Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1881-07-22

4
cainery, the condensation of salt water fror
| the bay was taken into consideration, to ayoi
the expense of paying for fresh water. ]
was for that reason that high and low pres
sure engine was selected.
Mr.. Mills-Was there any agreement be
tween the Board and Mr.. Scott about tn
specifications, as i appears they were no
seat in until two days after the others?
Warden Ames-There was none whatever
The only reason Prescott, Scott & Co.'S ar,
dated two days later is because Mr.. Scot
called and said what was asked for in the sd
| vertisement was indefinite, and asked fol
mora details of what We wanted.
Further examination Of the subject va!
postponed.
THE QUESTION OF MILEAGE AND TRAVELLING
EXPENSES.
The next matter considered was the pass
age of the bill allowing ten cents mile and
500 per month travelling expenses for each
Director. Upon this subject the testimony
of the Warden and Directors was taken, and
further consideration of the suhjsct post
poned to await the arrival of witnesses to.
morrow.
THE WARDEN AND DIRECTORS.
This relation Of the Directors with the War.
den was then taken up.
Warden Ames testified that he had not
placed written resignation in the hands Of
the Directors, to be accepted at their option.
After further testimony this subject was
postponed until tomorrow, by reason of the
absence of witnesses.
THE BRICK LAND PURCHASE.
The purchase of brick land was next con-
sidered.
George A. Worn, sworn: In 1869 had sold
the State through process of condemnation
100 acres CT land. The award made to him
in that case was $40 per acre. The land lay
in front of the prison, now occupied by the
Office Of the Warden and residences of the
officers. Witness knew the land purchased
by the State of David Porter; couldn't give
evidence as to its value without an exanina.
ton Of the land.
The Commission furnished witness with a
buggy.
After an examination of the land, witness
returned and testified that to a private party
il was not worth more than SIS per acre
that by process of condemnation an award
of $500 per acre would have been made by q
jury in Marin county; believed the Directors
did well in purchasing the land at the price.
Cross.examined by the Chairman: The
land was not worth more than $50 to SIS per
acre; that the difference between SIS per
acre and the price paid-S300 per acre-rep-
resented the necessities OF the State thought
it right that this necessity should inure to the
benefit OF the private owner of the land.
Q.stion-Did you ever hear Mr.. Porter,
the former owner of the land, make any
statement affecting the disposition of the
money obtained by hun from the sale of the
land?
Answer-He told me it cost him nearly
one-Aalf the sum he obtained to get the sale
through.
Quesiion-Who acted for Mr.. Porter:
AnSWer-hOn. w. H. oearS'
Question-Who acted on behalf of the
State?
Answer-Judge Schell.
WARDEN AMFs
Was placed on the stand, and his attention
was called to the law approved April Is,
1880, Section II of which declares that the
Board of Directors shall in their discretion
purchase clay land not to exceed $4,000
Ames testified that he did not suggest to any
member Of the Legislature the amount o.
S15, coo to be inserted ia that bill; didn't
know how the Legislature came to fix upoI
that amount.
Question-By whom was the money pait
Porter?
Answer--I think paid him on ws,ran
drawn on the State Treasury.
Question--In whose name was the warran
drawn?
Answer-My recollection is that it wa
drawn in the name of David Porter, t
whom the money was due.
Qlestion-Did you have that warrant?
Answer-I think had it and handed it t
Porter.
Question-Are you sure the warrant wa
not drawn in your own name?
Answer-I5 might have been drawn in IN.
own name.
Question-If the warrant was drawn il
your name, where did you cash it?
Answsr-If it was drawn in my name,
would have cashed it at the Bank of Nevada
1 would have deposited it there and paid Mr.
Porter in a check.
The Cha;rman-To refresh your memoi.
in this matter, viii state that the warran
| was drawn July 23, 1880. 1t WAS No. 29l
and was in the name of J. P. Ames, Warden
for the sum of So. GIG.
! Warden Ames-I remember that the wal
rant was drawn in my name.
Question-What did you do with that wal
! rant
Answer assigned it to w. FL. Sears.
The Chairman then stated to the gentle
men of the Commission that the warrant wa
cashed at the Bank of Lazard Freres, and b,
that bank collected through d. o. Mills
Co., of Sacramento, from the State Treas
urer.
David Porter, who had been subpenaed
failed to appear, and further examination
of the question was adjourned to secure tn
attendance Of Mr.. Porter tomorrow.
PRISON DISCIPLINE
Was the next subject in the regular order c
business adopted at the opening of the Sc;
sion. The testimony of the Warden con
corning the discipline Of the prison and tn
ex sing prison system was taken. Tn
| Warden based his penal system upon tw
elements which influenced the prisoners
hope and the reformatory tendencies Of in
| dustry.
Pending testimony under this head tn
Commissioners, after a brief consultation
decided to inspect the prison with referenc
to certain testimony hereafter to be taken
| and the rest of the day was consumed in sucl
inspection.
Adjourned to meet tomorrow.