made to understand a "mystery of religion," but can he not understand why he is expected to believe it? Neither do we expect that dogmas can be explained so as to be understood; but we do expect, that what they learn they will understand, and what they believe, they will be able to give a reason for, not in parrot style, but becoming an intellectual being; and surely this is not impossible.

The Chaplain of a prison has one great advantage over any other officer-he has the unlimited confidence of the great majority of the prisoners, from the very moment of their reception. On this account, he could do an immense service both. to the prison and prisoners, by holding private conversation with each prisoner in turn. One instructive conversation in private being, in our opinion, worth fifty public sermons to the prisoner. Such a process is slow, we admit, but it is the fastest. These conversations may, frequently with advantage, turn to worldly subjects. This is, we presume, what the Directors of Convict Prisons mean by "individualization." We fully concur with the directors in the belief, that this is the secret of success. We are delighted to find the Honorary Governor of the Preventive and Reformatory Institution, 19 New Road, near Gower-street, north, London, has made it a rule to spend half-an-hour daily, in this way instructing the boys of his reformatory.

The following extract is taken from Rev. J. Field's excellent work on Prison Discipline. It clearly proves the necessity for INDIVIDUALIZATION :—

"Under the system of association, which recognised no variety of character, admitted little difference in the penal treatment, and afforded very few opportunities for individual instruction-of course this particular information was of comparatively little value; but its importance can scarcely be overrated now that the isolation of criminals permits the adaptation of punishment to circumstances, and allows discipline to be varied, in its application, as the disposition and conduct may require.

The following observations of the Inspectors of Prisons for the Home district, confirm the above remarks:-'It is plain that, if the reformation or intimidation of the convict ought to be the aim and object of his treatment while in confinement, this purpose can only be rationally and successfully pursued, by discovering, as soon as possible, what is the peculiar cast or frame of mind of the prisoner; what are his capacities, wants, feelings, and inclinations; and by suiting the treatment which he is to receive, and the behaviour and conduct of those who visit him, to the character which he appears

to bear. Unless this be done, the whole process of penal discipline is a mere game of chance, or rather an absurd and abortive pursuit of an end, without the employment of any likely means. We do not think it possible to overstate the importance of bearing in mind this consideration. The efficacy of a sound system may be safely said to depend upon the accuracy and facility with which it discovers the temper and character of the prisoner, and upon the facility and effect with which it adapts itself to the exigency of the case. The endless diversities of human character require appropriate treatment.'

The author of an interesting pamphlet on Reformatory Punishments,' just published, observes on this subject, that- As for every detail in a rule of action, a specific adaptation in the agent is requisite, so no such adaptation is complete, without an equally varied remedy, for every possible interruption. Therefore, no code of remedies is perfect, unless it be capable of particular application to all possible accidents to its subject—that is, unless it has a corresponding re-action on every possible action of the law it applies to. A remedy,' says Arnold, 'in itself good for one particular symptom, may do harm rather than good to the whole case, if applied alone; or, if not mischievous, it may be inefficient.' Nor less erroneous must be the idea that punishment, fit for men in one state, must be fit for men in a different state; or that any general rules can be laid down for the proper character of punishment under all circumstances. Burlamaqui has observed, that it is obvious, wherever laws are prescribed, there must be a fitness of agency, or they lose their application; and a power to check resistance, or they lose their obligativeness. He adds-And the same sort of punishment does not make the same impression on all kinds of people, consequently has not the same force to deter them from vice. We ought, therefore, to consider both in the general penal sanction, and in its applicationthe person of the criminal, and all those qualities which increase or diminish the sense of particular punishments."

For the purpose of "individualizing" a knowledge of phrenology would be most valuable, though not indispensable, to those having the education of youth, whether that education be intellectual, moral, or religious. Captain Maconochie's remarks, on Mr. Combe's paper, being so full and perfect, in expressing our own views on this important subject, that we consider it quite unnecessary for us to dwell further upon this matter, but respectfully invite attention to the Captain's own expressive language.

REMARKS ON MR. COMBE'S PAPER.

In the following observations on Mr. Combe's article, I waive the question of the truth of phrenology-I believe in this, and in its practical use and value in its place; but here it is merely a means to an end, that end being the full appreciation of the characters of Prisoners by their Governors and others in charge of them-I doubt, in my own mind, if it would even effect this.-It only shews tenden

cies; and character may be, and in almost all cases is, so modified by after circumstances, that organism is but an imperfect guide to its correct appreciation. The best tendencies are frequently overcome by temptation, and the worst get occasionally so fortunately directed as to be compatible not only with the absence of criminality, but even with a high moral standing. Mr. Combe in all his writings, but in none more than this, overlooks or undervalues the full force of this fact. But assuming even that Phrenology could do all for him that he here claims, I dispute the value that he attaches to the acquisition. A minute knowledge and appreciation of the character of the individual prisoners would not be a good foundation for their collective management, and on the contrary, would lead to endless mistakes, injustice, and at length confusion, or, it might be, rebellion among them.

The conclusions drawn from it could never be palpable to the mass of lookers-on, and their justice would therefore be constant matter of dispute; complaints of partiality, prejudice, inequality, and so forth, would be thus endless.-They would be so even if the decisions were always correct; but this could not be hoped for; and when they erred, direct injustice would of necessity ensue, sometimes in favour of an individual prisoner, sometimes to his prejudice. And the injury thus done would extend far beyond the individuals.— The very Law would be called in question through it.—It would become unequal, uncertain, often capricious, and never founded on appreciably fixed principles. I can conceive nothing more vague even in theory than such a system, nor in practice more embarrassing and unsatisfactory.

