SLIDE SHOW PRESENTATION:
DOMESTICATING WOMEN
AT THE ILLINOIS STATE REFORMATORY FOR WOMEN,
1930-1962
Mara Dodge
Ph. D. Candidate
University of Illinois at Chicago
2251 N. Spaulding Ave.
Chicago, I L 60647
(773) 489-2030
e-mail:
Organization of American Historians
I. Revised Introduction:
Like the position of police woman, the women's reformatory prison was a product of
Progressive-era campaigns which can be precisely localized in the decades of the 1910's and
1920's. During this twenty year period, sixteen states established women's reformatories. In
contrast, only four women's reformatory prisons were opened in the nineteenth century. However,
these Progressive-era reformatories have never been studied, and no study has explored their
history and evolution over the course of the twentieth century. (1a) Estelle Freedman and Nicole
Hahn Rafter, the foremost historians of women's prisons, focused their studies primarily on the
pioneering nineteenth century institutions and the ideology of the first generation of female prison
reformers. Thus, my research fills a significant gap in studies of both female criminality and female
prison life.
In addition, most prison histories have analyzed the prison without including the voices of
the prisoners themselves. That is, prison history has typically been a history of prison
administrations or a history of the failure of reform efforts. Few of these traditional prison
histories have explored the responses of the prisoner's themselves to prison policy, and few
document the daily conflicts over power, influence, and control between prisoners and staff.
I. Introduction: Ideology of the Women's Reformatory Prison
This paper is based on my dissertation, "The Social Construction of Female Criminality: A
History of Women's Imprisonment in Illinois, 1890-1970." The time period of my research covers
the existence of two distinct women's prisons: the Joliet Women's Prison (1896-1933) and the
Illinois State Reformatory for Women at Dwight (1930-1970). This paper focuses on daily life at
the Illinois State Reformatory for Women, also referred to as the Dwight Reformatory. (1b)
#1. Slide: Joliet Women's Prison
However, I wish to begin by offering a brief historical and comparative framework.
Throughout most of the nineteenth century nearly all female prisoners in the U.S. were housed in
separate quarters either within or adjacent to their state's male penitentiary. These custodial
women's units mirrored male prison architectural design and penal practices. (2) Here we see the
Joliet Women's Prison, constructed in 1896. This fortress-style Women's Prison clearly fit the
model of a custodial prison. Women were housed in a cell house-like unit in the back, and the
prison was surrounded by the same massive twenty foot high and eight foot thick wall.
#2. Slide: Women Inmates in Prison Yard
Here are the women inmates inside their prison yard. Only women convicted of felonies
could be sentenced to the Joliet Women's Prison.
#3. Slide: Female "Mop Brigade"
This photo, labeled the "Mop Brigade," was taken inside the cell house. Approximately
two-thirds of the daily population was African-American women, during a time when
African-American women represented only two to four percent of the state's population. Illinois
judges clearly did not view the Joliet Women's Prison as a "proper place" for white women, and
thus rarely sentenced them there.
#4. Slide: Domestic Science Classroom
Interestingly, while Joliet was a custodial women's prison in architecture and name,
domestic science ideology and progressive penology did have an impact. Here we see the
domestic science classroom which was outfitted by a new Progressive superintendent in 1914.
However, this superintendent never received the support or backing of progressive club women in
the state. Progressive women reformers could not envision any viable rehabilitative program in a
custodial setting. Instead, progressive reformers campaigned for an institution where women
convicted of misdemeanors would receive individualized treatment and care. These reformers
focused on rehabilitation of the woman "sex delinquent," the young white woman repeat offender
who was arrested many times, appearing over and over again before the Chicago Morals Court on
charges of prostitution, disorderly conduct, or petite larceny.
#5: Dwight Slides - Cottages, Interiors, Newspaper Headlines
In Illinois, Progressive women reformers and club woman campaigned for fifteen years
before the state legislature was convinced to vote the funds for a separate (and very expensive)
woman's reformatory in 1930. (Here we see the opening ceremony.) The Illinois State
reformatory for Women broke radically from traditional penal design and reflected a distinct
gender ideology. Reformatory prisons typically involved a cottage architectural plan. Women
were to be housed in a cozy, homelike, and family environment, which was intended to instill in
them the desire for upright living and a "home" of their own. Cottage living was also intended to
allow for classification, segregation, and individualization of treatment, with different groups of
women assigned to different cottages. Domestic training became the dominant ideology after the
reformatory opened. (3)
#6. Slides - Gardening/ Outdoor work scenes
In its first two years, a generally high level of camaraderie and cooperation existed between staff and inmates. During this early, informal period, characterized by a small population and unfinished buildings, all banded together to get the institution in working order. Wholesome exercise, outdoor activity, and farming were other central components of the reformatory regime. (4)
Like the position of police woman, the women's reformatory prison was a product of
Progressive-era campaigns which can be precisely localized in the decades of the 1910-20's.
