Evolving Function: Early Use of Imprisonment as Punishment by Norman Johnston

EvolvingFunction

 Read Journal Article 2.1 Evolving Function that explores the usages of imprisonment from its earliest recorded use 3,000 years ago down to recent times. Write a one-page (250-300 words) summarizing the context and giving your reflection on the topic. ********************************************************* Your summary and reflection paper should demonstrate an understanding of course content knowledge and application gained from the reading. Your summary should include the use of textual evidence and historical context. Your reflection should include critical thinking and synthesis as well as the development of a personal response to the experience, situation, event, or new information Mechanics include the use of proper grammar, punctuation, and APA format. Mechanics also includes adherence to the stated 250-300 word count. Ensure that you are using correct APA citations and format styles 

Supplement to
Volume 89 Number 1

March 2009 10S-34S

© 2009 Sage Publications
10.1177/0032885508329761

http://tpj.sagepub.com

The Prison Journal Articles

Evolving Function
hosted at

http://online.sagepub.com
Early Use of Imprisonment as
Punishment

Norman Johnston
Arcadia University, Philadelphia

This article explores the usages of imprisonment, both de facto and de jure,
from its earliest recorded use 3,000 years ago down to recent times. Early
scattered use, unreflected in the statutes, was followed by houses of correc-
tion for minor offenders and later, displacing capital punishment, for major
crimes. Serious reform in England and Pennsylvania and the subsequent
battle between two systems developed in Pennsylvania and New York states
and their ultimate demise are described. The origins of special prisons for
women, youth, and other categories are traced, and early prison labor and
schooling are described.

Keywords: transportation; houses of correction; John Howard; Pennsylvania
system; Auburn system; youth prisons; women’s prisons; prison
labor; prison education; prison architecture; privatization

This article attempts to bring together from established sources the grad-ual use of prisons as punishment for those convicted of crimes from
early times down to the development of specialized institutions in the 20th
century. Some writings on the uses of imprisonment leave the impression
that it was not a posttrial penalty until recent historic times.1 The facts are
somewhat more complex. Prison as a penalty is not a modern innovation. A
work edited by Confucius notes the building of prisons around 2000 BCE
and refers to one case in which three political offenders were exiled and the
fourth received strict imprisonment (Pauthier, 1840, p. 50). Although public
or private prisons have always existed, their regular use as punishment
rather than simply detention before trial—or in some cases, without trial—
is more recent. Incarceration as a penalty has been used from time to time
by rulers. The Old Testament often mentions imprisonment during the
Middle Kingdom in Egypt (c. 2040-164 BCE).2 The Bible also mentions
prisons in the Assyrian Empire and Babylon.

10S

http://online.sagepub.com

Johnston / Evolving Function 11S

Greece and Rome had dual systems of laws and practices for slaves and
for freemen or citizens. The range of punishments for slaves was largely
physical; for freemen or citizens, financial, exile, or death. In Greece,
freemen could be incarcerated indefinitely until a fine was paid, in reality a
possible alternative punishment not spelled out in the written law (Barkan,
1936, pp. 338-41). Socrates’ reported speech at his trial in 399 BCE consid-
ered his alternative punishments: imprisonment until a fine was paid, exile,
or, his choice, compulsory suicide. To what extent other prisoners had such
choices is not known. For slaves, masters could impose any penalty includ-
ing death. Citizens could also be sentenced to prison for financial, religious,
and a few other offenses. A sentence of penal slavery was also an option
which would have entailed labor in quarries and other public works, a slightly
different form of deprivation of freedom (Sellin, 1976, pp. 16-17).

In Rome, there were private prisons for slaves and family members as
well as prisons for state slaves. Later, punishments reserved for slaves were
used for lower class criminals. Although some prison time might be short,
there were also life sentences at hard labor in chains. The nature of the
housing and other security measures are not clear. Although, as in Greece,
imprisonment might be used to pressure payment of a fine, it was used to
detain persons until the death sentence was carried out, sometimes for a
period of years. Incarceration was used also to censor authors and for polit-
ical prisoners. The architecture of these structures remains largely unknown
as few of them survive.3

Later, the occasional use of prison as punishment spread to other parts of
Europe, practiced more widely in England at an earlier date than in most
countries (Pugh, 1968, p. 385). In the 10th century, King Athelstan ordained
that a thief be imprisoned 40 days and then released upon payment of com-
pensation and a pledge of good behavior (Pugh, 1968, p. 2). A variety of
offenses resulted in fines—cheaper than imprisonment for the state—but
incarceration was often used to squeeze money from the convicted. There
were a few statutory provisions for imprisonment in early times, such as the
year sentence and fine for poaching in the royal forests. In England, from the
12th century on, prisons and their use as punishment increased. Sentences
were for fraud, petty crime, and sometimes even felonies. In the reign of
Edward I (1272-1307), terms for petty larceny were based on the value of the
stolen goods, by weekly increments. But there were also life sentences for
such crimes as official misconduct, rioting, and forcible entry. It is not clear
how frequently these long sentences were carried out. Surprisingly, most
terms were short and could often be further shortened by some form of
payment or bribe. The costs of the prison were usually covered by charges

12S The Prison Journal

prisoners had to pay for services, lodging, food, and drink. Well-to-do pris-
oners might choose the most comfortable prison, and most prisons had dif-
ferent quarters for different classes of inmates. Similar conditions existed in
prisons on the Continent. When the Marquis de Sade was confined in the
Bastille, he brought his own furnishings and paintings, his library, a live-in
valet, and two dogs. His wife brought him gourmet food. Ordinary criminals
at the same time occupied the damp, unheated lower levels of the towers.

Generally we know little about the many local prisons that sprouted up
in Europe. Most were unsubstantial single rooms where inmates were kept
in irons or stocks for security. Once castles lost their strategic military func-
tions due to the advances in weaponry, they provided in their lower levels
ready-made secure quarters for prisoners.

Nonprison Imprisonment

An alternative to imprisonment was galley slavery, used for captured war
prisoners and those intended for a death penalty. Such vessels were used as
warships by Athens and later by European countries including England. The
prison reformer, John Howard, described slave galleys maintained by Pope
Pius VI (1775-1799). Sentences were 3 years to life. The prisoners received
three pounds of bread a day and on holy days beef and wine (Howard, 1792/
1973, pp. 115-116). Some convicts were also used in voyages of discovery
by Columbus, Vasco de Gama, and others (Ives, 1914, pp. 106-107).

The frequent imposition of the death penalty began to be questioned
following its extensive use during and after the French Revolution. At the
time, in England, the range of crimes that could result in the death penalty
was enormous—from offenses such as murder, arson, and rape to burglary,
larceny, cattle stealing, and violations of game laws (Radzinowicz, 1948,
pp. 143, 155).4 In 1819, Sir Thomas Buxton put the number of capital
offenses in England at 223 (Radzinowicz, 1948, p. 4). For serious crimes,
children as young as 10 were occasionally hanged. Some hangings and
beheadings were botched. Public display of the bodies of dead convicts,
even in America, was largely discontinued by 1800.5 Juries were increas-
ingly bringing in “not guilty” verdicts for some of these capital offenses, and
imprisonment became the punishment for all but the most serious offenses.
The result was that the capacity of existing prisons was completely inade-
quate. The question arose, “What to do with the criminals?” European
nations were establishing colonies worldwide, and the natural solution
seemed to be transportation—shipping criminals from the mother countries
to their far-flung empires and out of the way.

Johnston / Evolving Function 13S

Labor shortages in the British American colonies resulted in transporta-
tion of felons where needed. Following an 1718 law in England, all felons
with sentences of 3 years or more were eligible for transport to America.
Some were given a choice between hanging or transport. The actual number
sent between the first documented case in 1619 and the American
Revolution, particularly to Maryland and Virginia, is not known. Various
estimates have been put forth. Historian Harry Elmer Barnes (1927) of
Columbia University suggested that “the more conservative estimates put
the numbers between 50,000 and 100,000, and that by the outbreak of the
Revolution, there were about 2,000 a year” (p. 71). He gave no source. The
legal historian Frederick Wines (1910) wrote that “for a time, four or five
hundred were shipped to Maryland annually. Others were sent to Virginia.
The planters bought them” (p. 169).

These criminals were used as plantation workers and sometimes servants,
rather than being confined to penal colonies. When transportation to America
halted abruptly following the onset of the Revolution, other means of handling
prisoners had to be found quickly. The result was the use in English harbors of
old, unbattleworthy navy ships, the hulks. From 1776 until about 1850, these
floating prisons were in operation, perhaps the first large-scale example of
imprisonment. Flogging was common. Filthy conditions and overcrowding led
to disease and large-scale epidemics. Inmates healthy enough were sometimes
used as labor on shore. Ultimately, penal colonies were established at consid-
erable costs for transport in Australia, New Zealand, and Gibraltar. In the 19th
century, the French sent large numbers of felons to colonies in South America
and Algeria, and to Louisiana early in the 18th century. Other European coun-
tries such as Portugal, Spain, Holland, Denmark, Russia, and Italy maintained
such colonies outside the country. Italy maintained penal colonies until the end
of the Fascist regime in 1945. In South America, Chile and Ecuador also had
colonies (Barnes & Teeters, 1945, pp. 454-455). The nature of the architecture
in these colonies varied considerably. When nonpenal communities were estab-
lished in places such as Australia, even though most consisted of former felons,
strong opposition developed for the continued influx of prisoners. This led to
the rapid expansion of prison systems in Europe, especially as population
growth was rapid in the 18th and 19th centuries.

Ecclesiastical Imprisonment

Imprisonment as punishment has had a long but inconsistent history. There
was, however, a precedent for the regular use of confinement as punishment,

14S The Prison Journal

and it lay not with secular governments but rather the Catholic Church and
its extensive system of monasteries. Church prisons existed by the sixth
century and by the ninth century were described as though commonplace
(Johnston, 2000, chap. 2). At a time when the criminal law in all countries
had a range of punishments involving liberal amounts of pain and often
bloodshed, physical injury, and death, the church, though later using torture
during the Inquisition, was forbidden to draw blood (although they could
turn the guilty over to civil authorities to carry out the actual punishment,
which was usually death by a variety of ingeniously painful and bloody
methods). Solitude, reduced diet, and reflection, sometimes for extended
periods of time, not only provided punishment but also the possibility of
contrition.6 This regimen became a model, however imperfectly followed,
for later prisons. Architecturally, these church prisons differed little from
other prisons of the time except in the use of the individual cell, a feature
much later to become commonplace—at least as a goal.

Houses of Correction

In England and Northern Europe, social conditions in the 16th century
resulted in a large increase of vagrants, prostitutes, beggars, and petty crim-
inals. Attitudes toward idleness and these offender types hardened, but it was
also clear that severe multiple punishments against criminals had not worked
in the past. Sellin (1944, p. 15), for example, described a woman who was
finally executed in 1617 in Amsterdam. She had 21 prior arrests and had
been exposed on the scaffold 11 times, whipped 8 times, branded with a hot
iron 5 times, had her ears cut off, and had been banished for life 7 times.
Clearly, some other form of punishment needed to be developed.

The first of the institutions established to deal with these minor offend-
ers was housed in the Bridewell Palace given to London by Edward III and
opened as a prison in 1556 (Johnston, 2000, p. 33). Later, Elizabeth I
decreed that a workhouse or house of correction be set up in each county.
These workhouses were intended to make even the lazy vagrants engage in
productive labor, sometimes resulting in the economic self-sufficiency of
the institution. In Amsterdam, Holland, two houses of correction were set
up in 1596 and 1597 (Sellin, 1944, pp. 30, 88), the rasphuis for men and
the spinhuis for women. Inmates lived in various-sized rooms where they
ate, slept, and sometimes worked. All inmates were expected to work
except for some sons of the wealthy who might be committed by parents to
instill discipline. They were kept in a separate section.

Johnston / Evolving Function 15S

Houses of correction influenced either by English or Dutch models sprang
up, especially in Belgium, Sweden, and Germany. Although intended for petty
criminal offenders, they might also house disobedient children, lepers,
orphans, or the mentally ill. Sentences were usually short, although some
terms might be 10 years or more in some of these institutions. Houses of
correction were also established in several of the American colonies:
Massachusetts in 1632, West Jersey in 1681, Pennsylvania in 1682, and
New York in 1736. The nature of these is not always clear, but they seem to
have been just ordinary jails. Imprisonment at the time played a minor role
in the criminal law in America.

Youth Prisons

Special institutions for juvenile delinquents appeared gradually in Europe,
initially in facilities set up, usually by priests, for poor and vagrant boys and
individuals. They came to house delinquent sons of the well-to-do subse-
quently. For example, the priest Filippo Franci of the Religious Society of San
Filippo de Neri in Florence, established such a facility in 1653. In a portion of
the building, solitary cells were constructed, and hoods were used when boys
were led through the hospice to and from the chapel. The system of strict
seclusion was at its height about 1677 (Sellin, 1930, pp. 553-555).

A much more influential institution, largely as the result of its promi-
nence in the editions of John Howard, was the youth prison established by
Pope Clement XI and opened in 1705. It is not clear to what extent the
Hospice of San Michele in Rome was influenced by the earlier houses of
correction in England, Holland, and France. Boys were housed in individual
cells with a latrine. Work was in absolute silence in common spaces where
the inmates wore leg chains and discipline was severe: an early forerunner
of the Auburn or Silent system.

Prison Reform Gets Serious

The last two decades of the 18th century had seen a remarkable confluence
of influential reformers. Outstanding among them were Cesare Beccaria
and Jeremy Bentham, pushing for a reform of the criminal law and the
reduction in the use of capital punishment; and John Howard, who exposed
the miserable prison conditions of the day. Howard’s early life would hardly
suggest that he would later become the greatest prison reformer in history.

