1877 — Page 270

sequently made more careful observations as to the results of these floggings, and I

gave evidence in January, 1876, on their effect before the Royal Commission, and have since specially reported on this method of punishment. The effect of thirty lashes on the back is at the time a large dark purple bruised and abraded surface, from which a few drops of blood may be drawn. In twenty-four hours, the man complains of great difficulty of breathing, pain inside the chest, and both pulse and temperature rise, about the fourth day the bruised skin begins to come away leaving a large ulcer at the end of a week, when the difficult breathing and pain in the chest begin to abate, this large sore taking from five to six weeks to heal. But the man is indelibly marked for life, and in a country where it is the custom to strip to the waist when working for the greater part of the year, he who has been flogged in this way, cannot but expose these marks to the ridicule of his fellow workmen, and to his own detriment, as lessening his chances of obtaining honest work, known felons not being generally preferred for employment. I have therefore recommended that in future all floggings should be on the breech with a rattan, they are quite as painful and severe, no injury is done to any internal organ, the sore produced is similar and takes as long, sometimes longer to heal, and the man is marked for life, but on a part which need not be visible, and he at least has a chance of reforming. I am satisfied that the seeds of constitutional disease have been sown, in many cases, by these floggings on the back, even the Warders in the Gaol have noticed this and pointed out men whom they considered broken down by repeated floggings on the back. Though possibly a matter difficult to prove to the satisfaction of everybody, for there are many difficulties in the way, I have little doubt but that a special enquiry into the matter would prove the correctness of my views. The question of work and punishment for prisoners is beset with difficulty; in recommending flogging in my last report, as it is carried out in India, i.e., from five to thirty strokes on the breech, I did so as the best alternative and not as a special advocate for that mode of punishment, and because I considered that starvation diet, the only other punishment, though not so severe at the time, did harm that was much more lasting. I have however explained my views on these subjects at greater length in special reports.

One great improvement introduced into the Gaol this year, has been the dry earth system of conservancy in the cells; before this important sanitary, improvement was introduced, the effluvium in the morning in the corridors at unlocking hour was very great, now no disagreeable smell is detected.

The introduction of the solitary system is, I understand, under consideration. I do not think there is anything that would make the Gaol more dreaded by the Chinese than knowing every prisoner would be in separate confinement for the whole of his term of imprisonment. Very many of the prisoners who are sent to Gaol for short terms are a source of great trouble, they are often in such a debilitated state that it becomes a necessity to give then better food than the penal diet, simply to avoid Coroner's Inquests, and then when they do get a good meal, they make the discovery that they have only to cut a tree in sight of a Lokong to get back to Gaol and to a full belly and accordingly they are soon again on our hands. So if one crrs on the side of humanity, the Gaol fills, or if on the side of strict justice, a coffin is perhaps filled a few days sooner than it would otherwise be.

As regards opium smoking, no prisoner who confessed to being an opium smoker has been allowed a single grain in the Gaol. Neither has he had any stimulant as a substitute, and I do not find there has been any evil consequence in breaking off this habit at once, nor that any precaution has been necessary further than a closer attention to the general health. Several very good specimens of opium smokers have come under observation, one was the case of a man whose daily consumption had been two ounces a day for nineteen years, and who was allowed neither opium or gin, nor was he given any narcotic or stimulant. For the first few days, he suffered from want of sleep, but soon was in fair health and expressed himself much pleased at having got rid of the habit. I am no advocate for opium smoking. My experience of it is that it may become a habit, but that that habit is not necessarily an increasing one; nine out of twelve men smoke a certain number of pipes a day, just as a tobacco smoker would, or as a wine or beer drinker might drink his two or three glasses a day without desiring more. I think the excessive opium smoker is in a greater minority than the excessive spirit drinker or tobacco smoker. In my experience, the habit does no physical harm in moderation. In the greatest case of excess just mentioned at the Gaol, a better nourished or developed man for his size it would be difficult to see. With the morality of the opium smoking question, I have nothing to do; no doubt it is a costly luxury, and when indulged in even to a small extent by a poor man by no means increases the comfort of his family, but as far as my experience goes, and I have had good opportuni- ties of judging, there is no great difficulty in breaking off the habit. I have seen many cases of exces sive smoking in men who could afford to spend large sums on the vice. At the Tung Wah Hospital the stranger may at any time see the most dreadful and ghastly looking objects in the last stages of

Page 270Page 271