During this twenty year period, sixteen states established women's reformatories. Aside from New
York State (5), no other reformatories were opened either before or after. However, as Nicole
Hahn Rafter has perceptively observed, "(T)o study the successful development of the
reformatory movement is to observe its simultaneous decline." (6) By the mid 1930's, most of
these reformatories, the majority barely a decade old, were merged with their state's custodial
prison population, becoming in fact, if not in name, the only women's prison in most states. Thus,
in Illinois the Joliet Women's Prison was closed in 1933, and its population transferred to the
fledgling reformatory. (7)
However, as physical institutions, the women's reformatory prison long outlasted their
Progressive era origins. While we now have some historical research on the ideology of the
reformers who established these institutions, we know almost nothing of their subsequent
transformation and historical evolution throughout the remainder of the twentieth century. The
few historians who have explored the history of women's penal institutions or the policing of
female delinquency have all focused on the pre-1930 period. (8) No complete history has ever
been written of a single women's penal institution. In the rest of this presentation I will briefly
examine:
1) the changes in the inmate population at the lilinois State Reformatory for Women, 1930-70; 2)
the changes in philosophy and administration; and 3) the character of daily cottage life.
II. Inmate Population, 1930-1970
7. Chart #1: Total Commitments. 1860-1970
The opening of the Dwight Women's reformatory clearly represented a dramatic expansion
in the state's ability to police and penalize female behavior. As you can see from this first chart,
female incarceration rates increased dramatically after 1930. In the first decade, 75%, or nearly
one thousand women, were committed for misdemeanors. For the next twenty years, long after
the demise of the Progressive Era, over half of the women sentenced to the reformatory continued
to be committed for misdemeanors.
8. Chart #2: 1930s Misdemeanor Crimes
For the first time in Illinois history, women could be sentenced to a penal institution for
such "crimes" as disorderly conduct, vagrancy, public drunkenness, adultery, fornication,
prostitution, petite larceny (less than $15 in the midst of the Depression), and drug use.
9. Chart #3: Race of Felony vs. Misdemeanor Commitments
In addition to changes in the types of crimes for which women were now committed, came
changes in the racial composition. In the 1930s African-American women continued to be grossly
overrepresented in the number of felony commitments, remaining stable at 36% of the total felony
commitments. However, they were only 18% of the misdemeanor commitments. Thus, unlike the
Joliet Women's prison, the state reformatory was seen as an appropriate place for white women,
and judge showed little reluctance in sentencing young white women misdemeanants to the
reformatory during its first decades (often for the pettiest and most trivial of offenses.)
10. Chart #1: Total Commitments. 1860-1970 (repeat)
In contrast, as you can see by returning to the first chart, the opening of the Dwight
reformatory did not correspond with any great increase in the number of women committed for
felonies. Indeed, for almost a hundred years, from 1860-1950 the numbers of women committed
for felonies remained remarkably steady, averaging only 100 women per 5 year interval from the
entire state. (9) This raises many interesting questions about the relationship - or lack of any
relationship - between imprisonment rates and rates of criminality (none of which we have time to
explore in this presentation.)
III. 1930-70: Changes in Administration & Techniques of Social Control
#11. Slide: Helen Hazard Newsclips
Over the decades, as both the inmate population and the administration changed, came
changes in the techniques of institutional control. Helen Hazard, the first superintendent, was a
professional educator and prison administrator who served as superintendent for almost twenty
years. She had worked previously at the Connecticut State Reformatory for Women as well as the
Federal Reformatory for Women at Alderson. Until W.W.II she was able to maintain a rigid but
tempered system of discipline, demanding absolute ladylike behavior from her charges but without
resorting to harsh disciplinary techniques.
Despite the Great Depression, during the 1930s the institution continued to receive strong
financial support from the state legislature. Medical care was of an extremely high quality, and the
educational program offered opportunities to some of the institution's working-class inmates
which was unavailable to them otherwise during the Depression years. Inmate dramatics, singing
groups, clubs, and other activities were organized to enliven the daily routine. (10) Although
many inmates deeply resented their commitment to a penal institution for a misdemeanor, others
sought to take advantage of the programs and opportunities offered.
12. Chart #4: Commitments vs. % of Daily Population Present. Jan. 1939
However, by the early 1940s Hazard began describing lowered morale and increased
inmate unrest in her annual reports. In order to understand the changing character of daily life
within the reformatory over the decades, we need to examine the composition of the institution's
daily population. Because misdemeanor cases served only twelve month sentences, over time the
women convicted of more serious felonies tended to "pile" up, and became a majority of the daily
population. Indeed, by 1939 a third of the daily population of the reformatory was serving
sentences for murder or manslaughter. Throughout the 1930s, Helen Hazard, the first
superintendent, commented repeatedly on the problems posed by this growing population of
long-term women who faced many years in prison.
#13. Slide: Newspaper Headline - Women Live Lives Awaiting Parole
However, the short-term misdemeanant population could also be difficult to manage.
