The Auburn System: Prison and Punishment in 19th Century US
Observation:
1. I learned that Colonial Americans were more interested in getting people out of prison
and back to work. In this time period there were positions open and in need for workers
like carpenters, factory workers and even farmers so locking up or putting a portion of the
population in prison didn’t seem wise. Listening further, the podcast mentions that jails
were more typically used to house people before their trial which is completely different
from what we know their function is today. In the 19th century Americans would also use
the length of the prisoners' stay as a way of punishment only then to let them go. The
need for workers became more apparent when they developed things like workhouses for
people who couldn’t pay off their debt.
2. One of the hosts of this podcast states that people need to be separated from the bad
environment and be taught how to behave properly. This statement proposed the idea that
these <sinfully cities= were bound to commit crimes because they were surrounded by
other people that did bad things. If someone stole something you had to pay for, why
would you want to pay for that thing again? This was probably the typical mindset or
thinking in areas that had high crime rates. No amount of wiping could save the cities as a
whole as the saying goes one bad apple ruins the bunch.
3. The first prisons or pentrenties were established by quakers and they were the most
concerned in ending capital punishment. They believed prisons could be used as a
learning experience and the quakers would personally teach the consequences of their
actions because they were considered to be morally upright. Though these religious
reformers had good intentions like hooding the inmates as they entered the prison so they
could have a life afterwards they would expose them to isolation and would only let them
keep a Bible. Quakers went as far as making the guards wear slippers just to keep the
silence.
Questions:
1. The podcast mentions that in England people would be sentenced to death for minor
crimes like robbery and burglary. Why was England more strict on their residents? Why
did this idea to put people to death for petty crimes not transfer when American adopted
their idea? Did crime rates in England go down because more people feared for their life
or were they simply more cautions in the offense? If minor crimes receive death, was
there any change to the punishment for major crimes?
2. As time progressed Americans started to develop more private executions. Was there no
more satisfaction in seeing people killed for the action they commited? What was the
execution that changed their mind on how their death should be displayed? Did family
members and friends of the person being put to death step in and say this was wrong?
And if so, how long did it take enforcements to listen to them on how wrong public
executions were?
Observation:
1. I learned that Colonial Americans were more interested in getting people out of prison
and back to work. In this time period there were positions open and in need for workers
like carpenters, factory workers and even farmers so locking up or putting a portion of the
population in prison didn’t seem wise. Listening further, the podcast mentions that jails
were more typically used to house people before their trial which is completely different
from what we know their function is today. In the 19th century Americans would also use
the length of the prisoners' stay as a way of punishment only then to let them go. The
need for workers became more apparent when they developed things like workhouses for
people who couldn’t pay off their debt.
2. One of the hosts of this podcast states that people need to be separated from the bad
environment and be taught how to behave properly. This statement proposed the idea that
these <sinfully cities= were bound to commit crimes because they were surrounded by
other people that did bad things. If someone stole something you had to pay for, why
would you want to pay for that thing again? This was probably the typical mindset or
thinking in areas that had high crime rates. No amount of wiping could save the cities as a
whole as the saying goes one bad apple ruins the bunch.
3. The first prisons or pentrenties were established by quakers and they were the most
concerned in ending capital punishment. They believed prisons could be used as a
learning experience and the quakers would personally teach the consequences of their
actions because they were considered to be morally upright. Though these religious
reformers had good intentions like hooding the inmates as they entered the prison so they
could have a life afterwards they would expose them to isolation and would only let them
keep a Bible. Quakers went as far as making the guards wear slippers just to keep the
silence.
Questions:
1. The podcast mentions that in England people would be sentenced to death for minor
crimes like robbery and burglary. Why was England more strict on their residents? Why
did this idea to put people to death for petty crimes not transfer when American adopted
their idea? Did crime rates in England go down because more people feared for their life
or were they simply more cautions in the offense? If minor crimes receive death, was
there any change to the punishment for major crimes?
2. As time progressed Americans started to develop more private executions. Was there no
more satisfaction in seeing people killed for the action they commited? What was the
execution that changed their mind on how their death should be displayed? Did family
members and friends of the person being put to death step in and say this was wrong?
And if so, how long did it take enforcements to listen to them on how wrong public
executions were?
