To the thoughtful man there are at least four reasons why he should be interested in prison reform. Why in other words he should be determined that a more humane and Christian spirit should be carried into our prisons. To a consideration of these I ask the readers' attention.

In the first place the criminal, in spite of his degradation and his lawlessness, is a human being. As such he deserves the kindest possible treatment. Society has the right to deprive a man of his liberty, but no right whatever to abuse him. It may treat him as a dangerous member of society, but not as a wild beast. What man would treat a wild beast with the ferocity or contemptuous indifference that until John Howard's day was the portion of the incarcerated? Surely, there is room for the display of feelings, and the acts, of humanity.

In the second place, judged by its results, the way sketched in the earlier part of this article is the wiser way. Criminality has not been increased, but rather lessened by more humane treatment of those under sentence of the law. Some, at least, have gone out into society prepared and determined to be law-abiding and useful citizens. The expense of prison maintenance has been materially lessened. By a farther development and application of the system, improved as it will be by added experience, soon better results may be looked for. From the purely utilitarian standpoint the reformation of our prison system should be urged.

In the third place it may be well to consider the object of putting the law-breaker under duress. Why do we shut the prison door upon the condemned criminal? To this question but three answers can be given. Two or more of these will be combined in the answer of the more thoughtful.

We imprison the breaker of laws to punish him. What do we mean by the use of the word "punish? By some the meaning is this. By his evil act the criminal has injured society, has brought harm upon some member or members of it, or made its rights or property less secure, and so lessened their value. Society should balance accounts by bringing

upon him an equal amount of discomfort and injury. This is the eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, or the tit for tat principle, and unworthy of a Christian age. However, it is to be more than suspected that this idea is not yet eradicated from our penal codes, nor from our practice in administering them. Or do we mean that by natural law there abides in society the right and power to use the principles of retribution, to bring upon the evil doer, evil in his relations to society, arbitrary penalties? Society may have the right, as it certainly has the power, to do this, but how careful, discriminate and wise the exercise of this right, and the use of this power ought to be, every one can see. At the very least, the welfare of the violator of society's laws ought not to be left out of the account.

If, then, we admit that the punishment of the offender is one object, what is another? Evidently the protection of society from the mischievious deeds of the ill-intentioned. It may, I think, be granted that for self protection society may restrain the guilty of overt injurious act by depriving him of his liberty, and if thoroughly assured of its necessity, may, under certain circumstances, deprive him of his life. It is evident again that this right must be exercised with great care lest more wrong he done than prevented, and society damaged in its moral tone and rights, rather than protected. Then the humane method which looks to the training of the criminal, in body, brain and soul, that he may be a good citizen, and no longer endanger the comfort, peace, welfare or property of society will subserve better the purposes of protection. Of this there is no doubt.

Or, again, to the thought of some, reformation of his evil ways is the main object of the restraint put upon the condemned criminal. The restraints of prison life may induce a habit of obedience to law, the opportunity for meditation offered by solitary confinement will be helpful, the recognition which must come to the condemned man in his cell, that the way of the transgressor is hard, all these will be salutary in their influence. But to them should be added instruction

in religious and moral truths, and in trades, that shall enable him to earn an honest living when once more a man among men. It is then not too much to say that, every possible object had in view in depriving the ill-intentioned of his liberty is best served by the more philanthropic methods now being tested in some of our penal systems.

A fourth reason for a different treatment than the convicted criminal has often received, yet remains to be stated. Does the responsibilty for his crime rest solely upon the violator of law? Does any share of responsibility and blame rest upon society or the public? It is evident, if we are compelled to answer the latter question affirmatively, the conclusion is inevitable that the kindest, wisest treatment is due from society to the criminal, that considerations of brotherhood should govern that treatment, that that treatment should be the fruit of long and conscientious study. It is evident that society has no right to put upon him who is under the ban of its legal condemnation a single unnecessary pang or deprivation, but in the fullest sense to "remember those in bonds as bound with them."

To find an answer to the question upon the correct solution of which so much turns, is now our purpose.

Is it not true that almost every law so far partakes of human infirmity as to work injustice in certain cases? Is it not true that laws are sometimes so unfortunately drawn that those technically guilty suffer fully as much as those morally guilty? Are not laws so frequently modified that the wisest of us need to keep our thoughts well about us, would we avoid criminality? Think of the partial enforcement of some of our statutes. Certain classes of wrong doers receive the full penalty, others but a part. All these things lessen the ordinary man's reverence for law, lead him to feel that there is an antagonism between him and the laws of the land, and that law in general is an oppressor instead of a protector. Sometimes it needs but this to carry a man from the ranks of the law-abiding into those of the law-defying.

What a fearfully immoral influence npon certain classes has

our custom of compromising with criminals. A man secures a large sum by fraud and betakes himself beyond the reach of the law officers. Soon a proposition comes to him to return a portion and retain the remainder. This custom violates every one of the objects sought to be accomplished by the punishment of the evil doer. By this is the planner of schemes of embezzlement, etc., encouraged.

In political and business morality how fearfully attenuated often is the line that divides right from wrong! An honored senator of the United States, with his crutch beside him, was lying ill upon a lounge in his rooms. He was approached by one with an offer of stock if he would vote for a certain matter under consideration. He sprang from his couch and chased the bribe offerer from his presence with the crutch as a club. Yet that bribe-refusing senator said to a brother senator but a brief while after, "You vote for the matter under my care, and I will vote for that matter you are interested in, although I know nothing about it." The briberefuser was now a bribe-offerer. At any rate, the moral difference is exceedingly narrow. Some who have acute moral apprehensions cannot perceive it. In the commercial world it is supposed lawful to get an advantage in a bargain by an acted lie, by a false statement of cost or value of the goods, or certain tricks well known to the trade. A certain salesman well known to the writer, once declared that if his employer told him to sell a piece of goods for "all wool," he should tell every customer that it was all wool, though he might know it was not. Is it any wonder that certain minds make no distinction, and are easily led to appropriate the property of others in such way that the law lays its hand upon them? Society then does share the blame and responsibility in some degree. The treatment received by the convicted evil doer should be modified by this fact. Society should seek to undo, so far as possible, its harmful work upon the character of the criminal. Reformation may well be then the principle aim of punishment, that the man under condemnation of the law may be restored to his old position.

From what has been said it may be assumed that the lawbreaker has rights which the public are bound to recognize and assure to him, and wrongs which should be, under our Christian civilization, righted, not alone for his own sake, but that of the public as well.

In closing, attention may be called to the fact that several states, notably New York and Massachusetts, have entered upon the work of prison reform. It was the writers privilege recently to visit and inspect the reformatory at Concord, Mass. In this institution, which is under the superintendency of Colonel Gardiner Tufts, the more humane, Christian, and advanced principles of penal discipline are in use, in charge of one who is himself an enthusiastic believer in them, and well-fitted by nature and experience to test thoroughly their value. Let those interested in this matter visit this institution. Rev. E. A. Perry.

ARTICLE XXVIII.

Thoughts Concerning the Ministry.

It is an established fact, long ago settled, that the Christian ministry holds an important and vital relationship to human affairs; that it fills a place in the world of mind and morals, not supplied from any other source. That it has been a powerful agency for good in the Christian centuries that have passed, is unquestioned by candid minds; that it is a leading factor in all reformatory, enlightening and Christianizing movements of the present age, is recognized throughout the civilized world. Whether it is to continue, in the generations that are to come, to exercise the same healthful and saving influences as in the past, will depend almost wholly on the character of those who are to be Christian ministers in the future. While we may truly say that the ministry is a