Abstract
I must admit that when I was asked to review this book, I was not aware of Margery Fry. Given her Quaker background and her role in penal reform, I assumed that she was a descendent of Elizabeth Fry; an assumption which would have no doubt irritated the subject of this book as she was often mistakenly described as a descendent of or misnamed after the great prison reformer. However, as a long-standing supporter of the Howard League – and a member of its Research Advisory Group – I was keen to learn more about a woman who the author, Anne Logan, claims was ‘the dominant figure on the penal reform scene during the 1930s and 1940s in England and Wales’. It is a claim with some considerable justification. While the title of the book focusses on Margery Fry’s role in overseeing the formation of the Howard League for Penal Reform through the amalgamation of the Howard League and the Prison Reform League, her influence shaped British, Colonial and arguably – worldwide penal reform during the 40-year period between her assuming control of the Prison Reform League and her death. Her achievements include being the first woman Justice of the Peace in England and she played a key role in the establishment of the Magistrates Association. She helped lay the foundations for the study of criminology in English Universities, as well as instigating campaigns for the abolition of the death penalty, better pay and improved training for probation officers and for compensation for victims. She did much to increase public knowledge of prison conditions in Europe, China and North America and was influential in the United Nations adoption of minimum standards for prisoners.
Despite her considerable achievements, like so many women, Margery Fry has not received the acclaim that her role in shaping criminal justice policy and practice deserves and her intellectual achievements have been largely overlooked and under-estimated. This book is an attempt to redress this omission through the lens of a feminist, biographical study that places its subject within her gendered social and familial context. Although she is best known for her role in the advancement of penal reform, Margery Fry only took up this cause in the second half of her life and so Part 1 of Anne Logan’s book explores the experiences and influences that helped shaped her before she took up penal reform. Chapter 1 focusses on her Quaker family background and the gendered nature of late Victorian English society that stirred her interest in feminism and the suffrage movement. Chapter 2 covers her career in higher education from 1899 to 1914, a period during which she honed her administrative and professional skills through a myriad of Education Committees and other voluntary roles. Chapter 3 examines Fry’s life during the First World War and the devasting impact this had on her personal life and which probably influenced her decision to take on the role of secretary of the Prison Reform League.
The second part of the book is focussed primarily upon her involvement in the politics of penal reform. Chapter 4 analyses Fry’s decision to join the Penal Reform League and the strategies she adopted for strengthening the penal reform cause through merging with the Howard League and via the synergy she developed with the Magistrates Association which she had helped create. This, along with the National Council for the Abolition of the Death Penalty, transformed the penal reform pressure group landscape through a more professionalised form of political lobbying. Chapter 5 examines her committee work and her role as an ‘insider’ who gained the trust and admiration of those in power. Remarkably she continued to attend committee meetings, that could last for ‘four solid days to begin to tackle the prison question’ (p. 133) well into her eighties. Chapter 6 examines the methods she used to publicise the penal reform cause at a time when women taking on public platforms and in the broadcast media was still a rarity. Chapter 7 aims to establish Margery Fry’s place in the history of criminology, both as an instigator of teaching and research in the subject but also as a researcher in her own right. Among these was her role in launching the Howard Journal to which she regularly contributed.
This engaging book explores the life of a remarkable individual who dedicated her life to public service. She used her position and privileged background to fight for causes which would have been unpopular with many. In doing so, she pursued ‘a clear, dispassionate, and scientific understanding of crime and its causes’ (p. 155). Margery Fry was undoubtedly a gifted communicator who in contemporary parlance would be seen as a superb networker with an aptitude for choosing allies and co-workers and inspiring others, as was demonstrated by the frequent invitations she received to take part in official enquiries and present evidence. While this book tells the story of a remarkable life, the prominent position that Margery Fry held in criminal justice reform in the 20th century means that it also provides a lens through which to explore social, political and economic developments during these times. It also throws light on the struggles faced by women such as Margery Fry who fought to establish themselves, and get their voices heard, in a male-dominated society.
It is tempting to speculate what Margery Fry would have thought of current state of criminal justice. She would undoubtedly be proud of the Howard League for Penal Reform and the preeminent position it retains in penal reform and its continuing campaigning zeal for issues of social justice which were established during her tenure. She would be gratified by the work of female criminologists who have followed in her footsteps and made such a distinguished contribution to the field of criminological enquiry. She would also no doubt take some satisfaction from the greater appreciation of victims’ rights in the criminal justice system and the establishment of a criminal injuries compensation scheme that she fought hard for in the latter years of her life but did not live to see materialise. She would still though be campaigning for an improvement in prison conditions and despair at the lack of progress in some areas. She would almost certainly be highly critical of the attempts to privatise parts of probation work in England and Wales, an organisation which she was an enthusiastic and active supporter of, as an example of the lack of evidence-based policy making which she fought so hard to counter.