Page:The New International Encyclopædia 1st ed. v. 05.djvu/420

* CONVICT. 360 CONVOCATION. feature of the penal system. In civilized countries fines and imprisonment are the customary pun- ishments. In Europe the prisoners are usually kept apart from each other; in America more freedom of association is allowed. For economic and moral reasons, prisoners are given steadj' em- ployment. Consult: Driihms, The Criminal: His Personnel and Environment (New York, 1900) ; Lombroso, L'liomo dclinquente (Turin. 1896). See Convict Labor; Penology; Prisons. CONVICT LABOR. In all penitentiaries the work of keeping the institution in good order and carrying on the domestic arrangements is done by the prisoners. In addition, repairs and improvements, such as constructing new build- ings, is often done by inmates under expert direction. This would not furnish sufficient em- ployment to keep the prisoners occupied. For the sake of the convict as well as for the pe- cuniary returns, it is customary to employ the prisoners in productive enterprises. In America these general systems prevail. In the lease system the convicts are leased to contractors for a fixed sum and period, the entire responsibility for the care and safe- keeping of the convicts devolving upon the con- tractors. This system may reduce the cost to the State, but it tends to great abuses and should be abolished. It prevails only in some of the Southern States. The contract system exists in two forms. In the first the labor of the convicts is furnished to contractors for a fi.xed sum, the contractors personally directing the employment in the insti- tution. The raw material and machinery are furnished by the contractor, though in some cases the State furnishes the latter. In the second forTn, the piece - price system, the con- tractor furnishes the material and pays a stipu- lated price for the finished product. The direction of the industry is in the hands of the prison officials. The advantage of this form ia that it avoids the possibility of trouble coming from the presence in the institution of employers who are not directly responsible to the authori- ties. The contract system has been in general use. It has many advantages. The industry is man- a.ged by experts who can buy and sell to better advantage than can the warden, who, presum- ably, is not so well posted, iloreover, the State is not subject to loss because of gluts in the market or because of official ignorance or du- plicity. It necessitates no great investment in expensive machinery. It has furnished steady employment to the prisoners and has reduced appreciably the net cost of maintenance. There are, however, serious ojijeetions to the plan. When it involves the presence of outside overseers it may seriously interfere with prison discipline. From an educational standpoint the highly developed industry interferes with the training of the individvial convict. This applies with special force to the younger prisoners. Employers have condemned the system on the ground that the cheap labor gave the contractor an unfair advantage. Labor unions have objected because they felt that it had a tendency to lower wages. The objections have weight. While the total of prison labor is but a small part of the labor of the country, the introduction of special industries may easily depress and unfairly com- pete with similar local industries. For these reasons the contract system is losing ground and is giving place to the public-ac- count system. The State furnishes the plant and materials and conducts the entire business through its officials. Any profits go to the State, and any loss is borne by it. Products are sold upon the open market, or, as in New York, only such articles may be made as will be utilized in other public institutions, or in the various State departments. Under this system the individual prisoner may be employed as seems for his best interest. Generally speaking, this plan is probably the best yet proposed. It tends, however, to infiuence the warden to strive for financial success rather than for the upbuilding of character, and opens the way for financial scandals. It does not avoid competition with free labor. If the New York plan is adopted there should be a central liody to regulate the industries in the different institutions, that there may not be a surfeit of certain articles and a scarcity of others. Penologists now advocate manual and technical training, particularly for the younger men. They agree that this system, though more ex])ensive, will in the end yield far larger returns to so- ciety than the present industries. It might be thought that the employment of convicts in pub- lie enterprises, such as road-making, would be profitable. Experience has not confirmed this view, and such employment is now considered advantageous only under peculiar local circum- stances. Consult: United States Industrial Com- mission Report on Prison Labor (Washington, 1900) ; Proceedings of National Prison Associa- tion (Pittsburg, 1898, 1899); Henderson, In- trodu-ction to Study of Dependents, Defectives, and Driinquents (Boston. 1893) . See Penology : Criminology. CONVOCATION (Lat. convocatio, from cx)n- vocare, to call together, from com-, together -- vocare, to call, from vox, voice). An assembly of the clergy of the Church of England, analo- gous in many respects to Parliament, at the same time with which it usually meets. As a factor in the development of English institutions, it is of great interest, being in some shape per- haps older than Parliament, into which attempts were made to incorporate it in the reigns of Edward I. and Edward II. Convocation for- merly exercised the right of enacting ecclesias- tical legislation, and also of voting subsidies to the Crown; but the former right was greatly restricted under Henry VIII. and by later acts of Parliament, while the latter was abandoned in 1604, since which time the clergy have been taxed like other citizens. Certain convocations are of importance in the history of both Church and State in England ; in particular that of 1529. which est«ablished the royal supremacy: tliat of 1.562, which confirmed the Articles of Religion; that of 1603, which enacted an im- portant body of canons: and that of 1661, which completed the revision of the Book of Common Prayer. About the beginning of the eighteenth century a factious spirit prevailed, so that the sittings of the Lower House were distinguished by contention with the bishops. Convocation was prorogued in 1717, and not again assembled until the revival of Church life in the nineteenth century caused a demand for the renew-al of its sessions. By the influence of Bishops Wilber- force, of Oxford, and Philpotts, of Exeter, the