The hydraulic press., 1860-07-14

| In 1856, when Know Nothing Legislature
passed law under which the management o
the State Prison was let out by contract to james
M. Estell, very general condemnation of tn,
measure was indulged by all opposing parties
Ten thousand dollars month was considered
too large sum to pay for the support of an in
stitution which it was correctly supposed ough
to be self-sustaining. But the executive officers
of the State, designated in the bill agreed to gvs
that amount, and there was no appeal from thei
decision. The Lessee, on his part, assumed Ger
tain obligations and duties, which in short tim,
after, were shamelessly and notoriously violated
/ By some hook or crook which we never coult
thoroughly understand, an individual named
McCauley-eyen before the death of Estell-be
came the ostensible and virtual manager Of the
Prison, under the title of sub-Lessee, and a.
| such, has ever since e'beenrecognised by the Chic
Executive of the State, the Legislature, the
Courts and the people. The law Of 1856 confers
no such power on the Lessee, nor makes any
provision whatever for sub-letting. There, then
was the first palpable infraction Of the contract;
and yet, at subsequent period, this McCauley-
man entirely unknown to the law, sues the
Governor for trespass, in taking possession Of
the Prison, and RECEIVERS damages! The law
says nothing, either, about heirs, executors, ad-
ministrators, or assigns" but does plainly read,
that S'he (thc Lessee) shall be iadiriduaHy res
ponsible for all losses and damages" etc.
Without any forfeiture of contract having been
declared under McCauley's sub-Lesseeship, be-
fore after the death of Estell, or any new bar
gain being entered into, he is permitted to have
actual control of the Prison up to the time of his
forcible ejectment by Governor Weller, and both
nominal and virtual control according to the
decision of the Courts, ever since.
We find the Legislature of 1860 passing an act
authorising certain State officers, with the Gov
ernor at the head, to 'compro8aise and settle
with John F. McCauley and Lloyd Tevis, assign
ees of James NJ. Estell, deceased" etc. A third
and previously unknown party, it appears, is here
introduced; and the State, defeated at all points
by her own legal tribunals, is forced to the hum+
iating position of proposing 'tcompromise
Now, we contend, first, that no one could be
recognised under the law of 1856, as the Lessee
of the State Prison, but James M. Estell. Sec
ond, that under the provisions of that law, he
had neither power nor authority to sub-let his
contract Third, that his "assigns" are not en-
that on the death of Estcll, the contract became
null and void. Fifth, that the contract was fire.
quently violated by both Estell and McCauley,
and ought not to stand, before court of Justice.
This may not be technical law-the commodity
in which our California Courts are fonaest OF
dealing-but we think it is good sense, equity,
right, proprety, and, beyond all question: justice.
We bequeath the case, thus made out in the form
of brief, to the lawyers. Some of those who
have had the management of the State cases,
might derive profit from its perusal!
Four years have passed since the Legislature
of 1856 passed the act for the contract system
four Legislatures have met and dissolveds-and
notwithstanding it has been SO loudly and uni
versally condemned, the evils which it entailcd
are still existing, aggravated in severity, and
largely increased in number. The act itself
stands unrepealed, but operative only SO far as
its benefits are to accrue to McCauley, and those
whom he may choose to associate with him. The
oeoee3 Inv eiOU SoOSC, Oull anu HISS
in the impotence of its offended dignity, while
sub-Lessees, assignees, courts, lawyers and hang
ers-on, divest her of golden plumage.
The few and feeble attempts which have been
made to reform State Prison abuses, have all
failed. The whole system, from beginning to
end, is a stupendous swindle and humbug. The
Prison itself, instead of being an institution for
the solitary confinement and punishment of
criminals, is a kind of grand Hotel, or Relay
House, where gentlemanly cut-throats and itin-
Grating pads repose and refresh themselves during
the season, when purses are scarce, and the pro-
fits of robbery are by no means commensurate
with its attendant anxieties and fatigues. When
business in their line resumes, they have only to
play the amiable for couple of weeks, get their
names enrolled on the list of ssTrusties," and
escape-or we might rather say, to ride off on
mule, or set sail in a boat, provided with gun
and ammunition belonging to the State-is a
thing very easily accomplished. Sometimes a
party of twenty thirty get off together. In
one instance-that of Buster, who robbed the
Sonoma county treasury-the prisoner was grant
ed parole of honor of two weeks, to visit his
constituents, and circulate among them petition
for his own pardon!
Now is not such an abuse as this monstrous
An abuse which has been practised with impuni-
ty for years. Every one has been familiar with
the fact-except the Courts. Before these, it has
been impossible to make out case. According
to their information, there is no such thing as
contract, or if so, the sub-Lessee has never per-
mitted it to be violated McCauley and Tevis
are to get $27O,OOO or $500, 900 under its provis-
ions. A recent ruling of the Supreme Court has
so decided and God knows how much more they
may claim and receive under our present Judicial
andlegislative systems. California wisdom seems
entirely inadequate to overcome the difficulties
presented in this ponderous and subtle State
Prison question. A future generation will have
to solve and decide it, when State Prosecuting
attornies and Legislatures are little smarter,
and the Judges of the higher courts of justice
not quite so obtuse.