HABITUAL OFFENDERS AND ADULT REFORMATORIES. (Hansard, 4 May 1897)

§ * SIR CHARLES CAMERON (Glasgow, Bridgeton)

rose to move:— That, in view of the increasing ratio of habitual offenders and misdemeanants in our prison population, the inadequacy of the existing law to deter or reform them, the cost involved in their repeated imprisonments, and their demoralising influence upon the community, this House considers the institution of adult reformatories for their special treatment, as recommended by the recent Departmental Committee on Habitual Offenders (Scotland), to be a matter deserving the early attention of Her Majesty's Government. He said that the existence of a mass of petty criminals in the community was a source of great demoralisation and danger, for it was from the ranks of these petty misdemeanants and offenders that the army of more desperate crime was constantly recruited. This sub- 1532 ject had attracted the attention of the departments concerned with the administration of the law, and in 1894 two departmental Committees were appointed to investigate the subject, one by the then Home Secretary, of which the right hon. Member for West Leeds (Mr. Herbert Gladstone) was Chairman, and the other by the Secretary for Scotland, Sir George Trevelyan, over which he himself had the honour to preside. The English Committee was directed to inquire into a number of matters of prison administration in England, and among them was the question of the prison discipline of habitual criminals, while the Scotch Committee had its attention directed primarily to the question of the alleged increase of habitual offenders, vagrants, beggars and inebriates in Scotland, and the inadequacy of the existing law for dealing with them, and was invited to make suggestions for reforms calculated to deal with the evil. The result of this Scotch Committee's investigations showed that there had been an increase in the number of habitual offenders within the five years preceding the Committee's appointment, the years 1889 to 1894—as indicated by the number of persons sent to prison ten times and upwards in one year. The number had increased by 14 per cent. There appeared to have been an even larger increase of habitual criminals in England, and as showing the futility of the present system for reclaiming offenders, the English Committee summed up the result of the 1893 figures in a table, from which it appeared that of persons committed for the first time 30 per cent, returned to prison, for the second time 48 per cent, returned to prison, for the third time 64 per cent., for the fourth time 71 per cent., and for the fifth time 79 per cent. On the strength of these facts the English Committee declared that when a prisoner passed into the habitual class, prison life, subject to the sentences now given, lost its terrors as familiarity with it increased, and that such sentences on old criminals and on persons habitually drunk and disorderly were almost altogether ineffective. The laws and administration in Scotland were different, but the Scotch Committee came to precisely the same conclusion as to the utter inadequacy of the present 1533 system to deal with the evil. They said:— One result of the diversity of the law regarding petty offences in Scotland, and the still greater diversity in the method of police administration, is that it affords an exceptional opportunity of judging as to the comparative efficacy of a number of different systems for the regression of the class of offences with which we are called upon to deal. It was therefore most significant that with one accord the wit nesses connected with the administration of the law and police throughout Scotland testified as to the inter inadequacy of any of the systems adopted to cope with the evil of the habitual offender. While these I we Committees, working independently of each other, arrived at the same, conclusion as to the increase of offenders and the inadequacy of existing methods to deal with or reform them, what was more hopeful was that both Committees were agreed at all events as to the principle of the remedy that was to be applied. Both recommended the establishment of adult reformatories. The English Committee made rather more complex recommendations than the Scotch. They proposed the institution of a Government penal reformatory, and that the Court should have power to commit to this reformatory offenders above 10 and under 23 for periods of not less than one year and up to three years, and that the Secretary of State should have power to transfer prisoners under 23 from prisons to the penal reformatory if satisfied that the treatment there would be more suitable, Referring to the large class of habitual Criminals not of the desperate order, who live by robbery and thieving and petty larceny, and who run the risk of short sentences with comparative indifference, they suggested that a new form of sentence should be placed at the disposal of the Judges, by which these offenders might be segregated for long periods of detention, during which they would not be treated with the severity of first-class hard labour or penal servitude, but would be, forced to work under less onerous conditions. They further suggested that prisoners sentenced primarily for drunkenness should be specially treated in prisons or parts of prisons set apart for them. The Scotch Committee also suggested adult reformatories, or, as they preferred to call them, "labour settlements," as the best means for solving this question. It appeared to him 1534 that their plan was simpler than the other, while it embraced all the recommendations and requirements made by the English Committee. Their proposal was the institution of labour settlements, where habitual offenders and petty criminals could be subjected to prolonged detention, put to productive labour, so that as far as possible they might become self-supporting, and have inculcated habits of industry and self-reliance, and from which they could get licensed so as to get accustomed to liberty before their final liberation. The Committee also suggested that in these settlements the persons detained should be afforded the opportunity of earning a gratuity for work on a more liberal scale than existed in the prisons, with the view of enabling them to earn sufficient money with which they might emigrate