They should lead as human a life as is possible to those who have fallen under so terrible a judgment.They should have their own little cottages in their own little gardens,under the blue sky,and,if possible,amid the green fields.I would deny them none of the advantages,moral,mental,and religious which might minister to their diseased minds,and tend to restore them to a better state.Not until the breath leaves their bodies should we cease to labour and wrestle for their salvation.But when they have reached a certain point access to their fellow men should be forbidden.Between them and the wide world there should be reared an impassable barrier,which once passed should be recrossed no more for ever.Such a course must be wiser than allowing them to go in and out among their fellows,carrying with them the contagion of moral leprosy,and multiplying a progeny doomed before its birth to inherit the vices and diseased cravings of their unhappy parents.To these proposals three leading objections will probably be raised 1.It may be said that to shut out men and women from that liberty which is their universal birthright would be cruel.
To this it might be sufficient to reply that this is already done;twenty years'immurement is a very common sentence passed upon wrong-doers,and in some cases the law goes as far as to inflict penal servitude for life.But we say further that it would be far more merciful treatment than that which is dealt out to them at present,and it would be far more likely to secure a pleasant existence.
Knowing their fate they would soon become resigned to it.
Habits of industry,sobriety,and kindness with them would create a restfulness of spirit which goes far on in the direction of happiness,and if religion were added it would make that happiness complete.
There might be set continually before them a large measure of freedom and more frequent intercourse with the world in the shape of correspondence,newspapers,and even occasional interviews with relatives,as rewards for well-doing.And in sickness and old age their latter days might be closed in comfort.In fact,so far as this class of people were concerned,we can see that they would be far better circumstanced for happiness in this life and in the life to come than in their present liberty--if a life spent alternatively in drunkenness,debauchery,and crime,on the one hand,or the prison on the other,can be called liberty.
2.It may be said that the carrying out of such a suggestion would be too expensive.
To this we reply that it would have to be very costly to exceed the expense in which all such characters involve the nation under the present regulations of vice and crime.But there is no need for any great expense,seeing that after the first outlay the inmates of such an institution,if it were fixed upon the land,would readily earn all that would be required for their support.
3.But it may be said that this is impossible.
It would certainly be impossible other than as a State regulation.
But it would surely be a very simple matter to enact a law which should decree that after an individual had suffered a certain number of convictions for crime,drunkenness,or vagrancy,he should forfeit his freedom to roam abroad and curse his fellows.When I include vagrancy in this list,I do it on the supposition that the opportunity and ability for work are present.Otherwise it seems to me most heartless to punish a hungry man who begs for food because he can in no other way obtain it.But with the opportunity and ability for work I would count the solicitation of charity a crime,and punish it as such.Anyway,if a man would not work of his own free will I would compel him.
