Abstract
Tocqueville and Beaumont compare the costs to erect the Philadelphia, Auburn, Wethersfield, Baltimore, SingSing, and Blackwell Island penitentiaries and conclude that costs are managed better by avoiding decorative luxuries in architecture. The Auburn system is inherently more economical than the Philadelphia system. France would face different financial challenges when erecting penitentiaries, and should therefore consider using prisoner labor for reducing building costs. In terms of maintenance expenses, prison labor and good management of short contracts reduces the costs and increases the profits of penitentiaries.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
The wall surrounding the Philadelphia prison alone cost almost 200,000 dollars (1,060,000 fr.). It is, however, of all the penitentiaries the one that has the least need of high surrounding walls, since each prisoner is isolated in his cell, which he never leaves. (See Report of the Boston Society and Report of Judge Powers, 1828, pag. 86).
- 2.
In comparing the Philadelphia penitentiary to a castle from the Middle Ages, we only reproduce an image presented by the society of prisons of Philadelphia that drew attention to this resemblance with praise: “This penitentiary,” they said, “is the only building in this country, which is calculated to convey to our citizens the external appearance of those magnificent and picturesque castles of the Middle Ages, which contribute so eminently to embellish the scenery of Europe.” (See Description of the Eastern Penitentiary).
- 3.
For the price of construction of other penitentiaries, see Financial Part, Appendix no. 19.
- 4.
See Letter of Mr. Welles of Wethersfield, in which is shown the estimate of a prison for five hundred prisoners. This estimate is probably incomplete, because the most experienced architects always omit some things in their provisions. But even if that would double the cost of his estimation, the construction of the penitentiary would still be half the cost per cell of our prisons. See Appendix no. 12.
- 5.
See note oo at the end of the volume.
- 6.
See Letter of Judge Welles, Appendix no. 12
- 7.
See note s at the end of the volume.
- 8.
See Statistics, Financial Part, section II, Appendix no. 19, at the end of the volume.
- 9.
*In this paragraph, there seems to be some confusion regarding the numbers. Until this point, Tocqueville and Beaumont have placed American currency in-text, with corresponding French currency in parenthesis. Lieber, however, did not translate the French currency and here puts the number of French currency into his translation as American currency. Thus, Lieber translates: “Every prisoner in the new penitentiaries costs, on an average, for his support, food, clothing, and surveillance, fifteen cents; in Wethersfield and Baltimore, the support of the prisoner is the cheapest; at Auburn the dearest: the food costs in the various penitentiaries, on an average, five cents a day per head. At Wethersfield it costs but 4 cents, and at Sing-Sing, five cents” (Beaumont and Tocqueville 1833, p. 79).
- 10.
Surveillance for each prisoner costs six cents more than food per day. See Statistics, Financial Part, Section II, Appendix no. 19.
- 11.
These are those accidental causes that explain why the work day in the prison yields at Baltimore, on average, 1 fr. 39 c. (26 cents 31), while at Auburn it produces only 77 c. (14 cents 59). See Report of 21 December 1829, on the Maryland prison, pages 6 and 7, and financial part at the end of the volume, section II. The sale of manufactured things sometimes proves just as difficult in Connecticut. See Report of 1830, from the inspectors to the legislature. Among us the workday of seventeen thousand five-hundred convicted prisoners in the maisons centrales produces, on average, only 23 cents (4 cents 34).
- 12.
See Report on Auburn, 1831.
Reference
Beaumont, Gustave de and Alexis de Tocqueville. 1833. On the Penitentiary System in the United States and Its Application in France, with an Appendix on Penal Colonies and also Statistical Notes. Translated by Francis Lieber. Philadelphia: Carey, Lea & Blanchard.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 © Translation by Emily Katherine Ferkaluk
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
de Beaumont, G., de Tocqueville, A. (2018). Chapter 4: Financial Part. In: On the Penitentiary System in the United States and its Application to France. Recovering Political Philosophy. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70799-0_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70799-0_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-70798-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-70799-0
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)