16S The Prison Journal

On a sea voyage to Portugal he was taken prisoner by pirates and was in a
series of French prisons (Howard, 1792/1973, p. viii). Ransomed, he later
was elected sheriff of his county, Bedfordshire, and thus became responsi-
ble for the county prison. Finding conditions intolerable, he began visiting
prisons in England and Ireland and later in other European countries, dying
in 1790 in the Crimea of what was called “gaol fever,” probably either
epidemic typhus or typhoid fever. For 17 years, Howard had made about
40 tours in Britain and 7 on the Continent to inspect prisons. On those visits
he took extensive notes dealing with living conditions, the governance of
the prison, the fee system,7 and overcrowding. Details appeared in four
editions of his The State of the Prisons from 1777 to 1792. Prisons of the
time showed much variation but usually were a mixture of harsh discipline,
austere conditions, misery, and great looseness—starvation, alcohol for sale,
games that sometimes included outside participants, and few comforts that
inmates with money could not buy. Howard argued for better sanitation,
and elimination of jailers’ charges for various services, including alcohol,
and for adequate medical care. He urged a regimen of individual night
cellular confinement and constructive labor by day.

Although Howard did not live to see his reforms widely adopted, his
work did spark some local reforms in Britain and an increasing belief that
individual cells were necessary to provide an orderly prison, reducing chaos
and criminal associations, and ultimately resulting in a hope for individual
reform. Through his books, he called attention to two outstanding reform
prisons with individual cells and constructive work programs: the Hospice
of San Michele in Rome has already been mentioned; the second was the
Maison de Force at Ghent, Austrian Flanders (later Belgium). This prison
must be regarded as the first large-scale adult penal institution to use archi-
tecture to implement a reform-minded penal philosophy. When four of the
eight trapezoidal sections were completed in 1773, they separately housed
male felons, beggars, women, and unemployed laborers and abandoned
children—a very early example of classification of different types of
inmates. Ghent remained a model prison until it later became seriously
overcrowded—always a spoiler in the history of prison reforms (Johnston,
2000, pp. 35-41).

The reaction to John Howard’s and other reformers’ revelations about
prison conditions led to some changes, particularly the improvement of
sanitary conditions, the elimination of the sale of liquor and beer, and the
mitigation of disorder, by means of an architecture stressing surveillance.
The small radial design of county prisons erected in England and Ireland
from the 1780s into the early 19th century was intended to allow the governor

Johnston / Evolving Function 17S

to observe what went on in the prison. The layouts of these structures, how-
ever, offered little real opportunity for oversight.

A few counties established exemplary systems of prisons, some using
cellular confinement with work in the cell, a forerunner of the Pennsylvania
system. Perhaps the greatest of the local reformers was George O. Paul, in
Gloucester, who built a series of county prisons between 1786 and 1792,
characterized by night cellular separation and hard labor outside the cell
(Evans, 1982, pp. 139-141; Johnston, 2000, pp. 44, 47; McGowen, 1995, pp.
91-92). These institutions, referred to as “penitentiary houses,” soon failed
due to overcrowding. The Quaker Elizabeth Fry, by initiating prison visita-
tion at Newgate, did much to acquaint the British upper classes with prison
conditions. Jeremy Bentham was perhaps the leader among the legal reform-
ers of the period. His curious circular prison plan, the Panopticon, was
intended to provide, by mechanical means and lines of sight, complete, unre-
lenting surveillance over every movement and conversation of its inmates.
Fortunately, few such prisons were ever built, none in his own country.

During the 19th century in Europe, corporal and capital punishment had
been used less and less, and imprisonment became the punishment of
choice. Through the efforts of reformers, disorder and violence were largely
eliminated and a modest increase in control and surveillance was accom-
plished. Nevertheless, no clear method of achieving reform, other than the
assumed deterrence of punitive imprisonment, achieved primacy.

The Atlantic Exchange

Throughout two wars, the American Revolution and the War of 1812, an
almost uninterrupted exchange of ideas on criminal justice issues continued
between America and Europe. The center of American reform was
Pennsylvania, not surprisingly, as William Penn himself had been subject to
imprisonment in England for his Quaker beliefs.8 While Penn was alive,
criminal law and punishments were humane and advanced in contrast to the
other colonies. Upon his death, the stricter, more sanguinary punishments
returned—public executions as well as whippings9 or imprisonment under
terrible conditions for some minor offenders and debtors. Philadelphia’s
first substantial prison was the Old Stone prison at Third and Market Streets.
There was no attempt to separate detainees from sentenced offenders except
for inmates under death sentences, who were confined to underground dun-
geons. Inmates had to depend on begging through the barred windows over-
looking the street for food as well as charitable donations of clothing. In

18S The Prison Journal

one month in 1772, for example, three inmates died of starvation there
(Teeters, 1955, pp. 10-16).

Horrified by these conditions, a group of prominent Philadelphians formed
a prisoners aid organization, apparently the first in the world, in 1776. It was
named the Philadelphia Society for Assisting Distressed Prisoners. Its exis-
tence was short as the next year the British occupied Philadelphia. However,
after the war, in 1783, the Philadelphia Society for Alleviating the Miseries
of Public Prisons was established, now the Pennsylvania Prison Society.
Some scholars claim it was dominated by Quakers, others have said by
Episcopalians, but it seems likely that the movers and shakers of the day in that
city were a mix of those two denominations. Because of overcrowding at the
Old Stone Prison, a new prison was opened uncompleted on Walnut Street in
1776. Except for the increased capacity, conditions were little different from
the old prison. The Prison Society went door to door collecting food in a
covered wheelbarrow to feed the inmates. Alcohol was sold. Shakedowns of
prisoners by other prisoners were common. Men and women and adolescents
were sometimes locked up at night together in common sleeping rooms
(Meranze, 1996, pp. 131-213; Teeters, 1955, p. 20).

With reforms in the criminal law, felons were increasingly given prison
terms instead of physical punishments or death, and in 1790, Walnut Street
Jail was designated as a state prison, the first in the United States.10 In the
prison yard, a small block of 16 solitary cells called the “Penitentiary House”
was built. Its two floors of cells were raised on arches, similar to a plan
described in John Howard’s works. A partition ran down the middle of each
corridor so that inmates could not see one another. Each cell had a toilet. The
Penitentiary House generally has been regarded as the first attempt to put into
practice the Philadelphia reformers’ evolving ideas about separation of inmates
from one another for their entire sentence to control activities common in
most prisons of the time and hopefully effect reform. Efforts at Walnut Street
brought the prison both national and international attention and praise. A
French refugee, François, duc de La Rochefoucauld-Liancourt, published a
complimentary and detailed description of the prison, which appeared in
English,11 French, Dutch, Danish, and German editions.

Thorsten Sellin, however, after a careful examination of the court dockets,
concluded that the use of separate or solitary confinement as an experiment
in treatment carried out at the Walnut Street Jail was “highly overrated” by
foreign observers and reformers. For example, he found that in 1797, of 117
convicts sent there, only 4 were sentenced to solitary confinement. This
proportion was similar to other years (Sellin, 1953, p. 329). The little cell-
block seems to have been used primarily as a punishment section. Also

https://States.10

Johnston / Evolving Function 19S

beginning in 1790, reforms in the internal management of the entire prison
were attempted, but there was great resistance, especially to abolishing the
sale of alcohol. Walnut Street Jail had 300 inmates in 1798, but by 1817, a
grand jury found there were 451. It was not uncommon for 30 to 40 inmates
to be confined to a sleeping room 18 feet square. Interviewed in 1831 at
Eastern State Penitentiary, inmates who had earlier been in the Walnut Street
Jail recalled with fondness that life had been good, corrupt, and crime-
enhancing. It remained so, even after the reforms, often disorderly and
characterized by riots and escapes. French investigators’ subsequent report
on United States prisons systems suggested that “the Walnut Street prison
could produce none of the effects which are expected from this [peniten-
tiary] system. It had two principal faults: it corrupted by contamination those
who worked together. It corrupted by indolence the individuals plunged
into solitude” (Beaumont & Tocqueville, 1833, pp. 2-3). It was clear that
the reformers’ goal of separate confinement for reform was still unrealized.
As noted above, with the rejection of the widespread use of capital punish-
ment and public whippings, imprisonment was used, first for minor
offenders, influenced by the English and Dutch houses of correction model.
Imprisonment for felons followed. In the 1790s, New York and New Jersey,
and after 1800 other states, constructed state prisons (Lewis, 1922/1967,
p. 30). At first, these facilities did not usually involve cellular isolation.

During this period, reformers and intellectuals in America and Europe,
especially in Pennsylvania and England, were aware of legal and penal devel-
opments in other countries. As already noted, John Howard’s trailblazing
investigations of prison conditions in England, Ireland, and Continental coun-
tries were well known abroad, especially by the Philadelphia reformers. A
copy of his 1784 State of the Prisons was in private libraries and in the library
of the Eastern State Penitentiary in Philadelphia, erected in the 1820s.12 In
1790, the Philadelphia Prison Society published a pamphlet arguing that their
proposed program of separate confinement to generate reform was workable
and had already been put into practice profitably in some prisons in England
and that officials needed to follow their example in Pennsylvania (Barnes &
Teeters, 1945, p. 501). Cross-Atlantic contacts continued, not just with pub-
lications but on a more personal level. For example, in 1827, a series of
letters were exchanged between Roberts Vaux of the Philadelphia Prison
Society and William Roscoe of the British Society for the Improvement of
Prison Discipline, which had been founded in 1813.

Although it is often overlooked by penal historians who have traced the
roots of prison reform in America to early developments in Pennsylvania,
Virginia also became interested in the use of solitary confinement. Thomas

https://1820s.12

20S The Prison Journal

Jefferson on his return from France in 1786 had observed with favor the use
of solitary cellular confinement with labor in England. Ten years later, the
penal code in Virginia authorized solitary instead of public labor. In 1800 the
large state penitentiary in Richmond was opened. Following a fire in 1823,
it was rebuilt with all cells. Prisoners were in solitary confinement for the
initial portion of their sentences, as was later common in Europe (Johnston,
2000, pp. 82-85; Keve, 1986).

Prison Reform Comes of Age

These exchanges and developments were only the preliminaries of what
was to galvanize prison reform during the remainder of the 19th century—a
bitter and contentious rivalry between two competing systems of penal treat-
ment, one developed in Pennsylvania, the other in New York. The partisans
of the two systems never conceded an inch until both were eclipsed, espe-
cially in the United States, by developments in the 20th century. Although
the regimen the Philadelphia reformers were so enthusiastic about, the sep-
arate system, was never operational at Walnut Street in such a way that it
might have proven itself, this fact never dampened the reformers’ conviction
of its rightness. They needed a large-scale prison specifically designed from
the ground up for complete validation. As the result of intensive lobbying,
that prison was authorized in 1818 and built in Allegheny, near Pittsburgh,
and opened in 1826. The cells were small, unventilated, and without sanitary
facilities, arranged back-to-back in a circle and shaded by a covered walk-
way connecting the cell doors. They were too small for work and surveil-
lance was poor. The prison opened in 1827 proved completely unworkable
and was razed 7 years later—a world record—and completely rebuilt
(Barnes, 1927, pp. 138-144; Johnston, 1994, p. 28).

Meanwhile, a prison for the eastern district had been planned in 1820
and was opened, still unfinished, in 1829. Its architect, John Haviland, a
recently arrived British architect, used a radial layout similar on a large
scale to the many lunatic asylums and little county prisons being erected in
both Ireland and England at the time.13 The prison was known generally as
Cherry Hill well into the 20th century, after a nearby burial ground. Eastern
State Penitentiary was specifically designed for the so-called Pennsylvania
system of penal treatment—inmates housed in separate cells where they
worked and slept, leaving only to exercise in their attached exercise yard or
to be taken out, masked, for occasional showers or a visit to the prison
dispensary. Inmates were known only by number and initially received

Johnston / Evolving Function 21S

visits only from official visitors, ministers, or prison overseers (guards)
who provided vocational instruction. Meals were brought to them by the
same overseers. In theory, prisoners were isolated both from the outside
world and the world of their fellow inmates. Punishments were mild by
standards of the day—removal to a dark cell with restricted diet.

The prison became an instant subject of interest both in this country and
worldwide. Among its visitors, some even before it was completed, were
Andrew Jackson; John Quincy Adams; the Marquis de Lafayette; Charles
Dickens; the Emperor of Brazil; and Edward, Prince of Wales, later to be
Edward VIII of Great Britain. The prison, although hard to imagine today, was
one of the must-see showplaces of the city. Dickens was quoted as saying
before his American trip that “the Falls of Niagara and your penitentiary are
two objects I might almost say I most wish to see” (Vaux, 1872, p. 111).

The influence of Cherry Hill was not the result of such visitors but rather
the official delegations sent by European and Latin American governments.
Both the architecture and the system of separation were copied in Europe,
European colonies, Latin America, and Asia, beginning with Britain. The
architecture itself was more likely to follow Haviland’s plan for the New
Jersey prison at Trenton, a half circle of radiating wings with a hub build-
ing allowing surveillance as well as housing administrative facilities. The
system of 24-hour separation of each prisoner proved not only expensive to
build but also costly to maintain. Prisoners’ productive labor was limited by
their cellular confinement. In the United States, there was a chronic labor
shortage in the 19th century until rapid immigration filled the gap toward
the end of the century.14 The inability of the system to fully utilize prison-
ers’ labor was considered unacceptable, and as noted below, an alternative
system was generally adopted along with its associated architecture. In
Europe, by contrast, with a labor surplus, this was not an issue (Rusche &
Kirchheimer, 1968, p. 131). As a consequence, separate confinement, the
wearing of masks, and the use of individual exercise yards were features
enthusiastically adopted, first in Britain with the opening of Pentonville in
London in 1842, and then throughout Europe, Latin America, and Asia, its
use only restrained by the financial resources available in a given country.
The last classic radial prison was the huge Carabanchel prison in Madrid,
opened in 1954. Strict isolation of prisoners was used in some countries
only briefly due to its cumbersomeness and chronic overcrowding, making
new construction necessary. Although some modifications were often made
in the separate system in some European countries, it stubbornly persisted
into the 20th century. Sanford Bates, a former director of the Federal
Bureau of Prisons, found in his visits to European prisons in the 1930s that

https://century.14

22S The Prison Journal

“in France, Holland, Italy and other countries of Western Europe, no con-
vict ever sees the face of a single one of his fellow prisoners” (Bates, 1936,
p. 85).15 In some prisons, following the elimination of masks, a few inmates
still were allowed to wear them if they desired.