These women often deeply resented their conviction. Moreover, misdemeanor cases had the least
incentive to cooperate, as they were guaranteed automatic release after twelve months. In
contrast, women convicted of felonies were committed under indeterminate sentences, typically 1
to 10 years, and faced a lengthy interrogation before the Parole Board which had total control
over determining the date of their release. During these decades the Parole Board played a central
role in encouraging compliance and facilitating discipline and social control within the institution.
(Inmates were well-aware that any and every transgression of prison rules would be noted in their
annual review, which was carefully scrutinized by the Parole Board.)
However, in the 1940s legislative changes in the parole laws served to weaken these
institutional controls. The state legislature assumed more authority in establishing sentence
lengths, which resulted in both shorter sentences and less discretion. Whereas previously a woman
might have received one to ten years for shoplifting, she now received a sentence of two to five
years, limiting the power of the Parole Board to deny her release based upon poor institutional
conduct. Women also now appeared automatically before the parole board, whether or not they
were in grade "A" standing.
#14. Slide: Segregated "Colored" Cottage
In the 1940s racial tensions also contributed to increased institutional turmoil. In 1942
Hazard wrote:
"...there is definite unrest. This is especially so among the colored population.
Numerous instances have been reported where some of hem have been very
outspoken regarding the war and its outcome. They are resentful of every
discrimination against members of their race. They see little use in fighting the
Chinese, Czechs, and Poles when freedom and equality are not given members of
their own race."
She went on to comment that, "In an Institution of this type one is always conscious of
racial problems... there is indisputably present in the institution today this serious problem." Until
the 1950s the cottages were racially segregated, and until the 1980s prison staff remained
overwhelmingly white, despite the fact that the daily population was half to two-thirds
African-American. (11)
Finally, World War II also drained educated and experienced female staff from the
institution. (Even Hazard took a two year leave of absence to serve in the Women's Army
Corps.) While the institution had had its own full-time resident female doctor, psychiatrist, social
worker and teacher during the 1930s, after W.W. II it would be impossible to attract educated or
highly qualified female professionals to this small rural town. (12) Even attracting competent
cottage staff became increasingly difficult, as more job opportunities were now available
elsewhere for women. Moreover, during the war funding was significantly cut, never to be
restored to their previous levels.
Thus, in the 1940s, the reformatory administration, with fewer professional personnel,
much more limited resources, and less discretionary power and control over an inmate's release
date, was confronted with both a greater population of long-term women and increasing unrest
among African-American women.
ILLINOIS STATE REFORMATORY FOR WOMEN
Superintendents, 1930-72
1. Miss Helen Hazard 1930 - 1949 Experienced in women's prisons; educator.
2. Mr. O. H. Lewis & Clarence Farbor 1949-1950 Former warden of male prison; military police.
3. Miss Doris Whitney 1950 - 1953 Experienced in women's prisons; social work.
4. Mrs. Mary Powers 1953 - 1954 Chicago police woman.
5. Mrs. Ruth Biedermann 1954 - 1962 Head, Chicago police women. Selected over
Hazard's assistant superintendent who had a background in social work. Fired for abuses.
Total surveillance and control over inmate population.
6. Mrs. Margaret Morrissey 1962-1972 Former secretary to Warden Joe Ragen of Joliet.
Described as an "old fashioned" lady. Unsure and inexperienced. Security concerns dominate.
#15. Slide: List of Superintendents
In early 1949 Hazard resigned. The public reason given was poor health; however, some
former staff reported that it was also due to the increasing difficulty in maintaining order.
Following her resignation, two males with backgrounds in military policing and male prison
management were brought in to reestablish control. In 1950 Doris Whitney, another experienced
prison administrator strongly committed to rehabilitation, was brought in from out of state.
However, Whitney was unable to win the loyalty or support of her cottage staff, and she was
forced to resign in 1953. (13) This was the end of a tradition of female superintendents who held
backgrounds in education or social work. A Chicago woman police officer, Mary Powers, became
the next superintendent, but she lasted only nine months, and was rumored to have left because of
a nervous breakdown. Finally, from 1954 to 1962 Ruth Biedermann, former head of women
police officers in Chicago, succeeded in ruling the institution with an iron fist, resorting to
frequent use of punishment and isolation, along with a system of both staff and inmate informers.
#16. Slide: 1962 Headlines of Biedermann's Firing
Biedermann would be forced to resign in 1962 due to public exposure of cruelty and
abuses. The 1960s saw a less harsh but still highly custodial and security-oriented administration
which continued Beidermann's strict policies of absolute controls.
#17. Slides: Cooking class, hat-making class, "charm school"
Throughout these years domesticity and proper femininity remained the only clearly articulated rehabilitative ideology, but in daily practice domesticity had little practical meaning. While the reformatory was originally intended to teach all women a variety of homemaking skills (such as the cooking class you see here which was briefly instituted under Doris Whitney in 1950), in practice those women who were already skilled cooks became the cottage cooks. (14)
Hat making and sewing classes were sometimes offered by local volunteers, while in the 1960s a
"charm school" program was much heralded by the superintendent.
