Prison Regulations.

A city contemporary says:
"The prisoners in the Donnelly tragedy were returned to London on Friday. We are sorry to see one of our city contemporaries publishing items which might in a manner prejudice the care of those in custody. It seems some of them were allowed to receive from their friends some little marks of attention, and this is taken as a reason why the jail officials should be taken to task for permitting it. It should be borne in mind that these men must be considered innocent until they are found guilty by the court, and any remarks in the public press having a tendency to create an unfavorable impression against them is not only in exceedingly bad taste, but criminal as well."

So far as the ADVERTISER is concerned, it claims to have shown the Biddulph prisoners all consideration. We have never assumed that they are guilty, and have never printed one word of comment that could be held by any person as prejudicing their case. But, with all due respect to our contemporary and all who may endorse it, we hold and are not afraid to express the conviction that jail rules should not be so relaxed in the case of any persons whatever as to endanger their safe-keeping, if at all. That they are to be considered innocent we fully concede, but so is every one in jail awaiting trial. Yet we never knew, in London or elsewhere, that prisoners were permitted such exceptional liberties as the company of their wives all night. The guilt or innocence of the prisoners does not enter into the question - it is simply a matter of jail regulations. If the jailer has not gone outside of his duty, all well and good; if he has, let the authorities take the proper steps in the matter.

Source: Unknown, "Prison Regulations," London Advertiser, June 4, 1880.

Return to parent page