allowances the more unjustifiable, was that it is estimated that the contractors made $20,000 by their contract, and that one of them was a relative of an influential officer of the prison. [See Appendix.]

In Auburn prison we find a number of men working on contract at 50 cts. a day, where by the terms of the agreement, 651 cts. a day was to be charged. In this case the former agent felt bound, by his obligations to the State, and his oath, to exact the full price, although he was directed to the contrary by the Inspectors, and finally resigned his office in consequence of the difficulties which resulted from his strict construction of his duty. The present agent is charging but 50 cts. a day for these men without the slightest authority appearing on record for his doing so.

Another wide door is open for fraud in the practice of charging but half price for certain convicts where they do not come under the description of "healthy, capable, able-bodied men." It will be readily seen how easy it is for a dishonest officer who has the power of deciding whether a man is a "half-pay man" or a "full pay man," to increase the number of half-pay men on the time books to a considerable amount, when they are each one actually doing nearly or quite a full day's work. On one contract the committee found but nine men, out of fifty-two, charged at the full contract price. It seems hardly credible that fivesixths of all the men in that shop were incapable or disabled by disease. [See Appendix.]

All the prisons are at present supplied with provisions by the Agent. This method when faithfully conducted, is unquestionably preferable to the system of obtaining supplies by contract and advertising for proposals. Under the present plan, the Agent purchases the rations and clothing of whomsoever he may choose. Under the contract system he was obliged to procure his supplies from the lowest bidder. While the latter system seems to guard against the dangers of favoritism and collusion incident to the former, experience has proved that under the latter, contractors are constantly tempted to smuggle in damaged and inferior articles; and when, through the vigilance of the

officers, they are unable to "save themselves" by these means, a willing Legislature is generally found to grant relief in the shape of" extra allowances." So that, in the matter of economy, nothing is really gained by the contract system, while much is often lost to the health and comfort of the convicts. But the method in use is surrounded with so many temptations and so susceptible of abuse that it should be always in honest hands and vigilantly guarded. The committee were unable to discover any abuses in their investigation of this department at either prison; and they bear willing testimony to the faithful conduct of the several agents in this particular.

The committee would call the attention of the Legislature to the manner in which the finances of the prisons are stated in the annual reports of the Agents and Inspectors. The receipts and expenditures are detailed with great minuteness, but only the cash items are included. The debts which the Agent incurs for new buildings, repairs, improvements, rations, &c., are never reported. Neither are the credits which may be allowed to the contractors mentioned in the statement. For this reason the Legislature obtains no correct idea of the financial condition of the prisons from the annual reports.

Certain sums of money appear under the head of "Receipts," and perhaps an equal amount under the head of "Expenditures," and the inference is that the prison is supporting itself, while in fact it may be, and generally is, in debt several thousands of dollars. These debts are paid out of the receipts of the following year, and corresponding or increased amounts incurred. So it goes on from year to year, until the amount becomes unwieldy, and then the Legislature is asked for an appropriation to pay "past indebtedness." This method not only furnishes the Legislature with a very imperfect idea of the prison finances, but leads people of other States into error as to the cost of supporting our prisons; for the manner of conducting our prisons is closely watched at home and abroad, and carefully compared with the systems of other States and nations.

WARDEN AND KEEPERS.

There seems to be three interests connected with the prison, that of the State, that of the contractor, and that of the prisoner. To the warden seems to be entrusted, peculiarly, the last. While the agent watches with a careful eye the interests of the State, and the obligations of the contractor, the faithful warden will guard well the rights of the convict, listen to his complaints and protect him from the cupidity of the contractor, or the passions of his keeper; being, in fact, what his name indicates-a guardian. Your committee are happy to find that the wardens now in office so regard the duties of their station. The convicts at Auburn and Sing Sing were unanimous and sincere in their testimony to this effect. At Clinton, the present warden had but just entered upon his duties, but a similar feeling existed among the convicts in regard to the former warden as at Auburn and Sing Sing. It was pleasant to hear from the prisoners expressions of esteem and affection for their warden in particular, and a general satisfaction with all the other officers. A general feeling of contentment and resignation throughout all the prisons, was an evidence that a very great change in the government of convicts has taken place within a few years, and that the days of cruelty and barbarity in our large penal institutions are passing away.