or go to another part of the country where they might obtain a fresh start in life. In these settlements the most complete system of classification of inmates could be carried out. The younger could be separated from the older, and as to those offenders in whose ease drunkenness formed the primary factor, they would be subjected to treatment calculated in the highest degree to break their habit. They might under the system of classification be dealt with separately, but, in any case, they would be under medical supervision, they would be employed in the open air, and trained in the habits of abstinence, industry, and discipline, and he thought they would thus be placed in a better position for the ultimate repression of the drink habit than if they were shut up in a prison engaged in indoor work. The Scotch plan, therefore, seemed to cover all the suggestions of the English Committee, and he had ventured to bring it before the House, because the recommendations were due to a Committee which included amongst its members a gentleman so thoroughly conversant with the whole system of prison administration in England and Scotland as Colonel M'Hardy, the present Chief Commissioner for Prisons in Scotland. The Scotch Committee worked out their scheme in great detail. They thought it could be carried out at almost no expense to the National Exchequer, and with the hope of bringing about a large ultimate saving. What commended it to 1535 him was that it was not punitive but reformatory. ["Hear, hear!"] They surrounded their proposal with safeguards which, he thought, would render it impossible that any but incorrigibles could come within its scope. There appeared in Scotland to be more urgent necessity for facing this problem than in England. In Scotland the local authorities were most anxious that something should be done, for in every town apparently there were a hundred or more habitual offenders who gave the police considerable trouble. In proportion to the population the number of persons annually imprisoned in Scotland was nearly 2½ times as large as the corresponding number in England. Whilst here a proportion of 5½ persons to 1,000 of the population went to prison every year, the proportion in Scotland was 12 to 1,000 of the population. This must not be taken as indicating greater depravity on the part of the Scotch people. The ratio of convicts sent to penal servitude was practically the same in both countries. The ratio of persons convicted on indictment was slightly in excess to what it was in England, but that was due to no more than the system of public prosecution which universally prevailed north of the Tweed. The difference, in numbers arose from the cases dealt with summarily in Scotland—those of drunkenness, breach of the peace, assault, petty theft, vagrancy, begging, and solicitation. Such cases were prosecuted by the Procurator Fiscal, and the greater number were dealt with under local Police Acts, which were more stringent than the Police Acts in, England. The comparatively trivial nature of Scottish crime was shown, by the fact that the average sentence in Scotland was barely half as much as in England. In 1891, of the 48,000 persons imprisoned in Scottish prisons, 33,000 were cases of drunkenness, breach of the peace, and petty assaults. It was curious, and it was a fact not known to those who had not studied the habits of habitual drunkards, that the number of habitual drunkards, pure and simple, that came before the Police Courts was comparatively small. The Committee, in making their proposal, did not make any special recommendation as to the treatment of habitual 1536 drunkards. They thought that no better treatment for them could be devised than prolonged confinement, in places where they would be deprived of drink, have healthy work, and be, of course, under medical supervision. He had shown the House that the present system of short sentences was absolutely useless. Would long sentences be of any more avail? The Departmental Committee thought they would not. Within 20 years the length of sentences had been halved, from 30½ to 15½ days. The opportunity for re-committals had increased, but the number of them had gone on steadily decreasing. In the vast majority of cases much less than the maximum sentences were inflicted, and where exceptional penalties had been sanctioned it was found that they were never inflicted. What was wanted was not longer sentences, but a different system of dealing with habitual offenders. Another question was, weir these habitual offenders susceptible of reformation? He was happy to say that both Committees held that they were not incorrigible, and the English Committee was especially hopeful as to the possibility of reforming the more juvenile offenders, though it did not despair of the case of the older and more hardened. The Scotch Commit tee took much the same view. In Scotland by far the larger proportion of habitual offenders were women. They were 2½ times as numerous as the men, the explanation probably being that a single false step might land them in an unalterable career; but there existed among them widespread and remarkable desire to reform. The Scotch Commission interviewed a large number of women in gaols and refuges, and reported that in many cases the stories were very sad. They went on to say:— The sacrifices to which many of these women submit, in their effort to escape from their wretched existence are convincing proof of their earnestness of purpose. In the Magdalene Asylums, in which so many of them find refuge, they voluntarily undergo close confinement for periods of 12 to 24 months, labouring hard at laundry or other work, and, in many cases, supporting by their toil the institutions in which they are immured, their monetary remuneration, postponed to the end of the term of voluntary confinement, amounting to £3 a year, including the value of their outfit. This they do in the hope of being restored to the paths of honest labour. 