An Alternative System

In New York State, Newgate prison in Greenwich Village opened in 1797,
largely patterned after the original Walnut Street Jail, with large rooms and
little separation of various sorts of prisoners. Overcrowding resulted in much
pardoning, and after a bloody riot, a decision was made to build a new state
prison outside the city at Auburn. The first portions of the prison contained
congregate rooms, but disorders here and at Walnut Street led officials to
order a new cellblock at Auburn containing 550 tiny sleeping cells. A group
of 80 hardened offenders in 1821 were subject to complete 24-hour solitary
confinement without labor or any contact with visitors, supposedly for the
first portion of their sentences. An increasing number of mental illnesses and
deaths led to governor’s pardons, and the experiment was abandoned
(McKelvey, 1936/1977, p. 14). Officials developed an alternative system,
which came to be known as the Auburn or Silent system. Meticulously con-
ceived military-like routines determined every movement and activity of the
inmates (Johnston, 2000, pp. 76-77). Prisoners moved in tight formation
called “lockstep” in complete silence and with downcast eyes. No prisoner
was ever to see another face-to-face, even in the workshops. Punishments
were severe: flogging with as many as 500 blows; straitjackets; cold showers
outside, even in winter temperatures; and dark cells on reduced diet. Warden
Elam Lynds of Auburn told Tocqueville and Beaumont during their mission
to observe American prisons in 1831 that “I consider it impossible to govern
a large prison without a whip” and expressed his belief that “nothing, in my
opinion, is rarer than to see a convict of mature age become . . . a virtuous
man” (Beaumont & Tocqueville, 1833, pp. 201-202). The New York warden’s
disdain for the idealistic goals of reform through imprisonment was a far cry
from the exalted hopes and philosophy of treatment associated with the
leaders of Philadelphia’s Cherry Hill prison.

Because of a rapidly expanding prison population in the state, a new prison
was begun in 1825 with inmate labor in Ossining, later to be known as Sing
Sing, where the Auburn regimen could be perfected. As in the Pennsylvania
system, there was to be complete isolation from the outside world. David
Rothman quotes a Sing Sing warden of an early period as observing that “the

Johnston / Evolving Function 23S

prisoner was taught to consider himself dead to all without the prison walls”
(Rothman, 1971, p. 95). Sing Sing’s original cellblock had a thousand tiny
sleeping cells stacked back-to-back on five tiers. Little light could enter the
cell, and there was no plumbing or heat. The prison had workshops. Prison
labor not only satisfied one of the goals of imprisonment—punishment—but
also could be interpreted as contributing toward eventual employment once
back in the community. That, however, was not its primary purpose in the
New York prisons. Cheaper to build and run and fully utilizing inmate labor to
provide goods sold on the open market without restrictions, Auburn system
prisons in a number of states claimed that their prisons actually earned a yearly
profit for the taxpayers. It is, therefore, not surprising that it was the architec-
ture and regimen at Auburn and Sing Sing that became the model for almost
all U.S. penal establishments in the 19th century.

Canada was not unmindful of these penal developments. In 1832, offi-
cials visited Cherry Hill and prisons in New York and Massachusetts, ulti-
mately recommending adoption of the Auburn system. The first institution,
opened in Kingston, Ontario, in 1884, had been heavily influenced by the
staff at Auburn and the Prison Discipline Society of Boston (Johnston,
2000, pp. 80-82). Dana Johnson (n.d.) wrote that “Kingston Penitentiary
and its regulatory system became the physical and operational prototype for
every Canadian penitentiary built in the ensuing century” (p. 4).

The raucous rivalry between the Auburn and Pennsylvania systems, seen
in 21st-century perspective, appears as a puzzling waste of energy and
resources.16 In 1867, Enoch Wines and Theodore Dwight authorized a sur-
vey of prisons in the United States and Canada, sponsored by the New York
Prison Association. They discovered that in none of the institutions was
reform the primary goal and concluded that the prisons of the time did not
appear to have mechanisms in place to modify criminal tendencies
(Rotman, 1995, pp. 171-173). It should be noted, however, that both sys-
tems essentially eliminated the vicious and exploitive informal inmate cul-
ture in most prisons that had existed in all prisons before these systems
were in place. With the erosion and de facto elimination of separate con-
finement and the gradual relaxing of the silent Auburn system, the subcul-
tures of the prisons again thrived everywhere.

Imprisonment of Youth and Women

Early in the United States, juveniles were housed in adult institutions,
sometimes in separate sections. Influenced by developments in Europe,

https://resources.16

24S The Prison Journal

especially in Germany, John Griscom, a Quaker, opened the House of
Refuge for delinquents in Madison Square, New York City, in 1825 to serve
destitute and delinquent children. Similar institutions were established in
Boston in 1826 and Philadelphia in 1828, the latter through the efforts of
the Philadelphia Prison Society. Many of these houses of refuge, which at
this time kept both boys and girls in different sections, were little more than
prisons, with their high walls and grim interiors.

In France, by contrast, reformers, shocked by the plight of children
housed in adult prisons, established a minimum security agricultural facil-
ity, the Mettray Colony, opened in 1840.17 Cottages were arranged on a
campus without walls, a layout that later became a template for American
youth and women’s facilities into the 21st century. The individual cottage
was intended to be run as a family unit. Separate institutions for boys and
girls were later opened in most American states, particularly from the 1850s
on. These early juvenile institutions did not receive the attention that adult
prisons did. It is likely that discipline and order overshadowed systematic
attempts at rehabilitation in most of them once the influence of their found-
ing reformers had disappeared.

The National Prison Association, now the American Correctional
Association, was formed in 1870, giving a national platform for innovations
in a few individual prisons and state systems (McKelvey, 1936/1977, p. 88).
At their first meeting in Cincinnati, a Declaration of Principles was adopted
that became a blueprint for advancing the ideas of the reformers. The agenda
for change included the use of the indeterminate sentence along with a
consideration of the individual inmate’s likelihood of reform as a basis for
release or parole. Different sorts of prisoners were to be assigned to differ-
ent prisons. This included separating chronic offenders from the less criminal
and youth prisoners from older adults. Six years later, the first reformatory
was opened at Elmina, New York, incorporating many of the Declaration
principles and reemphasizing the idea of reform that had characterized the
early days of Cherry Hill, the Eastern State Penitentiary. Most states subse-
quently built such reformatories. These were intended for young men and
first offenders, usually between 16 and 30 years of age. These reformatories
were inspired by examples in Ireland and Australia. In yet another Atlantic
exchange, the head of English prisons, Sir Evelyn Ruggles-Brice, in 1897
visited reformatories at Elmira and in Massachusetts at Concord. He later
established a private prison for young men aged 16 to 21 at Borstal, Kent. In
1908, this new category of youth institution became part of the English
system, especially following new leadership in the Prison Commission.
Indeterminate sentences and minimum security with open institutions were

Johnston / Evolving Function 25S

significant features of Borstals (Grünhut, 1948, pp. 95, 381, 421; Ruggles-
Brice, 1921, chap. 8).

In early times, women and girl offenders were housed in male prisons in
separate sections in most countries. The first completely separate institution
for women and girls in the United States appears to have been established
at Mount Pleasant—later known as Ossining—New York, near the Sing
Sing male prison in 1835 (Zedner, 1995, p. 337). All other states followed
with facilities for women and others for girls (U.S. Bureau of Prisons, 1949,
p. 130).

The federal government made extensive use of state prisons and local
jails to house its prisoners until the end of the 19th century and beyond.18

There were, however, territorial prisons scattered about the West. Although
the Federal Bureau of Prisons was not yet established, federal prisons were
built or located in former sites of military prisons. McNeil Island, Washington,
had a small federal facility about 1867, which formally became a U.S.
Penitentiary in 1907. In 1895, the Department of Justice took control of the
military prison at Leavenworth, Kansas, and began building a new prison the
next year. The Atlanta penitentiary was opened in 1902. In the 20th century,
a reformatory for men was opened in Chillicothe, Ohio, in 1926, and the first
federal prison for women the next year at Alderson, West Virginia. It was not
until 1930 that the Federal Bureau of Prisons was created, largely due to the
rapidly increasing number of prisoners and the need for more institutions
(Barnes & Teeters, 1945, pp. 675-676).

Overcrowding, present in federal as well as in most state systems, has
been due, among other reasons, to the country’s rapidly growing population
in the 19th and early 20th centuries. This situation of insufficient prison
space would have been much worse had not two innovations in criminal
justice, probation and parole, diverted increasing numbers of convicted
offenders away from imprisonment. Traditionally, John Augustus, a shoe-
maker, is credited with initiating a form of individual sponsorship of release
of both men and women from detention for minor offenses by paying their
bail or fine. His state, Massachusetts, passed the first probation law in 1878
(National Probation Association, 1939/1972, pp. v-vii). By the 20th century,
probation was used widely, especially with juveniles.

Parole, usually paired with the indeterminate sentence, has its roots in
prisons in both Ireland and Norfolk Island, off the coast of Australia.
Innovations on the part of Captain Alexander Maconochie on Norfolk
Island and the development of the so-called Irish System of stages by Sir
Walter Crofton in the 1850s were known to the prison reformers who had
gathered in 1870 in Cincinnati to form the National Prison Association.

https://beyond.18

26S The Prison Journal

Michigan passed the first law on parole in 1867. Many states followed, but
as late as 1940, 3 had no parole laws and 11 had no indeterminate sentences
(Barnes & Teeters, 1945, p. 821).

Inmate Labor

Prisoners have been used since early times in public works projects and
less often in systematic production within prison walls. Regular use of
inmate labor in American prisons had begun as part of the reforms of 1790
in the Walnut Street Jail. Nail making, marble sawing, shoemaking, weaving,
carding wool and chipping wood used to make dyes were carried out in the
new workshops. Women prisoners made clothing. All were paid a small
amount per item. With the development of the separate system, inmate labor
was confined to the cell. The result was textile work and shoemaking, which
became increasingly anachronistic as prisoners in other states worked with
machines in factories within the walls to produce a larger volume of prod-
ucts to be sold on the open market. The Civil War created an enormous need
for cheap clothing and shoes. Prison labor thrived in prison factories outside
Pennsylvania (Barnes, 1936/1969, pp. 272-273).

English prisons in the 19th century became overcrowded, as was the
case with American prisons, because prison sentences “with hard labor”
were being handed out for a wide variety of crimes including such compara-
tively minor offences as dog stealing, sleeping in the open air, and poaching
(Mayhew & Binny, 1862, p. 300). The solution, as advanced by conserva-
tives, to keeping the prisoners busy with no high demand for prison-made
products was to develop labor that, because it was obviously worthless, was
intended to be more punitive. One device within the cell had a handle
attached to a friction mechanism and a counter dial. According to a British
government report in 1854, the inmate had to crank 1,800 revolutions for
breakfast, 4,500 for the noon meal, and 5,400 for supper, completing 2,700
that evening, or more than 14,000 daily and 12,000 for juveniles (Ives, 1914,
p. 193). There were also treadmills, large cylinders with 24 steps: men
walked 15 minutes, rested 15, walked 15, and so on, for a total that varied
from prison to prison of from 5,000 to 14,000 feet of ascent per day in the
summer (Crawford, 1835/1968, pp. 32-33). The mechanism was usually
attached to a large fan on the roof that simply rotated, again providing ardu-
ous and useless labor as a corrective punishment. According to official
prison reports of 1839, the treadmill was used for imprisoned delinquents,
as young as 11, occasionally.

Johnston / Evolving Function 27S

Prison industries in the late 19th and early 20th centuries in the United
States had sold their products on the open market. Although productive
labor and work habits still remained a central goal of reformers, the grow-
ing strength of labor unions resulted in a series of state as well as federal
legislation in 1929 and 1935 that limited the interstate shipment of prison-
made goods. The state-use system expanded. Restrictions also resulted in a
high proportion, often around 30%, of inmates in a particular prison
engaged in prison maintenance.

Farm labor continued to dominate many southern states’ penal systems.
Writing in 1936, the criminologist Blake McKelvey stated, “The southern
states from a penological point of view never really belonged to the Union”
(McKelvey, 1936/1977, p. 172). His undiplomatic characterization of
southern prisons was referring to the squalid and brutal conditions in the
prison labor camps that were used in contrast to the walled prisons in other
parts of the country. Because of insecure housing, prisoners were kept in
chains and in some cases lived in mobile wagons with two levels of cages.
Long after the 1930s, southern prison systems continued to rely on scat-
tered labor camps maintained by the state or private companies. Work was,
as it still is in some states such as Texas and Louisiana, on large agricultural
plantations. Other prisoners worked as miners or on highway maintenance.
The chain gang has made a limited reappearance in the 1990s for county
jail prisoners, now with women as well as men prisoners. Larry Sullivan
(2002, p. 21) has suggested that the southern penal systems replaced slav-
ery, quoting Enoch Wines’s 1874 study of American prisons that found that
75% of the convicts in southern prisons at the time were black.

Prison Schools

The first prison school was established at the Walnut Street Jail in 1798
and was attended by inmates when not at their work (Skidmore, 1951, p. 211).
At many prisons subsequently, instruction of the illiterate prisoners was
carried out informally and as time permitted by the chaplain along with his
religious instruction. So-called Sabbath schools were also established in many
prisons where some instruction in reading was also provided. Increasingly,
a full-time teacher was employed. From the beginning, youth institutions
and later adult prisons featured education: Massachusetts State Prison by
1823, the New York House of Refuge in 1825, and the Boston House of
Correction in 1841. A New York law of 1847 authorized two instructors for
each state prison. Cherry Hill in Philadelphia had an instructor by 1854.