To this fact all the old convicts and former keepers bear testimony. The Clinton prison seems to have been well governed since its establishment. At Sing Sing, where, ten years ago, more than a hundred blows were struck daily, where the whipping post was never dry, now scarcely a blow is ever struck, or punishment inflicted for weeks. In Auburn a similar improvement is manifest. We think we cannot be mistaken in saying that punishments are every year becoming more infrequent in all our prisons, and he is now justly regarded as the best officer who allows the longest time to elapse without inflicting a punishment. Notwithstanding these marked improvements, occasional cases of cruelty still occur, and must so long as such dangerous engines of torture as the shower bath and yoke are left in the hands of imprudent keepers.

Many of the subordinate keepers were free in their opinions that the shower bath is a much more cruel punishment than the cat. But there is one important difference of which they seemed not so well convinced, and that is, while the use of the lash hardens the keeper and stimulates his angry passions, the contemplation of his victim under the water excites his pity and better feelings. The shower-bath cools his passion, while the whip inflames it.

While many of the subordinate officers in their testimony expressed a strong attachment to the use of the lash, they all (reluctantly in some cases) admitted that the discipline of the prison was as good now as when the "cat" was used, and that the punishments had greatly decreased in number and severity, without detriment to the good order of the prison. When asked how they accounted for this; their reply was, "the convicts, of late years, are not such desperate characters as formerly"—-evidently putting cause for effect.

Your committee cannot refrain from introducing in this place the following testimony of one of the most successful wardens* in the country, in favor of the disuse of corporal punishments. He says:

I have long looked upon a man as a man, whether he be the occupant of a palace or a prison-and, in whatever situation he may be, entitled to human sympathy, kindness and respect. He is my brother, wherever he may be, whatever of wrong or of crime he may have been tempted to commit.

The more he has erred, and strayed from the path of right and virtue, the more he is to be pitied, and the louder is his call upon our commisseration, our sympathy for his sufferings, and our efforts for his reformation, for his restoration to rectitude, to usefulness and happiness. We are all liable to fall into temptation; if it were not so, we should not have all been taught to beseech our Father in Heaven to 'lead us not into temptation.' I felt my own frailties and imperfections, and resolved to do by others as I should wish to be done by, if I were in their situation. It •F. Robinson, of the Massachusetts State prison.

seemed to me, therefore, in entering upon the duties of this office, if I erred at all I should prefer rather to err on the side of kindness, clemency and humanity, than on that of severity of punishments. I knew that the laws, rules, regulations and discipline of the prison must be enforced. But I wished, if possible, to enforce them without recourse to corporal punishment or physical suffering. And I have sncceeded, thus far, as well as I could have expected. With the exception of three cases, and those soon after I took charge, the government of the prison has been administered without corporal punishment. The shower bath has not been used. And yet, I think I can safely say, that the convicts are as orderly, as industrious and obedient as heretofore, and more contented, docile and happy. A feeling of mutual respect, kindness and friendship seems to be growing up between us. I am sure I experience these affections towards the convicts, and every day gives evidence that the same affections are being excited in their breasts towards me."

Although the use of the "cat" is so favorably regarded by a large portion of the keepers, and its abolition so much deplored, your committee cannot believe it necessary at this late day, to offer any further arguments in opposition. Those who desire to see the subject more fully discussed, are referred to the report of committee on State prisons in 1846. Senate document No. 120.

CHAPLAIN, PHYSICIAN AND INSTRUCTOR.

The committee speak of the physicians, chaplains and instructors lastly and briefly, not because the importance of their offices are underrated, but rather because that importance cannot be justly and fully treated in the limits prescribed for this report. The great fault which is prominent in connection with all these offices is the small amount of time and attention which is bestowed upon their duties, owing perhaps to the meagre salaries attached to them. The salary of the instructors is $150 per annum, of the chaplain $600 and of the physicician $500. The salaries of the other principal officers (which seem to be moderate,) are from $1,000 to $1,500 per annum. Whether owing to this cause or to some other, the committee are compelled to say