IV. Daily Cottage Life: Discipline and Resistance
#18. Slide: Cottage
Throughout these decades, the daily "cottage logs" reveal deep tensions within cottage
life. While conceived as providing a more pleasant form of housing than the prison cellblock,
cottage life also meant that the female inmates were isolated in small groups, under a great degree
of surveillance and control. Regulations governed every aspect of daily life. Even trivial offenses
resulted in demerits and the loss of "good time." These offenses could include: singing or
whistling in room, "sitting on a chair sideways during meal," combing another inmate's hair,
having an unmade bed," borrowing any item from another inmate, (15) "going to dinner without
socks," or "working with top button open on shirt."
#19. Slide: Headline - "Rules Let Inmates Know She Is Not Free"
Until 1963 the cottage staff, or "warders" as they were called, lived in the cottages with
the inmates. Most were older, widowed women from rural Illinois with no other means of
financial support who had received their position through political patronage. (16) Tensions often
ran high, and the staff frequently complained that the girls sought to "live by their own rules."
In 1960 a new warder wrote of her difficulty getting the women to do the housework
according to her standards, concluding: "The girls in the cottage have rules of their own they live
by and think I am crazy when I mention rules..." Another new warder wrote: "In one day here, I
have found Frances G. the second cook runs the kitchen as she pleases. I heard her say she would
butter up Mrs. Parkinson as she had Mrs. Orr and would run the kitchen..." Another warder wrote
to the superintendent concerning her "relief warder": "As I have told you, the older women and
the good girls like Mrs. Adams, but the younger ones and the homosexuals do not like her
because she is too observant and too quick for them."
#20. Slide: Dining Room
Food and conflicts in the kitchen created constant problems. While reformers had
envisioned the small family dining rooms as central to women's rehabilitation, conflicts over
quality of the food, sneaking food, menu, style of preparation, and attempts to make fermented
drinks were constant. One warden complained in 1955 that she had instructed inmate Gwendolyn
to make a devil's food cake for dinner, but the inmate had proceeded to make a white coconut
cake instead. The warden wrote: She lied to me and said she didn't know there was devel's food
cake mix. I issued (her) a ticket and made her add cocoa to the mixture. She will not listen to
instructions... She is supposed to be the second cook here... but does not even know how to cook
dried fruit. (She) Does not try to learn and shows no interest..."
The women were graded daily on their attitude, citizenship, and cooperation, and these
grades impacted their likelihood for parole. One warder reported in 1956: "I am giving Shirley
White poor for her attitude at the breakfast table this morning... Shirley is just spoiling for trouble,
nothing is ever right. If we don't have one particular kind of food Shirley wants it very badly, and
when we have that same kind of food she won't eat it at all. "
#21. Slide - Sun room
Thus, the homelike cottage images are deceptive. Despite the architectural design,
surveillance and control, security and custodial concerns were the hallmarks of cottage life.
Warders were required to compel recalcitrant women to perform daily routines in which they had
no autonomy, independence, or freedom of choice. Inmate resistance rarely erupted in collective
action, but was instead woven throughout the texture of daily life. (17) For example, despite the
absolute prohibition on prisoners sending notes to one another, the inmate files are full of
confiscated notes. Inmates often wrote advice to one another. One warned a new inmate in 1957:
Do you know these screws and guards go through the garbage regularly?.... Tear up notes in
small pieces and flush them down the toilet, don't flush a whole piece of paper either. . . Those
things you have simply got to learn to be careful about.
This inmate was using a prison argot and expressing attitudes towards the staff more often
associated with male prison subcultures. Moreover, she was not exaggerating. Handwriting
samples were taken upon entrance, and staff frequently pieced torn up notes together. For
example, the superintendent reported in 1958:
"Two kites (notes) were found by Mrs. Dickson, torn in little bits under Mary Lane's window.
They were pieced together and checked against handwriting and found to be Nancy Smith's
handwriting. Nancy was questioned and denied writing the notes. (She received) 8 days (in)
isolation for lying."
Until the early 1980s there was an absolute "no physical contact" rule which prohibited
any and all physical touching between inmates. Thus, inmates could not brush one another's hair,
give each other a pat on the shoulder, or even a hug. (18) From 1930 to 1950, during the first
two decades, homosexuality had always been regarded as a problem, but there was little focus
placed upon it (19). Hazard had believed that a full range of extracurricular activities and
meaningful work would help curtail this perceived problem. However, under superintendent Ruth
Biedermann in the 1950s, absolute paranoia reigned. (20) The inmate files from the 1950s reveal
the high degree of scrutiny which the inmates had to endure. The women were closely monitored
for their friendships. Their prison files contain notes from staff and even the superintendent herself
about who walked with who to school, who was considered to be overly friendly with whom, and
who had sat next to whom at special events, etc.