I am yet, as I have said, a believer in Phrenology, and concede fully, that as a supplementary agent, in the hands of an intelligent Governor, and still more Chaplain, guiding and regulating their demeanour and addresses to individual prisoners, encouraging some, checking others, appealing to one sentiment preferably to others with one, to another with another, and so on, it would be found a most excellent and valuable adjunct.—I have used it thus with many myself, and with success.-But a general system should not be so guided.It should rest on one or two fixed principles easily to be understood and appreciated by all, capable of being worked with little chance of error even by coarse hands, conveying a strong impulse to every one, whatever the diversities of the individuals to whom addressed, and by which all may thus reasonably be required to be guided.-And this function is in existing circumstances discharged by caution,-Fear, producing implicit obedience; for which in the mark system I propose to substitute "the desire to better ourselves," or, as it may be termed "self-interest,"- -a principle quite as instinctive as Fear, more powerful, for it habitually overcomes it, which is also a healthy, vigour-inspiring principle, changing its object with every step made in advance under its influence, which thus may raise from the lowest depths of abasement, as in criminals, to the highest principles of social ambition, and which thus in ordinary life, under Divine arrangement, keeps all human nature active and progressive, and cannot therefore be misplaced when we

seek, in humble imitation, to elevate the lowest; whereas Fear is a low, grovelling, depressing principle, enfeebling and deteriorating all much, or long under its active influence.-And this effect is so palpable in prisoners as at present managed, that it is even a proverb, Once a prisoner always one," the manly heart being so cowed and extinguished, the power of self-guidance so gone, the dependence on direction to regulate conduct so implicit, the moral weakness superinduced so absolute, and possibly the evil passions otherwise so irritated, that the man goes floundering on, poisoned and poisoning, till Transportation, natural death, or the Gallows alone, terminate a career to which this sad bent has been given (possibly despite of an originally average, or even favorable organism) by the consequences of a very slight youthful indiscretion.-I have seen many such examples.

And this philosophy seems to me at once indisputable, and to lie really very much on the surface; and it is extraordinary that in spite of this Self-Interest, is not only neglected as a principle in our ordinary Prison Discipline, but systematically excluded from it.Prisoners are all placed on a level in it. No laziness or indifference to improvement can make their situation materially worse, nor any effort either improve it, or shorten its duration, or in any other way advantage the individual exhibiting it. Some exception to this is now beginning to be made in the Government Gangs, concluding a long course of punishment, and preparing men to return to social life. But these are in existing circumstances, for the most part already hopelessly reduced. They are rendered prudent and plaus ible under this training, but not virtuous, and may thus be expected often to relapse. But why should not the same principle be brought to act on them while yet young und curable, in the County and Borough, in this point of view, Elementary Prisons which receive offenders in the beginning of their several careers? Why indeed? Because Penal Philosophers and the Public generally are still on the wrong road in regard to Prisoners, seeking present coercion and obedience rather than permanent improvement. They thus still greatly want the Leaders of the Press to guide their way-and both reason on the subject and expatiate on the advantages they may gain by following it, the lower classes from which prisoners mostly come, improved generally by their return among them reclaimed instead of having been made worse.

Carrisbrooke, 15th June, 1855.

A. MACONOCHIE.

The Chaplain could do a great deal, in removing the suspicion, with which criminals generally view any show of kindness, on the part of the officers, or in subduing that inveterate spirit of opposition which is to be found in most prisoners. In this way, the Chaplain would act as pioneer, and his services in this respect would be invaluable. We do not ask it for the sake of the officers, or with a view to their ease; no, we ask it for the sake of the common object of all-the reformation of the

unfortunate criminal. Let us hope, that there will be no splitting of hairs, no petty jealousy, no private animosity, no bickering between one officer and another, but that each will forget every thing but the one grand object-the salvation. of those over whom he is placed. Let it never be forgotten, that unless the officers work harmoniously together, the best system loses its efficiency. The effectiveness of a system, like that of an army, does not depend so much upon the individual strength or efficiency of its parts, as upon the compactness or unity of the whole.

We have written at considerable length, in a previous part of our paper, upon the quality of education which prevents crime. We now come to examine how and where the quality of men, to whom the education of our criminals ought to be entrusted, can be found. Our schoolmasters have been neglected, and, consequently, we find a difficulty in securing competent persons for the peculiar duties of prison schools. There has been no demand, and hence there has been no supply. We do not mean that the present teachers of our national and popular schools are incompetent for the situations they hold. The best of these men, although most efficient in an ordinary school, where they have to deal with boys comparatively innocent, would be found, when placed over our "Home Heathens," quite unequal to the task. A teacher who would be efficient in such a situation, must make human character a study for years, besides having a long practical experience of the working of a school attended by this class of children; he must be of a mind so constituted as to become more zealous and energetic from meeting with difficulties,-acquiring more taste for the profession the more laborious it becomes-in fact he must. have a mission. Mr. Turner, of the Philanthropic Institution at Redhill, writes, referring to this subject:

"He who has been used to schools where all are young, where all are assembled for a given time for the specific object of instruction, and from which the disorderly and mischievous are usually, after a trial, expelled, is very apt to be at a nonplus in a school where all are originally, and at first, "bad subjects," where many are fifteen. or sixteen, or seventeen years of age, where he has to govern as well as teach, where he has his work always going on, his judgment, his knowledge of character, his skill in management, constantly called out and exercised."

Let our readers not think or suppose, that such men can be had for niggard pay, or that young men of the material which