3
were purchased occasionally at the rates given in the ordinary price-currents and
not unfrequently at cheaper rates, but that at Nagpur, the Superintendent in
many instances purchased at rates in excess of those quoted in the price-currents.
This in a letter to the Officiating Inspector General of Gaols he explained as
follows:—
* Para. 24 of resume.
"The reason for this is, that the price-current supplied from the Deputy
"Commissioner's Office is in reality quite useless as a guide in the matter ; its
"rates are seldom or never in accordance with the market rates ; it is impossible
"to obtain anything at the prices laid down in it, and it is not in the power of any
"authority to enforce them.
*
*
*
I will take the instance of fire-
" wood, of which the average cost is stated in the price-current to be 137 seers
"and 3 chataks per rupee. It has always been charged to the asylum by the-
"Contractor at a uniform rate of 80 seers or 2 maunds per rupee. The market
" rates vary from 2½ to 3½ maunds per rupee, but this is the rate for unbroken
"wood at the market place. The asylum is distant some 4 miles from the
"market place and the wood is delivered at it broken for firing. For these
"reasons the Contractor declares that he cannot supply the asylum at a lower
"rate than 2 maunds per rupee. I think it may be possible to procure wood
"at a lower rate by purchasing it in large quantities before it enters the town.
"and I will endeavour to make arrangements to this end if I can be allowed
"cash in advance for the purpose." The Inspector General of Gaols hereupon
explained to the Superintendent that he was under a misapprehension, that
wood was at the time he wrote, delivered at the Nagpur Central Gaol (not
under contract), by a wood merchant whose stores were about 3 miles from the-
gaol, and about half that distance from the asylum at rates about half those
charged to the asylum ; that the gaol had been and was actually supplied with
grain at the rates given in the price lists, and that the Contractors who sup-
plied the gaol, were willing to supply the asylum at the rates which might
be quoted in the price lists. The Chief Commissioner thinks that he is correct
in saying that the higher cost of diet in Nagpur, is due neither to the existence
of a more liberal scale of diet, nor to the fact of higher prices, but really to
want of good management, and it will be seen* that supplies are now given at
the
rates published in the price-currents. Next as re-
gards clothing, the Chief Commissioner would give the fol -
lowing extract from a letter of the Officiating Inspector General of Gaols on the sub-
ject written in November last:—"Doctor Rice purchased his cotton articles at the
"Elgin Mills, his woollen articles in the local Bazar, and the average cost of clothing
"for the last 5 years is Rs. 3-14-11 per lunatic. I have seen the Jubbulpore
"lunatics several times, and have always found them well clad * * * Doctor Beatson
" purchased his clothing in the local market also: it cost Rs. 7-0-4 per lunatic
" on an average of the last 5 years. 1 have suggested to Doctor Beatson to get
" his clothing from the Nagpur Central Gaol, which can supply it at cheaper
" rates than those at which it has been hitherto purchased, although not so
" cheaply as the Jubbulpore arrangement"
The Chief Commissioner gives this extract in order that it may be read in
juxtaposition with the Superintendent's comments on his Statement 9, regard
ing clothing. It seems to the Chief Commissioner that these comments are
not only in themselves out of place, but are improper as reflecting on the ac-
tion of the Committee of Management. The comments are out of place, (1) be-
cause the purchase of the blankets and other clothing referred to from the Central
Gaol is not shown in Statement 9, and (2) because this clothing or part of it was
not received till December, i. e. the last month of the year under report; the
blankets (the only articles to which exception was, and is taken by the Superintend-
ent) were only received in January of the present year (1876). The remarks seem
then quite superfluous in respect to a report for 1875, and the Chief Commissioner
deems them to be improper because he thinks that they exhibit a disregard of