1537 And they added:— It does seem a pity that so many girls and women should in our gaols be submitted to a treatment which appears with each committal but to render them more reckless and abandoned. The proposal of the Committee was that when a person was imprisoned three times within 12 months and was again charged, he should be remanded to the Sheriff, who should be authorised to inflict upon him imprisonment without the option of a tine and to decide whether he should lie classed as an habitual offender. If he considered he should, he would order his name to be inscribed on a register, and inform him that, if he was charged so long as his name remained on the register, he would be attain brought before the Sheriff, who would again punish him, and in addition order him to be sent to an adult reformatory for not less than 12 or more than 30 months. Referring in their proposal, the Committee said:— The proposal which we submit aims not at increasing punishments but reducing them, and its object, based on many years' experience of a similar system in the treatment of youthful delinquents, is to safeguard society from the injury and annoyance which it at present suffers at the hands of habitual offenders, and with the minimum amount of compulsion and restraint by industrial training and discipline to restore as many as possible of them to the ranks of law-abiding citizens. With this object we have endeavoured to shape our proposal so as to avoid initial expense, and avail ourselves to the utmost of existing agencies, parochial and voluntary. They proposed to utilise as homes fur these persons poor-houses, many of which could be set free by judicious combination, and disused prisons. There were many prisons round which there was certain amount of Government land available for being worked by the inmates. Many habitual offenders were physically unlit for labour, and gravitated between the prison and the poor-house, and gave rise to an immense amount of trouble and expense to the local authorities. The Committee were repeatedly implored to suggest powers to detain for a considerable period this class of persons. What they proposed in. the ease of the habitual offender who was physically unfit to be relegated to the labour settlement was that the sheriff should order his confinement in a poor-house, where he would be 1538 treated under rules sanctioned by the Secretary for Scotland. He thought that if a man had been sent to prison four times within a year, it showed that he was an habitual offender, and that some strong steps must be taken in respect of him. The Committee proposed that four committals within the year should stamp a person as an habitual offender, and if that figure were adopted it was estimated that 1,800 persons would be dealt with within the year, 500 males and 1,300 females. Some of those the sheriffs would acquit, in some cases sentences would be suspended, and the remainder would be declared habitual offenders. That declaration would suffice in itself to pull up a considerable number of them. In Glasgow in the olden days it was the custom to turn away a large number of persons arrested for drunkenness. In 1873 54,000 persons were arrested, and 30,000 were discharged without being brought before the magistrates. But the magistrates ordered a change; they ordered that no person should be dismissed without cither leaving a pledge with the police or being brought before them, and after that system had been in vogue for two years the arrests for drunkenness fell from 54,000 to 36,000, a diminution of 37 per cent. The Committee felt justified in believing that the risk of a long confinement and enforced labour would have a very deterrent effect upon a considerable number of offenders; indeed, they calculated that not more than 900 would be sent to the labour settlement. They estimated that this operation would diminish the prison population of Scotland by 25 per cent., and that when it came into full effect there would be a saving to the State in the expenses of the prisons of something like £10,000 a year, and they proposed that with that sum the Treasury should endow the scheme. They believed that that, together with the labour of the person dealt with, would nearly suffice to make up the entire cost of the scheme, but any slight deficiency there might be they suggested should lie made up by the class of offenders themselves. An enormous proportion of prisoners in Scotch prisons were committed there in default of the payment of fines. A man might be fined 40s., or in default of payment be committed to prison, for four weeks. The man might have 35s. in his pocket, but he would be 1539 obliged to serve the whole of the four weeks unless he could raise the extra 5s. The Committee recommended a combination of fine and imprisonment. For instance, they recommended:— That in all cases in which a prisoner is committed to prison in default of the payment of a fine, the prisoner should be released at any period of his detention, not solely on payment of the whole fine imposed as at present, but on the payment of such proportion of that fine as the number of days' imprisonment still to be undergone bears to the entire sentence of imprisonment in default of payment. It was estimated that if this plan were adopted the tines paid in prisons would amount to between £7,000 and £8,000 a year. But there was another fund which the Committee thought might be treated as security in case of any deficit, and that was the £25,000 a year which local authorities received in the shape of lines from offenders. In the Committee's opinion the Government should, find the money required for the initial expenses, which they estimated at £15,000 or £20,000, but that they suggested should be handed back by instalments. Considering, however, the large sums recently given to England without similar disbursements in Scotland, the Exchequer might be a, little more generous and give a grant which would enable the scheme to be carried out without having recourse to any novel proposal. The estimates he had given were those of practical men. The scheme held out every prospect of success for the reformation of a large number of habitual criminals, while it would rid society of pests which were a source of demoralisation and danger. He would like to see the experiment tried all over the kingdom, but if financial or other considerations precluded the Government from entering upon an experiment on so large a scale, he urged upon them the desirability of at once trying it in Scotland, where there was a cut and dried scheme before them which could be tried with the most cordial co-operation on the part of the prison authorities and the local authorities.