The following types of notes in the women's files were common during the 1950s:
"Sadie C. walked with Jennie T. going to their assignment this afternoon. Jennie lives at
Frances Willard cottage. They both make it a point to meet up the road a ways".
"Mrs. Lee advised me to watch Anna Harris, due to sex reasons; as yet I have seen
nothing out of the way, but will immediately report it if it so happens."
"Christine L. is very interested in Leona R." (22)
"Give Mary Ellen a demerit for having her arm on Dale Martin's shoulder while walking on the
road to television." 22
V. Conclusion: Appearance vs. Reality of Women's Prisons
Throughout the 1930-70 decades, outside observers were all extremely impressed by the
pleasant and "homelike" atmosphere of the cottages, the beauty of the grounds, the quality of the
construction and workmanship. However, outsiders and reformers failed to understand that there
was much more to a "home" than architecture. Cottage living took women away from their real
homes and families to create an artificial home. In cottages they lived in close, confining quarters
with absolute strangers and no privacy. These close living arrangements were unmitigated by the
ties of kinship, friendship, caring or affection.
Moreover, contact with their real families and friends was severely curtailed. Visits were
restricted to one hour once a month, and all were strictly monitored. In addition, every piece of
mail sent or received was read closely by two staff members. Both visitors and correspondents
were limited to five per inmate, and all were fully investigated before permission to either visit or
correspond was granted. Thus, despite the ideology of the home, maintaining ties to their real
families and children was often an inmate's greatest challenge. (23)
In addition, unlike a real home, there was a rigid and set way of doing things: a fixed time
to eat, bath, and go to bed. How and what to cook were strictly proscribed, and no creativity or
individual variation was allowed. Women had to be Ucounted" at least five times a day. All
movement across the grounds was strictly monitored and controlled. (24) The warder in charge
had absolute authority. Cottages were also used for control. Women could be reassigned to
another cottage to break up a close friendship considered disruptive to discipline, or else if there
were suspected homosexual relationships. Thus, if a woman did become too close to another
woman, and ties of genuine affection developed, they were likely to be labeled homosexual. (25)
As Pat Carlen has so eloquently and succinctly put it:
Overall, the dominant meaning of woman's imprisonment... is that it is
imprisonment denied: it is denied that the woman's prison is a 'real prison,' it is
denied that the women are 'real prisoners,' it is denied that the prisoners are 'real
women.' (26)
Throughout these decades women prisoners at Dwight were told that they were not being
held in a "real prison" but at a school, treatment center, hospital, or rehab program. (27) They
were told that they were not to view themselves as "prisoners" but as "residents" - which
connoted the status of a student, patient, or voluntary subject of a treatment regime. (28)
Moreover, their very commitment meant that they had failed in their proscribed feminine roles,
and that they had failed in mastering the appropriate domestic arts and womanly virtues which
would have assured their successful place in society as "real women." Finally, their experience of
imprisonment itself, and the close homosocial and/or homosexual ties that they might create with
other women would serve to only further label them as deviant and beyond the bounds of
"normal" womanhood.
This brief history reveals that even at an institution designed by its founders to embody a
commitment to treatment and rehabilitation, penal practices prioritizing security, discipline, and
social control became dominant over the decades. Women's prisons, staffed by women and
championed by women's groups, were unable to resolve the inherent tensions and conflicts
between treatment and custodial concerns, and between rehabilitative and punitive goals. In
addition, throughout these decades race remained central to the social construction of female
criminality. The ideology of domesticity and femininity which remained the dominant rehabilitative
discourse, and which stood as the enduring legacy of the Progressive era, was constructed on
both class and race-based assumptions.
Revised Conclusion:
Throughout the decades there is also clear evidence of an ongoing battle to define the
nature of the institution. The staff always referred to Dwight as the "institution" and the grounds
as the "campus." In contrast, in all their letters and notes the women themselves referred to the
institution as the "penitentiary." Indeed, in the early 1950s several inmates appealed their
convictions and challenged the legality of their commitment to a "penitentiary" for misdemeanor
crimes. The Illinois Supreme Court, however, upheld their convictions.
In conclusion, the historical record from Dwight challenges many of the prevailing images
regarding both female prisoners and female prisons which have infused the popular imagination as
well as the scholarly literature. The homelike cottage images were highly deceptive. Despite the
architectural design, surveillance and control, security and custodial concerns were the hallmarks
of cottage life. Cottage warders were required to compel recalcitrant women to perform daily
routines in which they had no autonomy, independence, or freedom of choice. Inmate resistance
rarely erupted in collective action, but was instead woven throughout the texture of daily life.
Female prisoners, whether felons or misdemeanants, were never transformed into the "dutiful
daughters" of the reformers' imaginations.
1a. This lack of data has resulted in the use of vague and misleading generalizations which distort the historical record. For example, in one popular, current criminology text, Joycelyn Pollock-Byrne concludes that "institutions for women of the 1990s are often still very similar to the institutions of the 1890s. However, the male correctional system has been wracked by dramatic changes in philosophy and practice over the last century. I argue that there have been equally significant transformations in the social construction of female criminality, the operation of women's prisons and the nature of criminal justice policies towards women which have gone virtually unanalyzed. No study has ever examined the changing patterns of women's imprisonment and women's criminality in a single state throughout the twentieth century.
