d in such a position that
if he does not work--if he does not pump--the water will rise and
drown him. If the water does rise it is his fault. Nobody pours
it upon him. He takes his choice.

These are suggested as desperate cases, but I can imagine no case
where what is called corporal punishment should be inflicted, and
the reason I am against it is this: I am opposed to any punishment
that cannot be inflicted by a gentleman. I am opposed to any
punishment the infliction of which tends to harden and debase the
man who inflicts it. I am for no laws that have to be carried out
by human curs.

Take, for instance, the whipping-post. Nothing can be more degrading.
The man who applies the lash is necessarily a cruel and vulgar man,
and the oftener he applies it the more and more debased he will
become. The whole thing can be stated in the one sentence: I am
opposed to any punishment that cannot be inflicted by a gentleman,
and by "gentleman" I mean a self-respecting, honest, generous man.

_Question_. What do you think of the efficacy or the propriety of
punishing criminals by solitary confinement?

_Answer_. Solitary confinement is a species of torture. I am
opposed to all torture. I think the criminal should not be punished.
He should be reformed, if he is capable of reformation. But,
whatever is done, it should not be done as a punishment. Society
should be too noble, too generous, to harbor a thought of revenge.
Society should not punish, it should protect itself only. It should
endeavor to reform the individual. Now, solitary confinement does
not, I imagine, tend to the reformation of the individual. Neither
can the person in that position do good to any human being. The
prisoner will be altogether happier when his mind is engaged, when
his hands are busy, when he has something to do. This keeps alive
what we call cheerfulness. And let me say a word on this point.

I don't believe that the State ought to steal the labor of a convict.
Here is a man who has a family. He is sent to the penitentiary.
He works from morning till night. Now, in my judgment, he ought
to be paid for the labor over and above what it costs to keep him.
That money should be sent to his family. That money should be
subject, at least, to his direction. If he is a single man, when
he comes out of the penitentiary he should be given his earnings,
and all his earnings, so that he would not have the feeling that
he had bee