The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1893-03-15
PRISON AFFAIRS.
Annual Report Discusses
the Evils Of Contract
Convict Labor.
Special 10 The Jersey citp Ne,os.


TRENTON, March Is, ~1693.-There has
just been issued The report of the New
Jersey State Prison for 1892. 1t is not one
report. as its name implies. but a collec-
ton Of papers prepared and signed re-
spectively by the Legislative Joint Com
mittee. the Board of Inspectors. Super
visor, Keeper, physicians and moral
Instructors.
Ihe Board Of Inspectors in their report
show that the cost of maintaining the in
stitution during the fiscal year Of 1892
was $3.50. 245. SO. and that S75, Cos Oh was
turned In To the State Ire asury as earn
ings of convicts. leaving q net loss TO the
State of $50, 637. So. The deficiency in the
previous year, it is shown, was SS9,111.0S.
and SO this year shows a gain OF S5,472.SS.
This is made up to the extent OF
81. S32.5 of increased earnings of con-
victs turned over to the State Treasury,
a nd in the balance OF savings in the
maintenance account. The Board says
that this condition Of affairs shows u
healthy activity on the part of itself, the
Supervisor and the Keeper, bu5 nowhere
does it show that the fiscal year OF 1891
consisted of thirteen mouths, while that
OF 1892 a only the regular number.
Therefore, as will bs seen by comparison
u UH6 u&ureS, Inc muubuiy dVeIdSG OSAClt
for 1892, Is greater than for 1891.
Next comes the report of j. M. Sey-
mour, the Supervisor. He shows that
the cost of maintenance in 1891 was
S85. 170.51 as against $50. OH. 81 in 1892, al
though the prison had in the lutter year
an average daily excess of twenty-four
Inmates over the year before. This saving
however, is more han balanced by the in
crease iu the salaries of deputy keepers
and other employees from $40, 1858 to
$73, 354. 30. The figures i'll each of these
cases are for a twelve month year. 1t Is
while making this clear that the Snper-
visor explains about the thirteen-month
year.
SALARY BOOM.
The Supervisor publishes a table show
ing that with an average increase of
eighty-three prisoners more in 1892 than
in 1886, the salary list is $40, ZIG. l6 greater.
and that although the increase in average
of persons in 1892 is only two more than
in 1890, the salaries have increased
s., 1863. AZ.
Regarding this matter, the Supervisor
says
in my Judgment. this large annual in-
crease is entirely understandable and
should receive consideration. AS stated
in my last report, / believe that they
should receive a fair and reasonable con-
sideration for their services. and | do not
COuSlOcI tllO dtllOulb " lie Qdi
Individually excessive, but | do consider
the number employed to be beyond the
needs and requirements of the institn-
ton.
Under the existing law, neither the
Board of Inspectors nor Supervisor,
though held accountable Tor the financial
result and supervision of the prison,
ave any rights in determining the nun-
Der of deputies to be employed. To my
mind, this omission seems entirely incon-
sistent with good business man
agement. | understand that the ar
gament addnced at the time the
power was taken AVA from the Board of
Inspectors was that the Keeper, being held
responsible for the discipline of the insti-
tuition, should have full aud absolute con-
troll of appointment II discharge of the
officers. | must admit that | do not con-
sider such argument presents either a
logical conclusion or credit to the judg-
ment Of a Board who are selected to rep
resent and protect the interests of the
State. nor do | believe that any such power
should be vested in one nan. In unity
there is strength; likewise with a division
of responsibility, with a supervision over
all, as contemplated in the act creating a
Board of Inspectors, good results are
more likely to follow than by placing the
| entire control under one head, with none
to supervise.
41LAa AN l.
"1u view, therefore, OF such convictions
| I would recommend tina the present law
| relative TO employment and discharge of
| deputies be repealed, and that the previ-
| Gus law be ~re-enacted. giving the power
| 20 the keeper to make the appointment,
but requiring the confirmation of the
Board of Inspectors. with the proviso
| that the Board have full power TO deter
| mine the necessary number to be employ
ed to properly manage the institution, i'll
addition TO regulating the compensation
to be paid them.
81 am not d believer in false economy
| that makes a saving, but makes it at the
expense OF the:interests of the State; bu t
| when it is shown that the State is called
upon to ray an annual deficit, ranging
| from SS5, 900 to $97. 200, and that nearly
| S74, 900 uI this amount is for salaries
paid for guarding the ~conviets, and
| when it is further shown that every
| effort is being made to increase the
| amount of, revenue and decrease the cost
| of maintenance, it seems to my mind a
| question to be Immediately solved,
| whether a saving cannot be made of ex-
| penditures for such purposes, thereby re-
| ducing the amount of deficit, at the same
| time in no way reducing efficiency in that
department"
CONVICT LABOR.
He says further that there are In opera
| ton In the prison seven different Indus
| tiles, namely the manufactures of mats
AID mattinp, hosiery, shoes, shirts. panta,
| looms, brushes and blocks. He recon-
mends that the present piece-price sys-
tenn of convict labor be abolished and the
| old contract system re-established. On
| this head he has this to say
sConvict labor earnings this year exceed
any of the previous years earnings under
Dit system; Notwithstanding said
fact they fall short $3.50. 90 of the amount
that would have been received by the en-
| ploymenI of the same amount of labor at
the lowest minimum price, fifty cents per
diem, paid for labor under the old con-
tract system.
by an examination of the addenda of
| the plece-price system annexed TO this re-
port, where a comparison is made of the
earnings Jude the present system of en-
| pIoyment Of the prisoners. together with
| amounts that nave been earned under it's
operation for the past seven years, being
the entire period for which it has been IN
vogue, it will there be seen that had the
! same amount of labor been employed
upuer the old contract system at the low
minimum price paid nnder that system.
the amount Of revenue to the State for
said period would have been augmented
by the sum of STA, 38l:18.
"This showing must certainly prove con-