Drawing on an unprecedented quantity of prison reports, including monthly inmate conduct
records and daily cottage logs, my research documents the day-to-day negotiations and
contestations for power which were a central aspect of everyday life within the women's prison.
These sources clearly reveal the agency of the women themselves in resisting, undermining and
transforming prison policy. In contrast, both Freedman and Rafter concluded that female prisoners
did, in fact, become "dutiful daughters" and compliant subjects, rarely resisting or challenging
prison authority. However, my data reveals that women prisoners in Illinois were an unruly,
resistant, and active group who rejected penal constraints.
1b. Dwight itself is a small farming community of 1,000 located 85 miles Southwest of Chicago.
This institution still exists and is now known as Dwight Correctional Center. It remains the only
all-women correctional center in Illinois. Its average daily population was 250-350 during most of
the 1930-1980 period. However, the population began increasing after 1980, and today stands at
approximately 800, and a new 500 bed celihouse unit is now under construction. In addition, in
the late 1970s three male correctional centers in lilinois were transformed into co-ed
"co-correctional" institutions. Both nationally and in Illinois, since 1980 the woman's prison
population has been growing at a faster rate than that of men. In Illinois the number of women in
prison increased by 700%, from 350 in 1980 to 2,400 in 1996.
2. Nicole Hahn Rafter, in her pioneering work Partial Justice: Women. Prisons. and Social
Control (New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers, second edition, 1990) first developed this
distinction between the women's custodial and the women's reformatory prison.
3. Interestingly, in Illinois domestic ideology was never a major element in the ideology of the
reformatory advocates. However, as soon as the institution was opened domesticity was seized
upon as the major ideological raisin d'etre.
4. However, while Progressive campaigners and the reformatory advocates drew a sharp
distinction between a women's prison and a women's reformatory, the inmates themselves, as well
as the general public, often failed to note the difference.
5. New York State pioneered with the establishment of three women's reformatories in the
nineteenth century. These reformatories have received the greatest historical attention, although it
is not yet clear how representative they were.
6. Rafter, p. 55.
7. By the decade of the Great Depression, female delinquency and sexual immorality no longer
appeared to pose the moral threat that it once had. In addition, overcrowding within the male
prisons, as well as states' reluctance to support two separate institutions for women, contributed
to the move towards consolidation.
8. In Their Sister's Keepers: Women's Prison Reform in America. 1830-1930, Estelle B. Freedman
explores the ideology and history of the early female prison reformers. Nicole Hahn Rafter's
Partial Justice: Women. Prisons. and Social Control. which remains the most comprehensive work
on women's prisons, contains a final chapter on the evolution of women's prisons since 1935.
There is now a developing body of literature on the policing of female sexual delinquency during
the Progressive Era. See Mary E. Odem, Delinquent Daughters: Protecting and Policing
Adolescent Female Sexuality in the United States. 1885-1920 and Ruth M. Alexander, in The
"Girl Problem": Female Sexual Delinquency in New York. 1900-1930.
9. Chart #4 (not shown in slideshow presentation) reveals the changing composition of the felony
crimes for which women were convicted during the 1920 to 1960 period (and provides a baseline
comparison with the numbers of women committed to the Joliet Women's Prison during the
1920s.) The 1930s saw the greatest increase (500%) in the number of women committed for
crimes against persons (robbery, assault). The next greatest change in the pattern of women's
felony convictions would come in the 1950s, when drug possession was made a felony conviction
by the state of Illinois.
10. For the first three years Chicago women's groups continued their involvement with the
reformatory by funding a part-time music and recreation teacher. This music teacher, a young
woman of twenty-one who had her first teaching job at the local Dwight high school, described in
detail the various evening activities and inmate clubs which she helped supervise. (Interview with
Dorothy Burkhardt, music teacher 1930-37.)
11. African-American women who served time at Dwight in the 1950s and 1960s could often still
recall the names of, and count on their hands, the number of African-American staff. Because
African-American women were more likely to be convicted of felonies, and thus serve longer
sentences, the daily population at the reformatory was usually over half African-American within
five years of the reformatory's opening.
12 There would be no full-time doctor, psychologist, psychiatrist, or social workers employed at
the institution again until 1980.
13. In her first annual report Whitney began by stressing that under her administration
"self-discipline and self-control" were emphasized, explicitly noting that "there is no physical
punishment." This statement may have been a veiled reference to the practice under the previous
male administration. Anecdotal evidence from several staff who worked at the reformatory during
this period suggests that the two male administrators in 1949-50 relied on corporal punishment, as
well as a type of "strait jacket" to restore order. This jacket was investigated and banned in 1954
when the reformatory came under the centralized control of the Dept. of Public Safety (which had
been in charge of all the male prisons in Illinois since 1940).
