The southern sentinel. (Winnfield, La.) 1883-1910, 1885-07-24
CONNECT LABOR.

The working element in this
country has ever been antagonistic
to the bringing of convict labor in
to competition with that which is
free. That there is much of SEN
tlment connected with the latitude
of the working classes towards this
subject is clear, but the sentiment
is praiseworthy.
There is kind of degradation
connected with the criminal classes
which saaakes any contact with
them particularly CALLING to honest
labor. The fact that the wages of
conyicts are lower than those of
the true working classes does not
enter materially into the question.
While it is the professed cause Of
the dissatisfaction, it is only the
surface Indication. There Is n
question not economic behind it all.
The working of convicts wholly
within the walls of a penitentiary
is possibly the least Objectionable
place yet adopted. 1t is true the
products of their labor come in
competition with honest workmen
but the competition is limited to a
few lines, and does not materially
effect the broad avenue of trade.
The objection to this plan is that
the State almost without exception
is the loser, and the taxpayers
bear large share of the burden of
criminal support. 1t is a sad COM
mentary upon the efficiency of our
State governments that the State
cannot derive revenue from that
which private contractors find so
lucrative. 1t is a recognized fact,
however, that State management
of convict labor ends in financial
disaster.
IF the efficiency of this system
of employing criminals could be
made equal to that of private indi-
viduals when employing the same
labor for similar purposes, this
plan would doubtless be the best
that could be devised. But assu-
ming that this could not be done,
the Judgment of the several legis-
lures mas been that the private con-
tract system was the only resource.
Revenue accrues to the State uni
formly from the adoption of this
plan, and the financial outcome has
strongly commended it to the law
making power.
This private contract system is
wrong. 1t brings the servilc, sla-
yish labor os a hardened, criminal
class into direct competition with
fair. honest labor, and causes
rightly, intense dissatisfaction
among the working people. The
relation of nyict to free labor is
brought out insasstriking way, and
mcn-laboring men-arc not slow
to see it. They object to this sys-
tenn. which is to them especially
CALLING, and hurtful to their pride.
The employment of convict la
Der on plantations is unfair in cy-
cry way to honest toll. The agri-
cultural classes are mainly nom
rowing disposition, and live and
die in the same ncighborhood- To
bring the criminal fresh from his
crime into competition with this
home labor is both demoralizing
and unjust. 1t develops an intense
antagomsm; more intense because
the question becomes local ono.
In addition to this objection,
which comes frok free labor. there
is tho further difficulty of securing
from private contractors that hu-
name and merciful treatment which
all convicts require, If fwc have any
hope of even partially rcclaiming
them. The history Of the States
abouEds in Investigations of cruel
ties practised by grasping, greedy
contractors towards conyicts under
their charge. Tennessee and South
Carolina are striking instances Of
this within The last half year.
While the treatment was not s0in-
human as charged, yet there was