While both systems’ basis of discipline lay in silence and harsh punishment, the Auburn System distinguished itself by being more cost effective while still achieving similar results to the Pennsylvania System. The Pennsylvania System’s need for total isolation required extra furnishing that the Auburn System could do away with. Furthermore, the Auburn System’s tiered structure meant that prisoners could be housed in a more efficient method. Congregate living conditions tend to drain less money than isolated conditions. Thus, the states adopted the Auburn System, and have continued innovations such as solitary confinement for unruly inmates, military regimentation, and congregate working conditions to this
While both systems’ basis of discipline lay in silence and harsh punishment, the Auburn System distinguished itself by being more cost effective while still achieving similar results to the Pennsylvania System. The Pennsylvania System’s need for total isolation required extra furnishing that the Auburn System could do away with. Furthermore, the Auburn System’s tiered structure meant that prisoners could be housed in a more efficient method. Congregate living conditions tend to drain less money than isolated conditions. Thus, the states adopted the Auburn System, and have continued innovations such as solitary confinement for unruly inmates, military regimentation, and congregate working conditions to this