cannot make the child better by wisdom and love without flogging it. At times it may be necessary to establish a very sudden and sharp connection between misdeeds and their consequences, a discipline very unpleasant to you and to your child doubtless, but still you may find it necessary by corporal punishment to establish this valuable association of ideas.

There are natures, and there are circumstances, where not to whip may be to "spare the rod and spoil the child;" but whilst I hope that none of you are obliged to resort to such measures, let me warn all children that if they don't learn obedience and self-control, and if they won't mind when they are spoken to, they must be made to mind. What parents and guardians have to do first is this: to teach their children to obey.

There must be some one in the house whom the child will obey, and fear, as well as love. The father is the child's God, and God is the child's Father; and fathers must teach children, as they value their own peace of mind and the souls and bodies of their little ones, to control themselves.

How this is done is of less importance, though

it is important, but if you cannot do it in any other way, it must be done by whipping.

107. This applies to the young, but flogging is always brutal, and probably inefficacious in connection with adults.

I know it is said garotting and crimes of violence were put down by flogging, because they ceased about the time that flogging came in. But on further reflection it will be found that the garotting outbreak had virtually ceased before this addition of corporal punishment was adopted, a fact pointed out by one of our judges.

I believe, therefore, that on the whole it is true that adult flogging is a failure. At the same time I speak on this subject under correction, and with great deference to those who may differ from me on adequate grounds.

108. But there is one thing I do abhor and denounce. It is repeated floggings for one offence, at intervals of a week or fortnight. When a poor wretch has received his punishment, to have to look forward to its speedy renewal checks every mental process of reform.

Itsours, crushes, and embitters him. I would punish him if needful, and have done with it, and bring him as speedily as possible under reformatory influences. John Howard has pointed them out. Work. Make your criminals love work; make them feel the dignity and reward of honest labour, even within prison walls.

Abolish the crank and the treadmill, especially where they grind nothing, and are thus purely penal and profitless.

It

It is a horrible thing to set a man to do unproductive work. People call it penal labour. What is the use of it? It is mere torture. does no good. It does not reform the prisoner, it does not protect society. Look at the barbarous punishments of China: has crime been suppressed there? Torture alone has never stopped people from wrong-doing.

Experience teaches us to put a man to productive labour, to give him confidence, and train him in habits that will be useful to him when you turn him out.

Surely that is all

you want.

You don't want

to inflict pain on a bad man; that does neither

him nor his victims good.

You want to make the bad man good; then The is benefited, and so are you, and so is society, and his good behaviour will be an amende far more honourable to society than shins broken on the treadmill, o muscles strained by the crank, ten times over.

109. But I would go further, and give the prisoner some share in the proceeds of his labour.

Let him by industry lay by. If you can manage it, don't let him out of prison till he has acquired a taste for some kind of work.

The productive labour of prisoners lifts the burden off the shoulders of the virtuous citizen on to those of the criminal.

The six State prisons in New England are not only self-supporting, but yielded together in 1871 a surplus of £7,000.

Compare this with the fact that the prisoner in England earns only about £2 per head (Austin Bruce, "Utilisation of Criminal Labour"), and that a gaol population of 17,995 in 1867, instead of adding £7,000 to the nation's wealth, taxed the virtuous citizens to the extent of £657,129!

110. All this, according to some, is entirely the result of our mistaken policy of cruelty, and a disheartening penal code, instead of productive labour and reformatory influences.

America, Belgium, Germany, even India, are in advance of us in their methods, and exhibit results which justify us in learning from them. I am sure that the arguments against productive labour in prisons will not hold water. The adoption of wholesome and productive work in prisons reduces the penal element. Certainly, but it increases the reformatory element, for which the penal exists.

It is difficult to devise. That is a detail of administration, and merely proves the incompetence of those who put it forward.

It can be ill applied to short sentences. I should abolish it for most short sentences, but I should also abolish most short sentences.

It injures the markets, and clogs honest industry. Not if it is properly distributed, the amount of each kind of work produced being then too small to affect the market appreciably; but if it does, why, so does machine labour, so does foreign labour. Besides, if an article is cheapened, every one pays less for it. If wages