HC Deb 28 May 1847 vol 92 cc1280-2

On the question that 388,000l. be granted for county rates, expense of prosecutions, maintenance of prisoners, &c.,

MR. HENLEY

said, that the vote now-asked for would not defray the expense for which it was intended. It made no provision for the clothing, blankets, or bedding of the prisoners.

SIR G. GREY

said, the present vote contemplated two classes of prisoners—those who were formerly maintained by the counties, and those who, by reason of the change in the law, were now confined in the prisons in this country instead of being transported. It would be found that in the estimates for the expense of transports, there was a corresponding diminution of expense.

MR. HENLEY

did not accuse the present Government of not having fulfilled the promise held out to the county magistrates. It was the late Government who said that if the counties would provide prison room for transported convicts, the State would defray the expense of the other convicts in the prisons; instead of that, all that was provided was bread and meat, no allowance being made for clothing and bedding. This was a breach of faith, and a very shabby and mean way of carrying out what was originally proposed to the counties as a boon. It amounted to about 2s. a head per week.

SIR G. GREY

said, the hon. Gentleman was quite right in saying that the present Government was not responsible for this vote; nor was there any record of what was the intention of the late Government in proposing the vote of 40,000l., which it had done in a former year.

Vote agreed to.

On the question that 14,349l. be granted for the expenses of the Prison at Parkhurst, in the Isle of Wight, being proposed,

MR. HUME

said, that this vote was not only for maintaining boys in prison at Parkhurst, but for afterwards sending them abroad. Now, it appeared to him, that it would be better to send the boys abroad without any previous prosecution. It was encouraging vice to leave a number of boys idling about the country, and making no sort of provision for them until they had committed some crime.

SIR G. GREY

believed that the experiment of which the hon. Gentleman complained had succeeded. Very full reports had been laid before Parliament respecting the conduct of the boys who had been sent abroad from the prison at Parkhurst, and the accounts were of the most favourable character.

MR. WILLIAMS

approved of the suggestion of his hon. Friend (Mr. Hume), and thought it would be much better to give the money to the parents, to enable the boys to go out as free labourers and not as convicts, than to await the commission of an offence against the laws, and then, after a certain term of imprisonment, to send them out at the expense of the country as convicts.

LORD G. BENTLNCK

thought the House ought to have the details of this great, new, liberal plan for taking out all the boys of the country to the penal colonies; and he should like the hon. Member for Montrose to explain this novel proposition.

MR. HUME

observed, that none were so dull as those who would not understand. All that he (Mr. Hume) had suggested, was, that instead of leaving the boys in this country till they became criminals, the better plan would be to send them out as free agents, by appropriating the same money for that purpose as was now expended on them as convicts. If this plan were adopted, there could be no doubt that very many boys would be found willing and eager to go abroad.

Vote agreed to.

On the vote of 18,307l. for the expenses of the Model Prison, Pentonville, being proposed,

MR. WILLIAMS

complained of the expense of this establishment. The costs of the officers for looking after the prisoners, was at the rate of 15l. 6s. each prisoner in the year. This exceeded the wages paid to a hardworking labourer.

SIR G. GREY

said, the expenditure at Pentonville must not be taken as a model of expenditure for all prisons, although it was a model prison.

MR. WILLIAMS

thought it remarkable that the labour of 500 prisoners in the Pentonville prison should have averaged only l½d. per day. He had complained of this last year, and the produce of the prisoners' labour appeared to have been doubled in consequence; but it was still far below the produce of labour in the prisons of the United States. He observed that the pay of the persons who taught the Pentonville prisoners was twice as much as the produce of their labour amounted to.

MR. HENLEY

said, these prisoners cost 14s. a week each for their maintenance, besides 4s. rent, which made the cost 18s. per head. In the rest of the counties of England the average might be taken at 10s. per head. He thought the management of Pentonville was economic. The men being kept on the separate system required a higher diet.

MR. HUME

said, it appeared the maintenance of convicts in gaols cost from 12s. to 14s. a week. What a lesson this was for hon. Members, when they saw poor men labouring from morning to night, and unable to obtain 7s. a week! The expense of maintaining prisoners in gaols showed the immense importance of endeavouring, by prevention, to keep them out.

SIR G. GREY

was afraid that, under the best system of education, some prisons would be necessary.

MR. HENLEY

did not think the experiment of Pentonville worth much as a model prison. The Government took only picked prisoners there, while the counties had to deal with the old, imbecile, &c. The value of the experiment had not been so great as it would have been, had the Government taken the prisoners as they came. It must also be remembered, that many persons thought the separate system had a tendency to injure the minds of the prisoners,

SIR G. GREY

might remark, that medical men who had watched the system of separate confinement thought it very successful, and that no more cases of insanity had occurred in the Pentonville prison than were commonly found in persons of the same class of life.

Vote agreed to.