14. Former staff still recall the excellent home-cooked meals served them in the staff dining room,
and many commented in particular on the wonderful cooking of the Southern-born black women
who served them. Exchanging recipes, as well as tips regarding special embroidery, crochet, or
other "fancy work" sewing techniques, was one source of interaction with the inmate population
fondly recalled by retired female staff members from the local area. However, none of the five
inmates who I interviewed who had served time at Dwight during the 1955-1970 period
recounted such stories.
15. Borrowing items of clothing or sharing food or commissary items was always strictly
prohibited, even among roommates. Biederman's administration in the 1950s strictly enforced
these rules. Any hint of sharing of food, clothing, or other goods (no matter how trivial) was
thoroughly investigated. For example, the following account in an inmate's file reveals the
consequences of arranging to pass two pieces of fudge to a friend, and the chain of events which
could enfold as a result of the subsequent investigation:
"Judy W received two pieces of fudge from Nadine at Jane Addams Hall (the
school building)... During the investigation the following information was received.
The Superintendent shook down the room of Nadine, Harriet, and Annette. Harriet
admitted pants, socks and bra drying at end of bed. The socks were marked Pat F.
#3648. Harriet admitted that 3 months ago Pat bought socks for her in exchange
for cigarettes, as Harriet doesn't smoke much and Pat smokes over 7 packs a
week.... When interviewed the second time Pat admitted the socks in Harriet's
room were socks she had purchased in commissary. Earlier she had been
questioned about any exchange of clothing with room 13 and she denied all
knowledge. Still claims no knowledge of the fudge being passed at Jane Addams
Hall. Grapevine and gossip during the days are accusing Pat of really trying to get
the fudge to Sandra D, who was in Judy's cottage. Judy would be the go-between.
Two inmates at Jane Addams Hall confirmed this gossip and said that Pat was very
friendly with Sandra. However, Pat herself was at Jane Addams Hall and would
not have needed Nadine as an in-between in this case. Nadine insisting that she
alone was involved and responsible." (10/25/60)
16. In 1963 the superintendent who followed Ruth Biedermann changed the cottage warders'
workday to an eight hour shift. This had two main consequences. First, it allowed women from
the surrounding towns, many younger divorced women with children to support to seek
employment at the reformatory (previously only a handful of local towns women had been
employed as clerks and secretaries at the institution). Second, the number of warders increased by
half. Thus, a new generation of younger women (averaging in their thirties rather than their
sixties) began working at the reformatory. Staff had more autonomy than previously, while the
system of staff informers developed by Biedermann was significantly weakened. (Both staff and
inmate discontent was reported to have been at its height under Biedermann.)
17. The files reveal that letters to the superintendent seeking redress of grievances were also
common. One woman wrote bitterly in 1960: "This is the third time I've written you.... Is it
because I'm Negro and a prisoner here that justice here means nothing? Is it that a prisoner is
wrong because they are prisoners? Is it that you have warders here that think they can do no
wrong? Twice I have been thrown in lock-up and given demerits and my good time taken from
me just because I reported sick to my warder and she wanted to have her say about who is sick or
not...."
18. Most former inmates remember this "no physical contact" rule with great bitterness. As one
explained, it wasn't unusual for a woman to lose a family member while she was incarcerated. But
even in times of death or loss, an inmate could receive shoulder to cry on, hug, or any other type
of physical comforting. Several staff vividly recalled the day in 1980 when this rule was lifted, and
many regretted its passing. Today at Dwight Correctional Center female inmates are free to
embrace, touch, and hug at will. Staff (and some inmates) are sometimes deeply offended. Staff
often view the current policy as much too permissive and disruptive of security and institutional
control.
19. Freedman analyzes changing attitudes towards, and definitions of, the "prison lesbian" in a
fascinating article, "The Prison Lesbian: Race, Class, and the Construction of the Aggressive
Female Homosexual, 1915-1965," Feminist Studies 22, no. 2 (summer 1996), 397-423.
20. As one former teacher reported (with little exaggeration), under Beiderman if two inmates
even looked at each other that could be construed as homosexuality and/or a threat to security.
"They must be up to no good," was the common expression. (Interview with part-time teacher,
1958-72.)
21. In addition, there were often very lengthy investigatory reports in the files regarding
friendships suspected of being homosexual, many written by Superintendent Beiderman herself.
The following is a typical example:
"Delves M. managed to slip in seat next to Beatrice W. at entertain-ment at
Jane Adams (sic) Hall this evening. There were many other seats available. She
was asked to move by the Superintendent. A demerit was given to Delores...
Beatrice had been moved out of the same cottage as the warder had verbally
reported to the Superintendent her interest toward Delores. Both girls were given
demerits on January 13, 1957 (six months earlier) for walking together from Mass
and not with their cottage group." A week later the warder at Jane Adams Hall
reported that while she was out of the library for a few minutes three "girls I
wouldn't suspect of Iying" reported to her that the two had kissed. However, the
warder wrote that "since I didn't actually see anything I couldn't give a demerit."