28S The Prison Journal

Elmira Reformatory opened in 1876 and was based on a broad educational
program. In general, the goals were practical and tied to the advantage of
being able to read, write, and count when securing postprison employment.
In the first Congress of the National Prison Association in Cincinnati in
1870, the Detroit House of Corrections reported 65% of its male inmates
could not write numbers above 9, 27% could not read, and an additional
17% could read “a little” but not write (National Prison Association, 1871,
pp. 194, 40). Some other jurisdictions at the time reported much higher
percentages of illiteracy.

In 1928, Austin MacCormick surveyed 60 prisons, finding 13 had no
school at all (National Society of Penal Information, 1931, p. 38). In 1940,
the attorney general carried out a large survey of U.S. prisons. Fourteen had
no educational program; 10 others held classes for an hour or so several
evenings a week. Other prisons had schools that provided at least a grade
school program but seldom high school (Attorney General’s Survey, 1940,
pp. 232-285). Most prison academic schools remained substandard and
underfunded into the mid-20th century, many relying entirely on inmate
teachers and with no special provision any longer for teaching illiterate
inmates. Often the only texts available were those written for primary
schools rather than adults.

Vocational training often was a label attached to factory work in prisons
in the 19th century. Skill training later became diversified but was too fre-
quently tied to its usefulness in the maintenance tasks in the prison rather
than its possibilities for postprison employment. Because of budgetary con-
straints, prisoners were sometimes trained on outdated machines, no longer
found in the outside community.

Architecture and Specialized Institutions

With the growth of the U.S. population and consequently the increased
need to house convicted criminals, new prisons continued to be built. As
noted earlier, the radial layout at Eastern State Penitentiary was seldom
used in this country but was widely imitated worldwide. Variations on the
Auburn cellblock with multiple tiers of inside cells became common in the
various states. For a time, bigger seemed better. The Michigan prison at
Jackson, opened in 1926, had enormous cellblocks with 5,700 individual
cells on five tiers in very long, barrier-free corridors. As prison structures
unwisely grew in size, new layouts seemed to provide better control and
separation of various types of inmates. Wormwood Scrubs prison in London,

Johnston / Evolving Function 29S

opened in 1874, was the first of the “telephone pole” layouts, inspired by
earlier hospital plans in that country. The prison at Stillwater, Minnesota,
opened in 1914, was the first in this country to follow that design; although
the Federal Penitentiary at Lewisburg, Pennsylvania, opened in 1932, was
better known and undoubtedly influenced subsequent prison architecture
more than Stillwater (Johnston, 2000, pp. 95-97, 138-141).

Later changes in inmate populations, overcrowding, and a relaxation of
old, ironclad discipline led to problems of control in large-capacity prisons.
The result, in the late 20th century, was the development of layouts with
small-capacity housing units, sometimes connected by secure corridors.

Hand in hand with the expansion of prison systems went more highly
differentiated institutions in terms of security level, age, gender, and mental
status. This also resulted in the development of classification procedures at
the prison of entry. By the mid-20th century, less populous states would
have one state prison for adult felons, usually but not always a single sepa-
rate facility for adult women, a reformatory for boys, and one for girls.
More populous states would develop more facilities, including usually one
for prisoners requiring psychiatric care. Later psychologists, social case
workers, and, in at least one state, sociologists were added to classification
centers and other prisons in the system. Programs in some systems allowed
inmates to secure college-level courses and even degrees. However, as over-
crowding and the costs of building and maintaining more and more correc-
tional facilities stretched budgets, many of the rehabilitative programs were
pared down. Increasingly after 1960, a more critical eye was cast on those
rehabilitative programs, following evaluation research that resulted in
controversies over the effectiveness of many of them. This seemed to offer
an excuse for hard-pressed administrators to eliminate some.

Two more developments in the 20th century should be noted: the super-
max prison and the return of privately run prisons. As part of the growing
federal system, the Justice Department acquired the military prison on
Alcatraz Island in San Francisco Bay. It was opened in 1934 as its highest-
security facility. Never happy with the inconvenient but beautiful setting,
the Justice Department built a replacement to house the most dangerous
federal inmates at Marion, Illinois. It too proved inadequate, and a “control
unit” was built within its perimeter in the early 1970s. California at the
same time was constructing super-high-security “adjustment centers” within
existing prison enclosures. Security housing units (SHUs) appeared in a
number of states, and the federal government opened a unit of the U.S.
Penitentiary in Florence, Colorado, called Administrative Max in 1994.
Supermax prisons were built subsequently in most states.

30S The Prison Journal

Another trend was revived in the late 20th century, privatization, that is,
prisons managed and sometimes built and owned by private corporations. In
the western part of the United States, when most areas were still territories,
prisons were sometimes constructed by the federal government, on other
occasions by the territory. Lessees might build and also run the prison, espe-
cially before statehood was achieved. For example, in California, a company
selected a site on Point San Quentin and built and ran a small prison, with
the state ultimately taking over control in 1858. All adult prisons in both the
federal and state systems soon became an exclusive function of the respec-
tive governments. The reappearance of private prisons, often seen as a solu-
tion to budgetary limitations and freedom from labor union demands, has
been confined mostly to facilities for juvenile offenders and Immigration
and Naturalization Service prisoners. The first modern-day privately owned
prison for adult felons was opened in Kentucky in 1986. Such facilities con-
tinue to hold a very small proportion of offenders in this country. Private
prisons now exist in the United Kingdom and Australia.

The long history of the use of prisons as punishment, and later as a setting
where the experience also would result in future deterrence of crime, if not
reform, continues.19 New techniques appear, come into fashion, and later fall
out of favor. Public opinion and attitudes as well as practices of penologists
and administrators become less or more rigorous. The very idea that impris-
onment is a likely venue for reform also has its ups and downs.

Pieter Spierenburg (1984) has observed that “every modern Western
society witnesses the conflict between a perceived necessity of punishment
and uneasiness at its practice” (p. 207). That uneasiness continues as prison
issues take center stage or are crowded to the sidelines by other issues. The
key to combining an appropriate punitiveness through imprisonment with a
humane consideration for inmates and the difficult goal of changing strong
habitual behavior and attitudes seems to remain tantalizingly elusive.

Notes

1. Historical research on prisons seems to have been most active in the 1960s and the
1970s, although a few excellent studies had occasionally appeared earlier. Newer scholarly
works on special areas have also appeared, such as Salvatore and Aguirre’s (1996) research on
Latin American prisons; Dikötter and Brown’s (2007) work on prison systems in former
European colonies in Africa, Asia, and Latin America; and studies on American prisons by
Meranze (1996) and by McLennan (2008). Most newer works that deal with historical penol-
ogy or make reference to it are strong on theory, scholarly, but lack the bare-bones chronology
of earlier works. As a consequence, in my attempt to condense in a journal article an account
of the earlier use of imprisonment, many of the references are not from recent sources. As far

https://continues.19

Johnston / Evolving Function 31S

as textbooks are concerned, the classic historically oriented text was, of course, Harry Elmer
Barnes and Negley K. Teeters’s New Horizons in Criminology published in 1945. A chapter
on the historic origins of punishment was 64 pages; one on the origins of the American prison
system, 79 pages; and one on the rise of the reformatory, 17 pages; or a total of 160 pages. The
third edition of 1959 contained about 72 pages on this historical background. Currently, his-
torical material on prisons in texts is spare by comparison, in most cases varying from 3 to
about 35 pages. Some criminal justice texts have no historical material on prisons.

2. The story of Joseph and others imprisoned by the Pharaoh is an example. See Genesis
39:20 and 40:2, 4 (Revised Standard Version).

3. For a view of the subterranean prison where Socrates was held, see Peters (1995, p. 7).
Also see Johnston (2000, pp. 15-16), describing a Roman prison built between the third and
first centuries BCE.

4. Picking pockets ceased to be a capital offense only in 1808; soldiers and sailors found
begging could be sentenced to death until 1812 (Pike, 1876, p. 450).

5. Such display of bodies during the Colonial period in America was often by means of
a gibbet iron, a made-to-order iron cage in which the executed felon was displayed in a promi-
nent place (Sellin, 1955). Public executions, however, continued until 1936 in the United
States (Newman, 1978, p. 145).

6. It would be impossible to identify the first prisons where rehabilitation was considered
an important goal, but see Johnston (2000, p. 5).

7. It was common at the time for the jailer to derive his income from charges for food,
alcohol, beds, and the removal or placement of the prisoner’s chains.

8. Penn landed in prison for refusing to take an oath. Orlando Lewis in a 1922 history
claimed Penn was confined for 6 months at the infamous London prison, Newgate (Lewis,
1922/1967, p. 30). Other sources indicated he did his time in an inn.

9. As late as 1822, a felon was publicly flogged on the Yale University campus in view of
the students. See Tyler (1944, p. 269).

10. Although Connecticut placed state prisoners in an old mine in Simsbury beginning in
1773 and Massachusetts confined inmates in a fort in Boston Harbor in 1785, the “Penitentiary
House” at Walnut Street Jail appears to be the first purpose-built state prison.

11. His name did not appear in the English version, which was subtitled By an European
(see La Rochefoucauld-Liancourt 1796). As a member of the French nobility, La
Rochefoucauld-Liancourt fled France during the Revolution for England, then to the United
States. He returned to France in 1799.

12. Howard’s book was among a collection of books and records sold to a scrap paper
dealer in the 1960s, who, in turn, contacted a rare book dealer. Ironically, that copy of John
Howard deemed worthy of shredding will undoubtedly survive those very officials.

13. The original plan, consisting of seven radial wings and a center building containing
services, was, except for the attached exercise yards, almost exactly like plans for a proposed
London lunatic asylum by a prominent architect, and published before Haviland left England.
See Johnston (1994, p. 34).

14. That immigration surge was dramatic: In New York state, for example, by 1860, 44%
of the population were foreign-born; 46% were foreign-born in Illinois. See Rothman (1995,
p. 126). This surge of course contributed to prison overcrowding.

15. In 1958, when I visited the large departmental prison at Fresnes outside Paris, the
director expressed concern that inmates could see one another in adjacent cell wings. They
were still being fed in their cells and exercised in individual yards.

32S The Prison Journal

16. The strict system of separate confinement at Eastern State Penitentiary eroded from
the start, with no public acknowledgement by officials until its formal elimination in 1913.
For details of the compromised ideal of separate confinement there, see Johnston (2004,
pp. 275-305).

17. They included Frédéric-Auguste Demetz and Guillaume Abel Blouet, who in 1830 had
been sent by the French government to study American prisons, especially Cherry Hill. Also
involved in the Colony was Gustave de Beaumont, who had accompanied Alexis de Tocqueville
in 1831 on his American visit, ostensibly with the same goal as the earlier delegation. The intent
of the two magistrates, Tocqueville and Beaumont, was to find a reason to absent themselves
from France at a time of political turmoil. Beaumont had a greater interest in prisons, although
his colleague dutifully carried out interviews with inmates too. Their report, On the Penitentiary
System in the United States, was written largely by Beaumont. For a general description of
Mettray see Société Paternelle, 1839.

18. In 1885, there were 1,027 federal prisoners in state prisons. See McKelvey (1936/1977,
p. 194). That book provides a detailed history of American prisons, especially from 1835 to its
date of publication.

19. Too neat a boundary on reform motives cannot be made easily. Early examples existed
where reform was considered important. See, for example, Johnston (2000), pp. 5-6, and chap.
2, dealing with religious and monastic imprisonment.

References

The attorney general’s survey of release procedures: Vol. 5. Prisons. (1940). Leavenworth,
KS: Federal Prison Industries, Inc. Press.

Barkan, I. (1936). Imprisonment as a penalty in ancient Athens. Classical Philology, 31, 338-341.
Barnes, H. E. (1927). The evolution of penology in Pennsylvania. A study in American social

history. Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill.
Barnes, H. E. (1936/1969). The repression of crime. Montclair, N.J.: Patterson Smith.
Barnes, H. E., & Teeters, N. (1945). New horizons in criminology: The American crime prob-

lem (Rev. ed.). New York: Prentice Hall.
Bates, S. (1936). Prisons and beyond. New York: Macmillan.
Beaumont, G. de, & Tocqueville, A. de. (1833). On the penitentiary system in the United States

and its application in France (F. Lieber, Trans.). Philadelphia: Carey, Lea & Blanchard.
Crawford, W. (1835/1968). On the penitentiaries of the United States. Montclair, NJ: Patterson

Smith.
Dikötter, F., & Brown, I. (Eds.). (2007). Cultures of confinement: A history of the prisons in

Africa, Asia and Latin America. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Evans, R. (1982). The fabrication of virtue: English prison architecture, 1750-1840.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Grünhut, M. (1948). Penal reform: A comparative study. Oxford, UK: Clarendon.
Howard, J. (1792/1973). Prisons and lazarettos: Vol. 1. The state of the prisons in England and

Wales. Montclair, NJ: Patterson Smith.
Ives, G. (1914). A history of penal methods. London: Stanley Paul.
Johnson, D. (n.d.). Kingston Penitentiary (Building Report 89-32). Ottawa, Canada: Federal

Heritage Building Review Office.
Johnston, N. (with Finkel, K., & Cohen, J.). (1994). Eastern State Penitentiary: Crucible of

good intentions. Philadelphia: Philadelphia Museum of Art.

Johnston / Evolving Function 33S

Johnston, N. (2000). Forms of constraint: A history of prison architecture. Urbana: University
of Illinois Press.

Johnston, N. (2004). The world’s most influential prison: Success or failure? The Prison
Journal, 84(Suppl. 4), 20S-40S.

Keve, P. (1986). History of corrections in Virginia. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia.
La Rochefoucauld-Liancourt, F., duc de. (1796). On the prisons of Philadelphia. By an

European. Philadelphia: Moreau de Saint-Mery.
Lewis, O. (1922/1967). The development of American prisons and prison customs, 1776-1845.

Montclair, NJ: Patterson Smith.
Mayhew, H., & Binny, J. (1862). The criminal prisons of London and scenes of prison life.

London: Griffin, Bohn & Co.
McGowan, R. (1995). The well-ordered prison: England, 1780-1865. In N. Morris & D. Rothman

(Eds.), The Oxford history of the prison. New York: Oxford University Press.

