The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1878-04-11

WlllhB tllo OOuhty huOulu pay thO DuOI
: if a remunerative price therefor With
7 all due respect to the gentlemen of th'
Committee, we doubt if there is single
: county in the State paying less than fifty
cents day for boarding prisoners.
: The Report says "the bills relating tc
3 these, (boarding, clothing and washing
for prisoners), are heavy, and call fol
: greater economy in the future" We re-
: gret greater economy in attorneys feet
was not also recommended. The Com
mittee then give the aggregate amounts
for these three items, but do not state
the number of prisoners during the year
and the number of days confined. In
. fairness to the Sheriff and County Com
missioners, we give these. By reference
to the jail record we learn that for the
year ending Sept. lst, 1877, 1856 prisoners
were confined, and the total number Of
days confined were 1850. This is a
frightful reckoning, and accounts for the
"heavy bills" Let us have less crime,
less imprisonment, Speedier trials, and
thus economize.
Included in the amounts stated by the
Committee, is one of $247.5O, for com.
mitting and diseharging prisoners. This
should have been stated separately. Of
course, but it got mixed up somehow. It
is fee fixed by law.
Now, of the 1856 prisoners, only so were
taken before Court, and for this service
the Sheriff is allowed by the law $50,
which is also included, we understand,
in the aggregate given by the committee
ofthe three items in question.
As a public journalist we desire to
screen no one, in or out of Office; and
assuredly we desire no one convicted
and condemned without fair and full
hearing, where all the facts pertaining
to the case shall be known and Consid-
cred. SappreSSiO veri is as bad as may,
sometimes worse than, )SuggeStiO tdlSi. In
Cicero's day these were the strongest
charges that could be made against a
public orator or writer.
The Committee say, "As to clothing for
prisoners, there is no statute allowing
this to be done at the public expense,
but the Court of Common Pleas has di.
rected that it shall be done, 80 far as nee
essary."
Here, unfortunately, the Committee
leave the common mind in the dark, to
infer that the Judge usurps power, and
the Sheriff "Construes it too literally"
Now the Court usurps no power in so
ordering, but acts in conformity with the
law, clear and unmistakable. Onlpages
966 and 367 of the laws of Ohio for 1877,
the Court of Common Pleas "shall pre-.
scribe rules for the regulation and gov
ernment of the Jail of the county, not in
consistent with the law, upon the follow
ing subjects; 1st, The cleanliness of the
prison and prisoners. I'd, Classification
as to sex, age, crime, &c. Sd, Beds and
clothing"
The Court "shall" prescribe, making it
obligatory. So the Committee will see
there is statutory law for furnishing nee.
essary Clothing" to prisoners.
The committee give the number of
coats, pants, shirts, socks, drawers, shoes
&C., furnished prisoners, and say, "the
Court should so modify its order as to
prevent further misconCeption of its
scope and object" In this case it seems
the committee had "the means of deter
mining" that "the amounts were excess
sive"-although we do not suppose either
gentleman examined one of the 165 pris-
oners before they were furnished with
new and clean garments. How, other.
wise, could they say these garments were
not necessary ?" How can the Court
more carefully limit its order2 Clothing
is to be furnished prisoners $50 far as
necessary" Who are to Judge ofthe ne.
Cessity but the Sheriff and the Jail ply.
sician2 1t is then a discretionary power
lodged in the Sheriff. He may have ex-
ercised itliberally, in the interest of hui
manity. God forbid he should do other
wise
But let us consider. Three.fourths of
these prisoners were tramps, loathsome
with filth and vermin of more than one
variety liable to infectious disease, dan.
gerous to Sheriff, turnkey, visitors to
Jail, the SheriAfs family, and in fact the
entire community. Some of them were
from small pox localities. Under such |
circumstances the first step should be
and was to clean up and put on clean
clothes. In no other direction was there
safety, and we are surprised that the
committee failed to consider this. The
law requires cleanliness at the Jail, and |
the Sheriff would be amenable in case of
negligence.
The committee also recommend re-
form in clothes washing for prisoners.
They think there is too much done, and |
recommend that-"Persons confined for
few days only should haye no washing
done at the expense of the county"
Indeed, and suppose a batch of pris
oners are received, lousy, filthy, diseased,
&C., and the Sheriff, thinking they will
remain "a few days only" concludes to
obey this suggestion. Beds and bedding
would soon be in a beautiful condition.
Sheriff and family, turnkey, visitors, and
lawyers to see client prisoners, would be
all in danger. And then, suppose the small
pox or other infectious disease should |
break out in consequence-wouIdnot not the
Sheriff be denounced2 And would he
not deserve to be for being such fool as
to follow such adviceP