However, both women were denied library privileged for the rest of the summer.
The next week the baseball supervisor reported, "At the ball game Beatrice W. was disrespectful
to me and I am giving her a demerit. She dropped her umbrella three times so she could get down
(from the bleachers) and talk to Delores M. l told her that was enough of that moving around and
she just screamed at me." At the same baligame a male guard also gave Beatrice a demerit for bad
conduct, reporting that: "I asked her what her name was and she gave me a false name."
(6119157) Microfilm file, inmate #3351.
In another convoluted incident, Superintendent Beiderman reported that: "On November
twenty-sixth, 1957 Shirley W. is supposed to have sent cookies from the store to her friend Pat at
Jessie Hodder Hall by way of the truck girls, also reported that she had taken raisins from the
store to Katherine Hancock Goode cottage." Two months later it was reported that: "Barbara C.
admitted in an interview with the Superintendent that Shirley W. had been sending 'oral messages'
by other girls to her and that she is trying to develop a friendship. Barbara stated that she was not
interested in Shirley. A warder informed the, Superintendent that Shirley W. was overheard to say
she didn't care if she ever saw another white person again, as she likes colored much better. It is
felt that Shirley will be able to make too many contacts on her truck assignment... (91411957)
Microfilm file, inmate #3451.
22. Occasionally two women were found in bed together, or otherwise directly engaged in sexual
contact, but usually inmates were successful in maintaining a look-out. One cottage warder I
interviewed described the tremendous embarrassment she felt as a result of her first experience
walking in on two women making love. The warder was so embarrassed that she was unable to
write down what she had observed, and so she sent a "ticket" to the superintendent filled with
"blank spaces." Superintendent Morrissey called this warder into her office, told her that the ticket
was unacceptable, and lectured her that if she was going to maintain her job she would have to
learn to report and write down exactly what she had observed, without mincing words. Several
other warders, now elderly women, also admitted that they had never known about homosexuality
before working at the reformatory. (Interview with cottage warder, 1962-88.)
23. Although there was a nursery at the reformatory from 1930 to 1970, and pregnant inmates
were allowed to keep their babies at the institution for the first year, the inmate mothers were only
allowed to see their child one hour a week.
24. Despite the beauty of the grounds, extolled by all visitors, the women had no outdoor
recreation time whatsoever until the early 1980s, aside from serving as spectators in a weekly
summer softball game. Some women sought and greatly preferred a job assignment to the farm or
garden, and the warder's logs frequently note women's complaints about the claustrophobia they
experienced when confined inside to a cottage kitchen assignment. (Cottage cooks, waitresses,
and housekeepers stayed in the cottage all day, while most other inmates received some fresh air
during their daily walks across the grounds to and from their job assignments.)
25. Dobash, Dobash and Gutteridge also develop these points regarding the artificial nature of
home, work, and relationships in women's prisons. Russell P. Dobash, R. Emerson Dobash and
Sue Gutteridge, The Imprisonment of Women, Basil Blackwell, 1986.
26. Pat Carlen, Women's Imprisonment: A Study in Social Control, 1983, p. 211.
27. Staff reports throughout these years refer to the reformatory simply as "the institution."
Nowhere was it ever referred to as a prison or as a "penitentiary," and the grounds were (and still
are) referred to as the "campus." Throughout the 1930s and 1940s women were routinely denied
parole with the justification that a "further stay in the institution will prove beneficial."
However, there is evidence of an ongoing battle to define the nature of the institution. The few inmate writings which directly refer to the place always refer to it as the "penitentiary." Indeed, in the early. 1950s one inmate appealed her conviction and challenged the legality of her commitment to a "penitentiary" for a misdemeanor. In a convoluted reasoning, the Illinois Supreme Court upheld her incarceration, arguing that while the reformatory "may be a prison of the class or grade of penitentiary as to those committed to that institution for felonies... it does not follow that it is a penitentiary as to all offenders committed there. That a penal institution may be a prison of a certain class or grade as to some of its inmates and of a
different class or grade as to others has been recognized by this court in several prior opinions."
(People vs. Lewis, 413 111. 116, 108 N.E.2d 473 pages 474-75).
This Illinois Supreme Court ruling, however, failed to recognize the fact that all women at
Dwight were subjected to exactly the same rules and regime, and thus the same degree of
security, surveillance and control, regardless of whether they were convicted of a felony or
misde-meanor. While the 1920s reformatory campaigners had championed cottage living as a
means of individualizing treatment, in practice the cottages were never used in this way. All
inmates, no matter how trivial or how serious their offenses, experienced the same high level of
surveillance, restrictions, and loss of liberly. Not until 1970 was the first "honor cottage" opened,
which provided for special privileges and a more relaxed atmosphere for a select group of two
dozen inmates.
28. The term "resident" is still used by staff at Dwight today, in contrast to the term "inmate" which is applied to all male prisoners.