McKelvey, B. (1936/1977). American prisons: A history of good intentions. Montclair, NJ:

Patterson Smith.
McLennan, R. M. (2008). The crisis of imprisonment: Protest, politics and the making of the

American penal state, 1776-1941. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Meranze, M. (1996). Punishment, revolution and authority in Philadelphia, 1760-1835.

Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
National Prison Association. (1871). Transactions of the National Congress on Penitentiary

and Reformatory Discipline. Albany: Weed, Parsons & Company
National Probation Association. (1939/1972). John Augustus, first probation officer. Montclair,

NJ: Patterson Smith.
National Society of Penal Information. (1931). The education of adult prisoners. New York:

Author.
Newman, G. (1978). The punishment response. Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott.
Pauthier, G. (1840). Livres sacrés de l’Orient (Pt. 1). Paris: Firmin Didot.
Peters, E. (1995). Prison before the prison: The ancient and medieval worlds. In N. Morris &

D. Rothman (Eds.), The Oxford history of the prison. New York: Oxford University Press.
Philadelphia Prison Society. (1790). Extracts and remarks on the subject of punishment and

reformation of criminals [Pamphlet]. Philadelphia: Author.
Pike, L. O. (1876). A history of crime in England (Vol. 2). London: Smith, Elder & Co.
Pugh, R. (1968). Imprisonment in medieval England. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Radzinowicz, L. (1948). A history of English criminal law and its administration from 1750.

The movement for reform 1750-1833. New York: Macmillan.
Rothman, D. (1971). The discovery of the asylum: Social order and disorder in the new republic.

Boston: Little, Brown.
Rothman, D. (1995). Perfecting the prison: United States 1789-1865. In N. Morris & D. Rothman

(Eds.), The Oxford history of the prison (pp. 111-129). New York: Oxford University Press.
Rotman, E. (1995). The failure of reform. In N. Morris & D. Rothman (Eds.), The Oxford

history of the prison (pp. 169-197). New York: Oxford University Press.
Ruggles-Brice, Sir E. (1921). The English prison system. London: Macmillan.
Rusche, G., & Kirchheimer, O. (1968). Punishment and social structure. New York: Russell

& Russell.
Salvatore, R. D., & Aguirre, C. (Eds.). (1996). The birth of the penitentiary in Latin America:

Essays on criminology, prison reform and social control. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Sellin T. (1930). A precursor of modern penology. Journal of the American Institute of

Criminal Law and Criminology, 17, 104-112.

34S The Prison Journal

Sellin, T. (1944). Pioneering in penology: The Amsterdam houses of correction in the sixteenth
and seventeenth centuries. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

Sellin, T. (1953). Philadelphia prisons of the eighteenth century. Historic Philadelphia. In
Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, 43(1), n.p.

Sellin, T. (1955). The Philadelphia gibbet iron. Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology and
Police Science, 46, 11-25.

Sellin, T. (1976). Slavery and the penal system. New York: Oxford University Press.
Skidmore, R. (1951). An American prison school in the eighteenth century. Journal of

Criminal Law, Criminology & Police Science, 46, 212-213.
Société Paternelle. (1839). Fondation d’une colonie agricole de jeunes détenus à Mettray

(Vol. 1). Paris: Benjamin Duprat.
Spierenburg, P. (1984). The spectacle of suffering and the evolution of repression: From prein-

dustrial metropolis to the European experience. Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press.
Sullivan, L. E. (2002). Forlorn hope: The prison reform movement (Limited Rev. ed.). New York:

Richard Minsky.
Teeters, N. K. (1955). The cradle of the penitentiary: The Walnut Street jail at Philadelphia,

1773-1835. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Tyler, A. F. (1944). Freedom’s ferment. New York: Harper & Roe.
U.S. Bureau of Prisons. (1949). Handbook of correctional institution design and construction.

Leavenworth, KS: Leavenworth Penitentiary.
Vaux, R. (1872). Brief sketch of the origin and history of the State Penitentiary for the Eastern

District of Pennsylvania. Philadelphia: McLaughlin Brothers.
Wines, F. H. (1910). Punishment and reformation: A study of the penitentiary system. New York:

Thomas Y. Crowell.
Zedner, L. (1995). Wayward sisters: The prison for women. In N. Morris & D. Rothman

(Eds.), The Oxford history of the prison. New York: Oxford University Press.

Norman Johnston, PhD, was a sociologist with the Illinois Department of Corrections from
1948 to 1951. He taught at the University of Missouri–St. Louis, the University of Pennsylvania,
and Arcadia University, where he is now a professor emeritus. He is the coeditor of eight
criminal justice anthologies and the author of The Human Cage, Eastern State Penitentiary:
Crucible of Good Intentions, and Forms of Constraint: A History of Prison Architecture, as
well as journal articles published here and in Europe. His work has appeared in translation in
Spain, Russia, and Japan.

