspectors, by-laws were enacted, which declared, that all con-versation, (except such as might be necessary whilst at work,) want of cleanliness, whistling, attempting to sing, &;c., were offences against the laws of the prison, and should meet with immediate punishment, by confinement in a solitary cell on bread and water, from one to three days, or longer, according to the nature of the offence. By a faithful and rigid execu-tion of these laws, the quiet and order of this prison was, with some exceptions, perfectly preserved; and, as regarded neatness and extreme cleanliness, no prison in the world could surpass it. Fourth—If you shall be of opinion that the pre-sent, or any system of prison discipline, may be made to produce material and permanent reformation in any large proportion of cases, then be pleased to state how, and in what way, in your opinion, it becomes operative towards that end? What are the circum-stances in the system which will tend to change the character of the convict, and how do they, or will they, operate? What can be done to make them more effectual?