APPENDIX. REPORT OF THE JOINT STANDING COMMITTEE ON THE HOUSE OF CORRECTION. To the Hon. Senate and House of Representatives: The Joint Standing Committee upon the House of Correction which was instructed by joint resolution, passed in concurrence on Oct. 12, to visit said institution, examine into its sanitary condition and practical working, have performed the duty assigned them, and ask leave to submit the following report: The House of Correction is located in the village of Rutland, upon the southern slope of Pine Hill, and upon the west bank of a small stream called East Creek. The spot is an extremely favorable one for the purposes of such an institution. The soil is dry and light. The site is elevated, and permits easy drainage at small expense. The sewers or drains are two in number, made of cement tile, and are not of great length. The descent to the stream into which they are discharged is rapid, and the surplus water from the eaves, the waterpipes, and the rubbing-beds in the workshop, is abundant, and keeps the drains clean and wholesome. The water used in the institution is taken from the main of the village water-works. The air in the vicinity is pure, and the view, even from the prison cells, especially towards the east and south, is one of the finest in New England. The buildings are new, well arranged for their purpose, and in excellent condition. The prison furniture and fixtures are of improved modern pattern, and in some respects much superior to those of older institutions. Your Committee made careful examination of the various rooms, corridors and cells of the establishment, and were gratified with the cleanliness, neatness and order that prevailed throughout. We also examined the food furnished the convicts, and the facilities and manner of preparing it, and were convinced that it is of good quality, sufficient in amount, and well cooked. After this examination we can readily believe the statements concerning the uniform health of the convicts contained in reports of Directors, Superintendent and Physician already published. There were fifty-six convicts in the prison on the day of our visit— fifty-two males and four females-serving sentences varying from thirty days to eight years. The women find useful and ample employment in laundry work and in making and mending the garments of the prisoners. The men were nearly all at work upon marble under the contract. It is, perhaps, not time to form an accurate judgment as to the pe cuniary working of the institution. The Directors were not able at the outset to secure a contract which seemed favorable to the State when compared with those of the State's prison at Windsor, and of similar and older institutions in other States. The enterprise was new and untried. The sentences are, many of them, very short, and it was doubtful what kind of work could be profitably prosecuted by the convicts. But the business seems to have been wisely chosen and successfully pursued. The material used is abundant in the vicinity of Rutland. The demand for marble goods is constantly increasing, and it seems probable that when the present contract, which has less than two years to run, is completed, another can be made upon terms more favorable to the State. We do not anticipate, however, that the House of Correction will become directly self-supporting. Its pecuniary value will lie in the indirect saving to the State in the promptness and certainty of the collection of fines and costs, under the pres sure of an alternative sentence and in the reduction of jail expenses throughout the State. Our attention was called to a lack of uniformity in the courts of the State with regard to commitments, under sections 4367 and 4370 of the Revised Laws. Some courts add the costs of detention to the costs of commitment in the body of the mittimus. The costs of detention are also, as required by law, certified by the officer in his return. In such cases the prisoner sometimes suffers a double penalty for this item of costs. We ask leave to submit with this report a bill in amendment of the sections above named, designed to secure uniformity of practice. There is one other point to which the Committee would direct the attention of legislators. The law which requires the costs of commitment to be added to the costs of conviction bears, as may be readily seen, with extreme severity upon criminals in parts of the State remote from the prison. This anomalous circumstance, we respectfully submit, is not likely to conduce to the reformatory influence of the institution. The question whether it is right or wrong is, perhaps, not so important as that uniformity of punishment for crimes of the same grade should be established by law. The Committee were accompanied in their tour of inspection by Hon. W. H. H. Bingham and Hon. Charles Thatcher, Directors, and by George N. Eayres, Esq., Superintendent, and every facility was afforded us by these gentlemen to make our examination thorough and complete, and to ascertain fully and accurately the condition and working of the institution. Several members of the Legislature also embraced the opportunity to visit Rutland and witness personally the practical operation of the House of Correction. All of which is respectfully submitted, C. S. COLBURN, J. M. MCINTOSH, C. W. READ, E. HORTON, A. C. GROVER, F. A. WAY, L. A. KENT, Senate Com. House Com. |