<< /ASCII85EncodePages false /AllowTransparency false /AutoPositionEPSFiles true /AutoRotatePages /None /Binding /Left /CalGrayProfile (Dot Gain 20%) /CalRGBProfile (sRGB IEC61966-2.1) /CalCMYKProfile (U.S. Web Coated \050SWOP\051 v2) /sRGBProfile (sRGB IEC61966-2.1) /CannotEmbedFontPolicy /Error /CompatibilityLevel 1.3 /CompressObjects /Off /CompressPages true /ConvertImagesToIndexed true /PassThroughJPEGImages true /CreateJobTicket false /DefaultRenderingIntent /Default /DetectBlends true /DetectCurves 0.1000 /ColorConversionStrategy /LeaveColorUnchanged /DoThumbnails false /EmbedAllFonts true /EmbedOpenType false /ParseICCProfilesInComments true /EmbedJobOptions true /DSCReportingLevel 0 /EmitDSCWarnings false /EndPage -1 /ImageMemory 1048576 /LockDistillerParams false /MaxSubsetPct 100 /Optimize false /OPM 1 /ParseDSCComments true /ParseDSCCommentsForDocInfo true /PreserveCopyPage true /PreserveDICMYKValues true /PreserveEPSInfo true /PreserveFlatness true /PreserveHalftoneInfo false /PreserveOPIComments false /PreserveOverprintSettings true /StartPage 1 /SubsetFonts true /TransferFunctionInfo /Apply /UCRandBGInfo /Remove /UsePrologue false /ColorSettingsFile () /AlwaysEmbed [ true /ACaslon-Bold /ACaslon-BoldItalic /ACaslon-Italic /ACaslon-Ornaments /ACaslon-Regular /ACaslon-Semibold /ACaslon-SemiboldItalic /AdobeCorpID-Acrobat /AdobeCorpID-Adobe /AdobeCorpID-Bullet /AdobeCorpID-MinionBd /AdobeCorpID-MinionBdIt /AdobeCorpID-MinionRg /AdobeCorpID-MinionRgIt /AdobeCorpID-MinionSb /AdobeCorpID-MinionSbIt /AdobeCorpID-MyriadBd /AdobeCorpID-MyriadBdIt /AdobeCorpID-MyriadBdScn /AdobeCorpID-MyriadBdScnIt /AdobeCorpID-MyriadBl /AdobeCorpID-MyriadBlIt /AdobeCorpID-MyriadLt /AdobeCorpID-MyriadLtIt /AdobeCorpID-MyriadPkg /AdobeCorpID-MyriadRg /AdobeCorpID-MyriadRgIt /AdobeCorpID-MyriadRgScn /AdobeCorpID-MyriadRgScnIt /AdobeCorpID-MyriadSb /AdobeCorpID-MyriadSbIt /AdobeCorpID-MyriadSbScn /AdobeCorpID-MyriadSbScnIt /AdobeCorpID-PScript /AGaramond-BoldScaps /AGaramond-Italic /AGaramond-Regular /AGaramond-RomanScaps /AGaramond-Semibold /AGaramond-SemiboldItalic /AGar-Special /AkzidenzGroteskBE-Bold /AkzidenzGroteskBE-BoldEx /AkzidenzGroteskBE-BoldExIt /AkzidenzGroteskBE-BoldIt /AkzidenzGroteskBE-Ex /AkzidenzGroteskBE-It /AkzidenzGroteskBE-Light /AkzidenzGroteskBE-LightEx /AkzidenzGroteskBE-LightOsF /AkzidenzGroteskBE-Md /AkzidenzGroteskBE-MdEx /AkzidenzGroteskBE-MdIt /AkzidenzGroteskBE-Regular /AkzidenzGroteskBE-Super /AlbertusMT /AlbertusMT-Italic /AlbertusMT-Light /Aldine401BT-BoldA /Aldine401BT-BoldItalicA /Aldine401BT-ItalicA /Aldine401BT-RomanA /Aldine401BTSPL-RomanA /Aldine721BT-Bold /Aldine721BT-BoldItalic /Aldine721BT-Italic /Aldine721BT-Light /Aldine721BT-LightItalic /Aldine721BT-Roman /Aldus-Italic /Aldus-ItalicOsF /Aldus-Roman /Aldus-RomanSC /AlternateGothicNo2BT-Regular /AmazoneBT-Regular /AmericanTypewriter-Bold /AmericanTypewriter-BoldA /AmericanTypewriter-BoldCond /AmericanTypewriter-BoldCondA /AmericanTypewriter-Cond /AmericanTypewriter-CondA /AmericanTypewriter-Light /AmericanTypewriter-LightA /AmericanTypewriter-LightCond /AmericanTypewriter-LightCondA /AmericanTypewriter-Medium /AmericanTypewriter-MediumA /Anna /AntiqueOlive-Bold /AntiqueOlive-Compact /AntiqueOlive-Italic /AntiqueOlive-Roman /Arcadia /Arcadia-A /Arkona-Medium /Arkona-Regular /ArrusBT-Black /ArrusBT-BlackItalic /ArrusBT-Bold /ArrusBT-BoldItalic /ArrusBT-Italic /ArrusBT-Roman /AssemblyLightSSK /AuroraBT-BoldCondensed /AuroraBT-RomanCondensed /AuroraOpti-Condensed /AvantGarde-Book /AvantGarde-BookOblique /AvantGarde-Demi /AvantGarde-DemiOblique /Avenir-Black /Avenir-BlackOblique /Avenir-Book /Avenir-BookOblique /Avenir-Heavy /Avenir-HeavyOblique /Avenir-Light /Avenir-LightOblique /Avenir-Medium /Avenir-MediumOblique /Avenir-Oblique /Avenir-Roman /BaileySansITC-Bold /BaileySansITC-BoldItalic /BaileySansITC-Book /BaileySansITC-BookItalic /BakerSignetBT-Roman /BaskervilleBE-Italic /BaskervilleBE-Medium /BaskervilleBE-MediumItalic /BaskervilleBE-Regular /Baskerville-Bold /BaskervilleBook-Italic /BaskervilleBook-MedItalic /BaskervilleBook-Medium /BaskervilleBook-Regular /BaskervilleBT-Bold /BaskervilleBT-BoldItalic /BaskervilleBT-Italic /BaskervilleBT-Roman /BaskervilleMT /BaskervilleMT-Bold /BaskervilleMT-BoldItalic /BaskervilleMT-Italic /BaskervilleMT-SemiBold /BaskervilleMT-SemiBoldItalic /BaskervilleNo2BT-Bold /BaskervilleNo2BT-BoldItalic /BaskervilleNo2BT-Italic /BaskervilleNo2BT-Roman /Baskerville-Normal-Italic /BauerBodoni-Black /BauerBodoni-BlackCond /BauerBodoni-BlackItalic /BauerBodoni-Bold /BauerBodoni-BoldCond /BauerBodoni-BoldItalic /BauerBodoni-BoldItalicOsF /BauerBodoni-BoldOsF /BauerBodoni-Italic /BauerBodoni-ItalicOsF /BauerBodoni-Roman /BauerBodoni-RomanSC /Bauhaus-Bold /Bauhaus-Demi /Bauhaus-Heavy /BauhausITCbyBT-Bold /BauhausITCbyBT-Heavy /BauhausITCbyBT-Light /BauhausITCbyBT-Medium /Bauhaus-Light /Bauhaus-Medium /BellCentennial-Address /BellGothic-Black /BellGothic-Bold /Bell-GothicBoldItalicBT /BellGothicBT-Bold /BellGothicBT-Roman /BellGothic-Light /Bembo /Bembo-Bold /Bembo-BoldExpert /Bembo-BoldItalic /Bembo-BoldItalicExpert /Bembo-Expert /Bembo-ExtraBoldItalic /Bembo-Italic /Bembo-ItalicExpert /Bembo-Semibold /Bembo-SemiboldItalic /Benguiat-Bold /Benguiat-BoldItalic /Benguiat-Book /Benguiat-BookItalic /BenguiatGothicITCbyBT-Bold /BenguiatGothicITCbyBT-BoldItal /BenguiatGothicITCbyBT-Book /BenguiatGothicITCbyBT-BookItal /BenguiatITCbyBT-Bold /BenguiatITCbyBT-BoldItalic /BenguiatITCbyBT-Book /BenguiatITCbyBT-BookItalic /Benguiat-Medium /Benguiat-MediumItalic /Berkeley-Black /Berkeley-BlackItalic /Berkeley-Bold /Berkeley-BoldItalic /Berkeley-Book /Berkeley-BookItalic /Berkeley-Italic /Berkeley-Medium /Berling-Bold /Berling-BoldItalic /Berling-Italic /Berling-Roman /BernhardBoldCondensedBT-Regular /BernhardFashionBT-Regular /BernhardModernBT-Bold /BernhardModernBT-BoldItalic /BernhardModernBT-Italic /BernhardModernBT-Roman /BernhardTangoBT-Regular /BlockBE-Condensed /BlockBE-ExtraCn /BlockBE-ExtraCnIt /BlockBE-Heavy /BlockBE-Italic /BlockBE-Regular /Bodoni /Bodoni-Bold /Bodoni-BoldItalic /Bodoni-Italic /Bodoni-Poster /Bodoni-PosterCompressed /Bookman-Demi /Bookman-DemiItalic /Bookman-Light /Bookman-LightItalic /Boton-Italic /Boton-Medium /Boton-MediumItalic /Boton-Regular /Boulevard /BremenBT-Black /BremenBT-Bold /BroadwayBT-Regular /CaflischScript-Bold /CaflischScript-Regular /Caliban /CarminaBT-Bold /CarminaBT-BoldItalic /CarminaBT-Light /CarminaBT-LightItalic /CarminaBT-Medium /CarminaBT-MediumItalic /Carta /Caslon224ITCbyBT-Bold /Caslon224ITCbyBT-BoldItalic /Caslon224ITCbyBT-Book /Caslon224ITCbyBT-BookItalic /Caslon540BT-Italic /Caslon540BT-Roman /CaslonBT-Bold /CaslonBT-BoldItalic /CaslonOpenFace /CaslonTwoTwentyFour-Black /CaslonTwoTwentyFour-BlackIt /CaslonTwoTwentyFour-Bold /CaslonTwoTwentyFour-BoldIt /CaslonTwoTwentyFour-Book /CaslonTwoTwentyFour-BookIt /CaslonTwoTwentyFour-Medium /CaslonTwoTwentyFour-MediumIt /CastleT-Bold /CastleT-Book /Caxton-Bold /Caxton-BoldItalic /Caxton-Book /Caxton-BookItalic /CaxtonBT-Bold /CaxtonBT-BoldItalic /CaxtonBT-Book /CaxtonBT-BookItalic /Caxton-Light /Caxton-LightItalic /CelestiaAntiqua-Ornaments /Centennial-BlackItalicOsF /Centennial-BlackOsF /Centennial-BoldItalicOsF /Centennial-BoldOsF /Centennial-ItalicOsF /Centennial-LightItalicOsF /Centennial-LightSC /Centennial-RomanSC /Century-Bold /Century-BoldItalic /Century-Book /Century-BookItalic /CenturyExpandedBT-Bold /CenturyExpandedBT-BoldItalic /CenturyExpandedBT-Italic /CenturyExpandedBT-Roman /Century-HandtooledBold /Century-HandtooledBoldItalic /Century-Light /Century-LightItalic /CenturyOldStyle-Bold /CenturyOldStyle-Italic /CenturyOldStyle-Regular /CenturySchoolbookBT-Bold /CenturySchoolbookBT-BoldCond /CenturySchoolbookBT-BoldItalic /CenturySchoolbookBT-Italic /CenturySchoolbookBT-Roman /Century-Ultra /Century-UltraItalic /CharterBT-Black /CharterBT-BlackItalic /CharterBT-Bold /CharterBT-BoldItalic /CharterBT-Italic /CharterBT-Roman /CheltenhamBT-Bold /CheltenhamBT-BoldCondItalic /CheltenhamBT-BoldExtraCondensed /CheltenhamBT-BoldHeadline /CheltenhamBT-BoldItalic /CheltenhamBT-BoldItalicHeadline /CheltenhamBT-Italic /CheltenhamBT-Roman /Cheltenham-HandtooledBdIt /Cheltenham-HandtooledBold /CheltenhamITCbyBT-Bold /CheltenhamITCbyBT-BoldItalic /CheltenhamITCbyBT-Book /CheltenhamITCbyBT-BookItalic /Christiana-Bold /Christiana-BoldItalic /Christiana-Italic /Christiana-Medium /Christiana-MediumItalic /Christiana-Regular /Christiana-RegularExpert /Christiana-RegularSC /Clarendon /Clarendon-Bold /Clarendon-Light /ClassicalGaramondBT-Bold /ClassicalGaramondBT-BoldItalic /ClassicalGaramondBT-Italic /ClassicalGaramondBT-Roman /CMR10 /CMR8 /CMSY10 /CMSY8 /CMTI10 /CommonBullets /ConduitITC-Bold /ConduitITC-BoldItalic /ConduitITC-Light /ConduitITC-LightItalic /ConduitITC-Medium /ConduitITC-MediumItalic /CooperBlack /CooperBlack-Italic /CooperBT-Bold /CooperBT-BoldItalic /CooperBT-Light /CooperBT-LightItalic /CopperplateGothicBT-Bold /CopperplateGothicBT-BoldCond /CopperplateGothicBT-Heavy /CopperplateGothicBT-Roman /CopperplateGothicBT-RomanCond /Copperplate-ThirtyThreeBC /Copperplate-ThirtyTwoBC /Coronet-Regular /Courier /Courier-Bold /Courier-BoldOblique /Courier-Oblique /Critter /CS-Special-font /DellaRobbiaBT-Bold /DellaRobbiaBT-Roman /Della-RobbiaItalicBT /Della-RobbiaSCaps /Del-NormalSmallCaps /Delphin-IA /Delphin-IIA /Delta-Bold /Delta-BoldItalic /Delta-Book /Delta-BookItalic /Delta-Light /Delta-LightItalic /Delta-Medium /Delta-MediumItalic /Delta-Outline /DextorD /DextorOutD /DidotLH-OrnamentsOne /DidotLH-OrnamentsTwo /DINEngschrift /DINEngschrift-Alternate /DINMittelschrift /DINMittelschrift-Alternate /DINNeuzeitGrotesk-BoldCond /DINNeuzeitGrotesk-Light /Dom-CasItalic /DomCasual /DomCasual-Bold /Dom-CasualBT /Ehrhard-Italic /Ehrhard-Regular /EhrhardSemi-Italic /EhrhardtMT /EhrhardtMT-Italic /EhrhardtMT-SemiBold /EhrhardtMT-SemiBoldItalic /EhrharSemi /ELANGO-IB-A03 /ELANGO-IB-A75 /ELANGO-IB-A99 /ElectraLH-Bold /ElectraLH-BoldCursive /ElectraLH-Cursive /ElectraLH-Regular /ElGreco /EnglischeSchT-Bold /EnglischeSchT-Regu /ErasContour /ErasITCbyBT-Bold /ErasITCbyBT-Book /ErasITCbyBT-Demi /ErasITCbyBT-Light /ErasITCbyBT-Medium /ErasITCbyBT-Ultra /Euclid /Euclid-Bold /Euclid-BoldItalic /EuclidExtra /EuclidExtra-Bold /EuclidFraktur /EuclidFraktur-Bold /Euclid-Italic /EuclidMathOne /EuclidMathOne-Bold /EuclidMathTwo /EuclidMathTwo-Bold /EuclidSymbol /EuclidSymbol-Bold /EuclidSymbol-BoldItalic /EuclidSymbol-Italic /EUEX10 /EUFB10 /EUFB5 /EUFB7 /EUFM10 /EUFM5 /EUFM7 /EURB10 /EURB5 /EURB7 /EURM10 /EURM5 /EURM7 /EuropeanPi-Four /EuropeanPi-One /EuropeanPi-Three /EuropeanPi-Two /EuroSans-Bold /EuroSans-BoldItalic /EuroSans-Italic /EuroSans-Regular /EuroSerif-Bold /EuroSerif-BoldItalic /EuroSerif-Italic /EuroSerif-Regular /Eurostile /Eurostile-Bold /Eurostile-BoldCondensed /Eurostile-BoldExtendedTwo /Eurostile-BoldOblique /Eurostile-Condensed /Eurostile-Demi /Eurostile-DemiOblique /Eurostile-ExtendedTwo /EurostileLTStd-Demi /EurostileLTStd-DemiOblique /Eurostile-Oblique /EUSB10 /EUSB5 /EUSB7 /EUSM10 /EUSM5 /EUSM7 /ExPonto-Regular /FairfieldLH-Bold /FairfieldLH-BoldItalic /FairfieldLH-BoldSC /FairfieldLH-CaptionBold /FairfieldLH-CaptionHeavy /FairfieldLH-CaptionLight /FairfieldLH-CaptionMedium /FairfieldLH-Heavy /FairfieldLH-HeavyItalic /FairfieldLH-HeavySC /FairfieldLH-Light /FairfieldLH-LightItalic /FairfieldLH-LightSC /FairfieldLH-Medium /FairfieldLH-MediumItalic /FairfieldLH-MediumSC /FairfieldLH-SwBoldItalicOsF /FairfieldLH-SwHeavyItalicOsF /FairfieldLH-SwLightItalicOsF /FairfieldLH-SwMediumItalicOsF /Fences /Fenice-Bold /Fenice-BoldOblique /FeniceITCbyBT-Bold /FeniceITCbyBT-BoldItalic /FeniceITCbyBT-Regular /FeniceITCbyBT-RegularItalic /Fenice-Light /Fenice-LightOblique /Fenice-Regular /Fenice-RegularOblique /Fenice-Ultra /Fenice-UltraOblique /FlashD-Ligh /Flood /Folio-Bold /Folio-BoldCondensed /Folio-ExtraBold /Folio-Light /Folio-Medium /FontanaNDAaOsF /FontanaNDAaOsF-Italic /FontanaNDCcOsF-Semibold /FontanaNDCcOsF-SemiboldIta /FontanaNDEeOsF /FontanaNDEeOsF-Bold /FontanaNDEeOsF-BoldItalic /FontanaNDEeOsF-Light /FontanaNDEeOsF-Semibold /FormalScript421BT-Regular /Formata-Bold /Formata-MediumCondensed /ForteMT /FournierMT-Ornaments /FrakturBT-Regular /FrankfurterHigD /FranklinGothic-Book /FranklinGothic-BookItal /FranklinGothic-BookOblique /FranklinGothic-Condensed /FranklinGothic-Demi /FranklinGothic-DemiItal /FranklinGothic-DemiOblique /FranklinGothic-Heavy /FranklinGothic-HeavyItal /FranklinGothic-HeavyOblique /FranklinGothicITCbyBT-BookItal /FranklinGothicITCbyBT-Demi /FranklinGothicITCbyBT-DemiItal /FranklinGothicITCbyBT-Heavy /FranklinGothicITCbyBT-HeavyItal /FranklinGothic-Medium /FranklinGothic-MediumItal /FranklinGothic-Roman /Freeform721BT-Bold /Freeform721BT-BoldItalic /Freeform721BT-Italic /Freeform721BT-Roman /FreestyleScrD /FreestyleScript /Freestylescript /FrizQuadrataITCbyBT-Bold /FrizQuadrataITCbyBT-Roman /Frutiger-Black /Frutiger-BlackCn /Frutiger-BlackItalic /Frutiger-Bold /Frutiger-BoldCn /Frutiger-BoldItalic /Frutiger-Cn /Frutiger-ExtraBlackCn /Frutiger-Italic /Frutiger-Light /Frutiger-LightCn /Frutiger-LightItalic /Frutiger-Roman /Frutiger-UltraBlack /Futura /FuturaBlackBT-Regular /Futura-Bold /Futura-BoldOblique /Futura-Book /Futura-BookOblique /FuturaBT-Bold /FuturaBT-BoldCondensed /FuturaBT-BoldCondensedItalic /FuturaBT-BoldItalic /FuturaBT-Book /FuturaBT-BookItalic /FuturaBT-ExtraBlack /FuturaBT-ExtraBlackCondensed /FuturaBT-ExtraBlackCondItalic /FuturaBT-ExtraBlackItalic /FuturaBT-Heavy /FuturaBT-HeavyItalic /FuturaBT-Light /FuturaBT-LightCondensed /FuturaBT-LightItalic /FuturaBT-Medium /FuturaBT-MediumCondensed /FuturaBT-MediumItalic /Futura-CondensedLight /Futura-CondensedLightOblique /Futura-ExtraBold /Futura-ExtraBoldOblique /Futura-Heavy /Futura-HeavyOblique /Futura-Light /Futura-LightOblique /Futura-Oblique /Futura-Thin /Galliard-Black /Galliard-BlackItalic /Galliard-Bold /Galliard-BoldItalic /Galliard-Italic /GalliardITCbyBT-Bold /GalliardITCbyBT-BoldItalic /GalliardITCbyBT-Italic /GalliardITCbyBT-Roman /Galliard-Roman /Galliard-Ultra /Galliard-UltraItalic /Garamond-Antiqua /GaramondBE-Bold /GaramondBE-BoldExpert /GaramondBE-BoldOsF /GaramondBE-CnExpert /GaramondBE-Condensed /GaramondBE-CondensedSC /GaramondBE-Italic /GaramondBE-ItalicExpert /GaramondBE-ItalicOsF /GaramondBE-Medium /GaramondBE-MediumCn /GaramondBE-MediumCnExpert /GaramondBE-MediumCnOsF /GaramondBE-MediumExpert /GaramondBE-MediumItalic /GaramondBE-MediumItalicExpert /GaramondBE-MediumItalicOsF /GaramondBE-MediumSC /GaramondBE-Regular /GaramondBE-RegularExpert /GaramondBE-RegularSC /GaramondBE-SwashItalic /Garamond-Bold /Garamond-BoldCondensed /Garamond-BoldCondensedItalic /Garamond-BoldItalic /Garamond-Book /Garamond-BookCondensed /Garamond-BookCondensedItalic /Garamond-BookItalic /Garamond-Halbfett /Garamond-HandtooledBold /Garamond-HandtooledBoldItalic /GaramondITCbyBT-Bold /GaramondITCbyBT-BoldCondensed /GaramondITCbyBT-BoldCondItalic /GaramondITCbyBT-BoldItalic /GaramondITCbyBT-BoldNarrow /GaramondITCbyBT-BoldNarrowItal /GaramondITCbyBT-Book /GaramondITCbyBT-BookCondensed /GaramondITCbyBT-BookCondItalic /GaramondITCbyBT-BookItalic /GaramondITCbyBT-BookNarrow /GaramondITCbyBT-BookNarrowItal /GaramondITCbyBT-Light /GaramondITCbyBT-LightCondensed /GaramondITCbyBT-LightCondItalic /GaramondITCbyBT-LightItalic /GaramondITCbyBT-LightNarrow /GaramondITCbyBT-LightNarrowItal /GaramondITCbyBT-Ultra /GaramondITCbyBT-UltraCondensed /GaramondITCbyBT-UltraCondItalic /GaramondITCbyBT-UltraItalic /Garamond-Kursiv /Garamond-KursivHalbfett /Garamond-Light /Garamond-LightCondensed /Garamond-LightCondensedItalic /Garamond-LightItalic /GaramondNo4CyrTCY-Ligh /GaramondNo4CyrTCY-LighItal /GaramondThree /GaramondThree-Bold /GaramondThree-BoldItalic /GaramondThree-BoldItalicOsF /GaramondThree-BoldSC /GaramondThree-Italic /GaramondThree-ItalicOsF /GaramondThree-SC /GaramondThreeSMSIISpl-Italic /GaramondThreeSMSitalicSpl-Italic /GaramondThreeSMSspl /GaramondThreespl /GaramondThreeSpl-Bold /GaramondThreeSpl-Italic /Garamond-Ultra /Garamond-UltraCondensed /Garamond-UltraCondensedItalic /Garamond-UltraItalic /GarthGraphic /GarthGraphic-Black /GarthGraphic-Bold /GarthGraphic-BoldCondensed /GarthGraphic-BoldItalic /GarthGraphic-Condensed /GarthGraphic-ExtraBold /GarthGraphic-Italic /Geometric231BT-HeavyC /GeometricSlab712BT-BoldA /GeometricSlab712BT-ExtraBoldA /GeometricSlab712BT-LightA /GeometricSlab712BT-LightItalicA /GeometricSlab712BT-MediumA /GeometricSlab712BT-MediumItalA /Giddyup /Giddyup-Thangs /GillSans /GillSans-Bold /GillSans-BoldCondensed /GillSans-BoldExtraCondensed /GillSans-BoldItalic /GillSans-Condensed /GillSans-ExtraBold /GillSans-ExtraBoldDisplay /GillSans-Italic /GillSans-Light /GillSans-LightItalic /GillSans-LightShadowed /GillSans-Shadowed /GillSans-UltraBold /GillSans-UltraBoldCondensed /Gill-Special /Giovanni-Bold /Giovanni-BoldItalic /Giovanni-Book /Giovanni-BookItalic /Glypha /Glypha-Bold /Glypha-BoldOblique /Glypha-Oblique /Gothic-Thirteen /Goudy /Goudy-Bold /Goudy-BoldItalic /GoudyCatalogueBT-Regular /Goudy-ExtraBold /GoudyHandtooledBT-Regular /GoudyHeavyfaceBT-Regular /GoudyHeavyfaceBT-RegularCond /Goudy-Italic /GoudyOldStyleBT-Bold /GoudyOldStyleBT-BoldItalic /GoudyOldStyleBT-ExtraBold /GoudyOldStyleBT-Italic /GoudyOldStyleBT-Roman /GoudySans-Black /GoudySans-BlackItalic /GoudySans-Bold /GoudySans-BoldItalic /GoudySans-Book /GoudySans-BookItalic /GoudySansITCbyBT-Black /GoudySansITCbyBT-BlackItalic /GoudySansITCbyBT-Bold /GoudySansITCbyBT-BoldItalic /GoudySansITCbyBT-Light /GoudySansITCbyBT-LightItalic /GoudySansITCbyBT-Medium /GoudySansITCbyBT-MediumItalic /GoudySans-Medium /GoudySans-MediumItalic /Granjon /Granjon-Bold /Granjon-BoldOsF /Granjon-Italic /Granjon-ItalicOsF /Granjon-SC /GreymantleMVB-Ornaments /Helvetica /Helvetica-Black /Helvetica-BlackOblique /Helvetica-Black-SemiBold /Helvetica-Bold /Helvetica-BoldOblique /Helvetica-Compressed /Helvetica-Condensed /Helvetica-Condensed-Black /Helvetica-Condensed-BlackObl /Helvetica-Condensed-Bold /Helvetica-Condensed-BoldObl /Helvetica-Condensed-Light /Helvetica-Condensed-Light-Light /Helvetica-Condensed-LightObl /Helvetica-Condensed-Oblique /Helvetica-Condensed-Thin /Helvetica-ExtraCompressed /Helvetica-Fraction /Helvetica-FractionBold /HelveticaInserat-Roman /HelveticaInserat-Roman-SemiBold /Helvetica-Light /Helvetica-LightOblique /Helvetica-Narrow /Helvetica-Narrow-Bold /Helvetica-Narrow-BoldOblique /Helvetica-Narrow-Oblique /HelveticaNeue-Black /HelveticaNeue-BlackCond /HelveticaNeue-BlackCondObl /HelveticaNeue-BlackExt /HelveticaNeue-BlackExtObl /HelveticaNeue-BlackItalic /HelveticaNeue-Bold /HelveticaNeue-BoldCond /HelveticaNeue-BoldCondObl /HelveticaNeue-BoldExt /HelveticaNeue-BoldExtObl /HelveticaNeue-BoldItalic /HelveticaNeue-Condensed /HelveticaNeue-CondensedObl /HelveticaNeue-ExtBlackCond /HelveticaNeue-ExtBlackCondObl /HelveticaNeue-Extended /HelveticaNeue-ExtendedObl /HelveticaNeue-Heavy /HelveticaNeue-HeavyCond /HelveticaNeue-HeavyCondObl /HelveticaNeue-HeavyExt /HelveticaNeue-HeavyExtObl /HelveticaNeue-HeavyItalic /HelveticaNeue-Italic /HelveticaNeue-Light /HelveticaNeue-LightCond /HelveticaNeue-LightCondObl /HelveticaNeue-LightExt /HelveticaNeue-LightExtObl /HelveticaNeue-LightItalic /HelveticaNeueLTStd-Md /HelveticaNeueLTStd-MdIt /HelveticaNeue-Medium /HelveticaNeue-MediumCond /HelveticaNeue-MediumCondObl /HelveticaNeue-MediumExt /HelveticaNeue-MediumExtObl /HelveticaNeue-MediumItalic /HelveticaNeue-Roman /HelveticaNeue-Thin /HelveticaNeue-ThinCond /HelveticaNeue-ThinCondObl /HelveticaNeue-ThinItalic /HelveticaNeue-UltraLigCond /HelveticaNeue-UltraLigCondObl /HelveticaNeue-UltraLigExt /HelveticaNeue-UltraLigExtObl /HelveticaNeue-UltraLight /HelveticaNeue-UltraLightItal /Helvetica-Oblique /Helvetica-UltraCompressed /HelvExtCompressed /HelvLight /HelvUltCompressed /Humanist521BT-Bold /Humanist521BT-BoldCondensed /Humanist521BT-BoldItalic /Humanist521BT-ExtraBold /Humanist521BT-Italic /Humanist521BT-Light /Humanist521BT-LightItalic /Humanist521BT-Roman /Humanist521BT-RomanCondensed /Humanist521BT-UltraBold /Humanist521BT-XtraBoldCondensed /Humanist531BT-BlackA /Humanist531BT-BoldA /Humanist531BT-RomanA /Humanist531BT-UltraBlackA /Humanist777BT-BlackB /Humanist777BT-BlackCondensedB /Humanist777BT-BlackItalicB /Humanist777BT-BoldB /Humanist777BT-BoldCondensedB /Humanist777BT-BoldItalicB /Humanist777BT-ExtraBlackB /Humanist777BT-ExtraBlackCondB /Humanist777BT-ItalicB /Humanist777BT-LightB /Humanist777BT-LightCondensedB /Humanist777BT-LightItalicB /Humanist777BT-RomanB /Humanist777BT-RomanCondensedB /Humanist970BT-BoldC /Humanist970BT-RomanC /HumanistSlabserif712BT-Black /HumanistSlabserif712BT-Bold /HumanistSlabserif712BT-Italic /HumanistSlabserif712BT-Roman /ICMEX10 /ICMMI8 /ICMSY8 /ICMTT8 /Iglesia-Light /ILASY8 /ILCMSS8 /ILCMSSB8 /ILCMSSI8 /Imago-Book /Imago-BookItalic /Imago-ExtraBold /Imago-ExtraBoldItalic /Imago-Light /Imago-LightItalic /Imago-Medium /Imago-MediumItalic /Industria-Inline /Industria-InlineA /Industria-Solid /Industria-SolidA /Insignia /Insignia-A /IPAExtras /IPAHighLow /IPAKiel /IPAKielSeven /IPAsans /ITCGaramondMM /ITCGaramondMM-It /JAKEOpti-Regular /JansonText-Bold /JansonText-BoldItalic /JansonText-Italic /JansonText-Roman /JansonText-RomanSC /JoannaMT /JoannaMT-Bold /JoannaMT-BoldItalic /JoannaMT-Italic /Juniper /KabelITCbyBT-Book /KabelITCbyBT-Demi /KabelITCbyBT-Medium /KabelITCbyBT-Ultra /Kaufmann /Kaufmann-Bold /KeplMM-Or2 /KisBT-Italic /KisBT-Roman /KlangMT /Kuenstler480BT-Black /Kuenstler480BT-Bold /Kuenstler480BT-BoldItalic /Kuenstler480BT-Italic /Kuenstler480BT-Roman /KunstlerschreibschD-Bold /KunstlerschreibschD-Medi /Lapidary333BT-Black /Lapidary333BT-Bold /Lapidary333BT-BoldItalic /Lapidary333BT-Italic /Lapidary333BT-Roman /LASY10 /LASY5 /LASY6 /LASY7 /LASY8 /LASY9 /LASYB10 /LatinMT-Condensed /LCIRCLE10 /LCIRCLEW10 /LCMSS8 /LCMSSB8 /LCMSSI8 /LDecorationPi-One /LDecorationPi-Two /Leawood-Black /Leawood-BlackItalic /Leawood-Bold /Leawood-BoldItalic /Leawood-Book /Leawood-BookItalic /Leawood-Medium /Leawood-MediumItalic /LegacySans-Bold /LegacySans-BoldItalic /LegacySans-Book /LegacySans-BookItalic /LegacySans-Medium /LegacySans-MediumItalic /LegacySans-Ultra /LegacySerif-Bold /LegacySerif-BoldItalic /LegacySerif-Book /LegacySerif-BookItalic /LegacySerif-Medium /LegacySerif-MediumItalic /LegacySerif-Ultra /LetterGothic /LetterGothic-Bold /LetterGothic-BoldSlanted /LetterGothic-Slanted /Life-Bold /Life-Italic /Life-Roman /LINE10 /LINEW10 /Linotext /Lithos-Black /LithosBold /Lithos-Bold /Lithos-Regular /LOGO10 /LOGO8 /LOGO9 /LOGOBF10 /LOGOSL10 /LOMD-Normal /LubalinGraph-Book /LubalinGraph-BookOblique /LubalinGraph-Demi /LubalinGraph-DemiOblique /LucidaHandwritingItalic /LucidaMath-Symbol /LucidaSansTypewriter /LucidaSansTypewriter-Bd /LucidaSansTypewriter-BdObl /LucidaSansTypewriter-Obl /LucidaTypewriter /LucidaTypewriter-Bold /LucidaTypewriter-BoldObl /LucidaTypewriter-Obl /LydianBT-Bold /LydianBT-BoldItalic /LydianBT-Italic /LydianBT-Roman /LydianCursiveBT-Regular /Machine /Machine-Bold /Marigold /MathematicalPi-Five /MathematicalPi-Four /MathematicalPi-One /MathematicalPi-Six /MathematicalPi-Three /MathematicalPi-Two /MatrixScriptBold /MatrixScriptBoldLin /MatrixScriptBook /MatrixScriptBookLin /MatrixScriptRegular /MatrixScriptRegularLin /Melior /Melior-Bold /Melior-BoldItalic /Melior-Italic /MercuriusCT-Black /MercuriusCT-BlackItalic /MercuriusCT-Light /MercuriusCT-LightItalic /MercuriusCT-Medium /MercuriusCT-MediumItalic /MercuriusMT-BoldScript /Meridien-Bold /Meridien-BoldItalic /Meridien-Italic /Meridien-Medium /Meridien-MediumItalic /Meridien-Roman /Minion-Black /Minion-Bold /Minion-BoldCondensed /Minion-BoldCondensedItalic /Minion-BoldItalic /Minion-Condensed /Minion-CondensedItalic /Minion-DisplayItalic /Minion-DisplayRegular /MinionExp-Italic /MinionExp-Semibold /MinionExp-SemiboldItalic /Minion-Italic /Minion-Ornaments /Minion-Regular /Minion-Semibold /Minion-SemiboldItalic /MonaLisa-Recut /MrsEavesAllPetiteCaps /MrsEavesAllSmallCaps /MrsEavesBold /MrsEavesFractions /MrsEavesItalic /MrsEavesPetiteCaps /MrsEavesRoman /MrsEavesRomanLining /MrsEavesSmallCaps /MSAM10 /MSAM10A /MSAM5 /MSAM6 /MSAM7 /MSAM8 /MSAM9 /MSBM10 /MSBM10A /MSBM5 /MSBM6 /MSBM7 /MSBM8 /MSBM9 /MTEX /MTEXB /MTEXH /MTGU /MTGUB /MTMI /MTMIB /MTMIH /MTMS /MTMSB /MTMUB /MTMUH /MTSY /MTSYB /MTSYH /MTSYN /MusicalSymbols-Normal /Myriad-Bold /Myriad-BoldItalic /Myriad-CnBold /Myriad-CnBoldItalic /Myriad-CnItalic /Myriad-CnSemibold /Myriad-CnSemiboldItalic /Myriad-Condensed /Myriad-Italic /MyriadMM /MyriadMM-It /Myriad-Roman /Myriad-Sketch /Myriad-Tilt /NeuzeitS-Book /NeuzeitS-BookHeavy /NewBaskerville-Bold /NewBaskerville-BoldItalic /NewBaskerville-Italic /NewBaskervilleITCbyBT-Bold /NewBaskervilleITCbyBT-BoldItal /NewBaskervilleITCbyBT-Italic /NewBaskervilleITCbyBT-Roman /NewBaskerville-Roman /NewCaledonia /NewCaledonia-Black /NewCaledonia-BlackItalic /NewCaledonia-Bold /NewCaledonia-BoldItalic /NewCaledonia-BoldItalicOsF /NewCaledonia-BoldSC /NewCaledonia-Italic /NewCaledonia-ItalicOsF /NewCaledonia-SC /NewCaledonia-SemiBold /NewCaledonia-SemiBoldItalic /NewCenturySchlbk-Bold /NewCenturySchlbk-BoldItalic /NewCenturySchlbk-Italic /NewCenturySchlbk-Roman /NewsGothic /NewsGothic-Bold /NewsGothic-BoldOblique /NewsGothicBT-Bold /NewsGothicBT-BoldCondensed /NewsGothicBT-BoldCondItalic /NewsGothicBT-BoldExtraCondensed /NewsGothicBT-BoldItalic /NewsGothicBT-Demi /NewsGothicBT-DemiItalic /NewsGothicBT-ExtraCondensed /NewsGothicBT-Italic /NewsGothicBT-ItalicCondensed /NewsGothicBT-Light /NewsGothicBT-LightItalic /NewsGothicBT-Roman /NewsGothicBT-RomanCondensed /NewsGothic-Oblique /New-Symbol /NovareseITCbyBT-Bold /NovareseITCbyBT-BoldItalic /NovareseITCbyBT-Book /NovareseITCbyBT-BookItalic /Nueva-BoldExtended /Nueva-Roman /NuptialScript /OceanSansMM /OceanSansMM-It /OfficinaSans-Bold /OfficinaSans-BoldItalic /OfficinaSans-Book /OfficinaSans-BookItalic /OfficinaSerif-Bold /OfficinaSerif-BoldItalic /OfficinaSerif-Book /OfficinaSerif-BookItalic /OnyxMT /Optima /Optima-Bold /Optima-BoldItalic /Optima-BoldOblique /Optima-ExtraBlack /Optima-ExtraBlackItalic /Optima-Italic /Optima-Oblique /OSPIRE-Plain /OttaIA /Otta-wa /Ottawa-BoldA /OttawaPSMT /Oxford /Palatino-Bold /Palatino-BoldItalic /Palatino-Italic /Palatino-Roman /Parisian /Perpetua /Perpetua-Bold /Perpetua-BoldItalic /Perpetua-Italic /PhotinaMT /PhotinaMT-Bold /PhotinaMT-BoldItalic /PhotinaMT-Italic /PhotinaMT-SemiBold /PhotinaMT-SemiBoldItalic /PhotinaMT-UltraBold /PhotinaMT-UltraBoldItalic /Plantin /Plantin-Bold /Plantin-BoldItalic /Plantin-Italic /Plantin-Light /Plantin-LightItalic /Plantin-Semibold /Plantin-SemiboldItalic /Poetica-ChanceryI /Poetica-SuppLowercaseEndI /PopplLaudatio-Italic /PopplLaudatio-Medium /PopplLaudatio-MediumItalic /PopplLaudatio-Regular /ProseAntique-Bold /ProseAntique-Normal /QuaySansEF-Black /QuaySansEF-BlackItalic /QuaySansEF-Book /QuaySansEF-BookItalic /QuaySansEF-Medium /QuaySansEF-MediumItalic /Quorum-Black /Quorum-Bold /Quorum-Book /Quorum-Light /Quorum-Medium /Raleigh /Raleigh-Bold /Raleigh-DemiBold /Raleigh-Medium /Revival565BT-Bold /Revival565BT-BoldItalic /Revival565BT-Italic /Revival565BT-Roman /Ribbon131BT-Bold /Ribbon131BT-Regular /RMTMI /Rockwell /Rockwell-Bold /Rockwell-BoldItalic /Rockwell-Italic /Rockwell-Light /Rockwell-LightItalic /RotisSansSerif /RotisSansSerif-Bold /RotisSansSerif-ExtraBold /RotisSansSerif-Italic /RotisSansSerif-Light /RotisSansSerif-LightItalic /RotisSemiSans /RotisSemiSans-Bold /RotisSemiSans-ExtraBold /RotisSemiSans-Italic /RotisSemiSans-Light /RotisSemiSans-LightItalic /RotisSemiSerif /RotisSemiSerif-Bold /RotisSerif /RotisSerif-Bold /RotisSerif-Italic /RunicMT-Condensed /Sabon-Bold /Sabon-BoldItalic /Sabon-Italic /Sabon-Roman /SackersGothicLight /SackersGothicLightAlt /SackersItalianScript /SackersItalianScriptAlt /Sam /Sanvito-Light /SanvitoMM /Sanvito-Roman /Semitica /Semitica-Italic /SIVAMATH /Siva-Special /SMS-SPELA /Souvenir-Demi /Souvenir-DemiItalic /SouvenirITCbyBT-Demi /SouvenirITCbyBT-DemiItalic /SouvenirITCbyBT-Light /SouvenirITCbyBT-LightItalic /Souvenir-Light /Souvenir-LightItalic /SpecialAA /Special-Gali /Sp-Sym /StempelGaramond-Bold /StempelGaramond-BoldItalic /StempelGaramond-Italic /StempelGaramond-Roman /StoneSans /StoneSans-Bold /StoneSans-BoldItalic /StoneSans-Italic /StoneSans-PhoneticAlternate /StoneSans-PhoneticIPA /StoneSans-Semibold /StoneSans-SemiboldItalic /StoneSerif /StoneSerif-Italic /StoneSerif-PhoneticAlternate /StoneSerif-PhoneticIPA /StoneSerif-Semibold /StoneSerif-SemiboldItalic /Swiss721BT-Black /Swiss721BT-BlackCondensed /Swiss721BT-BlackCondensedItalic /Swiss721BT-BlackExtended /Swiss721BT-BlackItalic /Swiss721BT-BlackOutline /Swiss721BT-BlackRounded /Swiss721BT-Bold /Swiss721BT-BoldCondensed /Swiss721BT-BoldCondensedItalic /Swiss721BT-BoldCondensedOutline /Swiss721BT-BoldExtended /Swiss721BT-BoldItalic /Swiss721BT-BoldOutline /Swiss721BT-BoldRounded /Swiss721BT-Heavy /Swiss721BT-HeavyItalic /Swiss721BT-Italic /Swiss721BT-ItalicCondensed /Swiss721BT-Light /Swiss721BT-LightCondensed /Swiss721BT-LightCondensedItalic /Swiss721BT-LightExtended /Swiss721BT-LightItalic /Swiss721BT-Medium /Swiss721BT-MediumItalic /Swiss721BT-Roman /Swiss721BT-RomanCondensed /Swiss721BT-RomanExtended /Swiss721BT-Thin /Swiss721BT-ThinItalic /Swiss921BT-RegularA /Symbol /Syntax-Black /Syntax-Bold /Syntax-Italic /Syntax-Roman /Syntax-UltraBlack /Tekton /Times-Bold /Times-BoldA /Times-BoldItalic /Times-BoldOblique /Times-Italic /Times-NewRoman /Times-NewRomanBold /TimesNewRomanPS-BoldItalicMT /TimesNewRomanPS-ItalicMT /TimesNewRomanPSMT /Times-Oblique /Times-PhoneticAlternate /Times-PhoneticIPA /Times-Roman /Times-RomanSmallCaps /Times-Sc /Times-SCB /Times-special /TimesTenGreekP-Upright /TradeGothic /TradeGothic-Bold /TradeGothic-BoldCondTwenty /TradeGothic-BoldCondTwentyObl /TradeGothic-BoldOblique /TradeGothic-BoldTwo /TradeGothic-BoldTwoOblique /TradeGothic-CondEighteen /TradeGothic-CondEighteenObl /TradeGothicLH-BoldExtended /TradeGothicLH-Extended /TradeGothic-Light /TradeGothic-LightOblique /TradeGothic-Oblique /Trajan-Bold /TrajanPro-Bold /TrajanPro-Regular /Trajan-Regular /Transitional521BT-BoldA /Transitional521BT-CursiveA /Transitional521BT-RomanA /Transitional551BT-MediumB /Transitional551BT-MediumItalicB /Univers /Universal-GreekwithMathPi /Universal-NewswithCommPi /Univers-BlackExt /Univers-BlackExtObl /Univers-Bold /Univers-BoldExt /Univers-BoldExtObl /Univers-BoldOblique /Univers-Condensed /Univers-CondensedBold /Univers-CondensedBoldOblique /Univers-CondensedOblique /Univers-Extended /Univers-ExtendedObl /Univers-ExtraBlackExt /Univers-ExtraBlackExtObl /Univers-Light /Univers-LightOblique /UniversLTStd-Black /UniversLTStd-BlackObl /Univers-Oblique /Utopia-Black /Utopia-BlackOsF /Utopia-Bold /Utopia-BoldItalic /Utopia-Italic /Utopia-Ornaments /Utopia-Regular /Utopia-Semibold /Utopia-SemiboldItalic /VAGRounded-Black /VAGRounded-Bold /VAGRounded-Light /VAGRounded-Thin /Viva-BoldExtraExtended /Viva-Regular /Weidemann-Black /Weidemann-BlackItalic /Weidemann-Bold /Weidemann-BoldItalic /Weidemann-Book /Weidemann-BookItalic /Weidemann-Medium /Weidemann-MediumItalic /WindsorBT-Elongated /WindsorBT-Light /WindsorBT-LightCondensed /WindsorBT-Roman /Wingdings-Regular /WNCYB10 /WNCYI10 /WNCYR10 /WNCYSC10 /WNCYSS10 /WoodtypeOrnaments-One /WoodtypeOrnaments-Two /ZapfCalligraphic801BT-Bold /ZapfCalligraphic801BT-BoldItal /ZapfCalligraphic801BT-Italic /ZapfCalligraphic801BT-Roman /ZapfChanceryITCbyBT-Bold /ZapfChanceryITCbyBT-Demi /ZapfChanceryITCbyBT-Medium /ZapfChanceryITCbyBT-MediumItal /ZapfChancery-MediumItalic /ZapfDingbats /ZapfDingbatsITCbyBT-Regular /ZapfElliptical711BT-Bold /ZapfElliptical711BT-BoldItalic /ZapfElliptical711BT-Italic /ZapfElliptical711BT-Roman /ZapfHumanist601BT-Bold /ZapfHumanist601BT-BoldItalic /ZapfHumanist601BT-Demi /ZapfHumanist601BT-DemiItalic /ZapfHumanist601BT-Italic /ZapfHumanist601BT-Roman /ZapfHumanist601BT-Ultra /ZapfHumanist601BT-UltraItalic /ZurichBT-Black /ZurichBT-BlackExtended /ZurichBT-BlackItalic /ZurichBT-Bold /ZurichBT-BoldCondensed /ZurichBT-BoldCondensedItalic /ZurichBT-BoldExtended /ZurichBT-BoldExtraCondensed /ZurichBT-BoldItalic /ZurichBT-ExtraBlack /ZurichBT-ExtraCondensed /ZurichBT-Italic /ZurichBT-ItalicCondensed /ZurichBT-Light /ZurichBT-LightCondensed /ZurichBT-LightCondensedItalic /ZurichBT-LightExtraCondensed /ZurichBT-LightItalic /ZurichBT-Roman /ZurichBT-RomanCondensed /ZurichBT-RomanExtended /ZurichBT-UltraBlackExtended ] /NeverEmbed [ true ] /AntiAliasColorImages false /CropColorImages true /ColorImageMinResolution 150 /ColorImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK /DownsampleColorImages true /ColorImageDownsampleType /Bicubic /ColorImageResolution 300 /ColorImageDepth -1 /ColorImageMinDownsampleDepth 1 /ColorImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50000 /EncodeColorImages true /ColorImageFilter /DCTEncode /AutoFilterColorImages true /ColorImageAutoFilterStrategy /JPEG /ColorACSImageDict << /QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >>
/ColorImageDict << /QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >>
/JPEG2000ColorACSImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >>
/JPEG2000ColorImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >>
/AntiAliasGrayImages false
/CropGrayImages true
/GrayImageMinResolution 150
/GrayImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK
/DownsampleGrayImages true
/GrayImageDownsampleType /Bicubic
/GrayImageResolution 300
/GrayImageDepth -1
/GrayImageMinDownsampleDepth 2
/GrayImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50000
/EncodeGrayImages true
/GrayImageFilter /DCTEncode
/AutoFilterGrayImages true
/GrayImageAutoFilterStrategy /JPEG
/GrayACSImageDict << /QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >>
/GrayImageDict << /QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >>
/JPEG2000GrayACSImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >>
/JPEG2000GrayImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >>
/AntiAliasMonoImages false
/CropMonoImages true
/MonoImageMinResolution 1200
/MonoImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK
/DownsampleMonoImages true
/MonoImageDownsampleType /Bicubic
/MonoImageResolution 1200
/MonoImageDepth -1
/MonoImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50000
/EncodeMonoImages true
/MonoImageFilter /CCITTFaxEncode
/MonoImageDict << /K -1 >>
/AllowPSXObjects false
/CheckCompliance [
/None
]
/PDFX1aCheck false
/PDFX3Check false
/PDFXCompliantPDFOnly false
/PDFXNoTrimBoxError true
/PDFXTrimBoxToMediaBoxOffset [
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
]
/PDFXSetBleedBoxToMediaBox false
/PDFXBleedBoxToTrimBoxOffset [
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
]
/PDFXOutputIntentProfile (U.S. Web Coated \050SWOP\051 v2)
/PDFXOutputConditionIdentifier ()
/PDFXOutputCondition ()
/PDFXRegistryName (http://www.color.org)
/PDFXTrapped /Unknown
/CreateJDFFile false
/SyntheticBoldness 1.000000
/Description << /FRA
/JPN
/DEU
/PTB
/DAN
/NLD
/ESP
/SUO
/ITA
/NOR
/SVE
/ENU (Use these settings for creating PDF files for submission to The Sheridan Press. These settings configured for Acrobat v6.0 08/06/03.)
>>
>> setdistillerparams
<< /HWResolution [2400 2400] /PageSize [612.000 792.000] >> setpagedevice