The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1900-06-15

! building, and for inspecting them after
| they were laid. Another members OF the
! Board employed as clerk in the analyt-
| ical department on a salary of $1,000 per
| year, received his per diem and expenses
| for attending Board meetings. Four other
members of the Board were employed as
| fertilizer inspectors at salary of $50
| per month and expenses, and were allow
| ed S4 per diem and expenses for attend
| ing Board meetings.
| Your committee is of opinion that the
| Board has been guilty of distributing it's
| patronage among it's own members; in
/ other words. the employment of them
| selves for the delicate and accurate work
/ required in the proper conduct of the
| work of the department, and We recon-
| mend the passage of such law as will
prohibit any employee of the department
| from holding more than one position at
| time.
| Another example of the extravaganza
| displayed in the management Of the insti-
tuition is in the matter of attorneys fees.
| We find that two law firms We're employed
| to defend the Department of Agriculture
| in suit brought by the Patapsco Guano
| Company against the department to test
the validity Of the tonnoge tax and that
| each fra was allowed a fee of $4,000.
After these two firms had conducted the
| suit up to the time of the final hearing
before the United States Supreme Court,
1 another attorney was employed as special
| counsel for the Board. and was allowed
| q fee of 50, 0G0 for one appearance before
| the court. In addition to this he filed
! bills of expense while on his trip to
| Washington, including the fec for his
license to practice in the United States
| Supreme Court. and they were allowed by
| the Board This was in addition to $3.50
1 per annum which was allowed him as
| general counsel to the Board. $3.50 for
making UP the report Of the Board Of Ag-
| riculture to the General Assembly, and
500 for services as special Legislative
| committee whose duty it was Ito use the
words of the resolution passed by the
| Board). e''to look after the Legislature.
| He was also member of the Beard Of
| Agriculture and received on these vari-
Gus accounts $44S.22, the total amount
! paid him during the two fiscal years
ending June l. 1899, being $3.375.QS The
| department spent for Attorneys fees,
during the last four years, $6,926,S6 We
believe this amount to be excessive, and
| that it should not have been allowed by
| the finance committee.
We do not deem it necessary to go into
=, any lengthy review of the evidence taken,
but beg to present it herewith for your
consideration. only pointing out some of
the more prominent features developed.
Respectfully submitted.
n STATE PRISON
! If your committee found incompetency
| ard extravaganza in the management of
! the Agricultural Department, it was only
| to be surpassed by the recklessness which
| characterized the management OF almost
| every department of the State Prison.
| Before the adjournment of the Legislature
| this committee reported that the peniten
! tiary was in debt at least $110,000 we
/ found upon further Investigation that the
! Indebtedness amounted practically to
| $120, 900. This one item of loss is not all
| that should be taken into consideration
| III the treatment of this matter. The
! depreciation i'll the value of the States
| property amounted to al least $4,000 in
! addition to the above indebtedness; and
| We estimate that the total loss to the
| State on account of incompeency and mis-
| management amounted to at least $780,.
| 600. After visiting the farms, and looking
| carefully into the general management
! and condition of the prison, your COM
mittee are of the opinion that under prop
| er management this institution could be
made self-sustaining, If not a source of
! revenue to the State, and such was the
! opinion of almost every witness examined
among the employees of the institution and
others familiar with its workings.
The evidence taken is too voluminous to
undertake to review it all in this report.
! Of he
| herewith and ask for it your careful con-
sideration We think it only necessary to
call your attention to few of the more
prominent points developed by the testi-
mony.
| 1. Incompetency. The evidence of al
most every witness examined shows the
| absolute ineompetency of the manage
ment of the prison for the past two years.
| AS this committee was only instructed to
| investigate the management during pc
| Rod Of four years, and as we had no au-
! hority to go back OF that time, we found
| it difficult to make a complete summary
| of the affairs OF the institution during
this period. TO go into this fully would
| have been not only too expensive to the
/ State, but would have required months
| of labor. 1t will be seen from the evil
!
| 1897, so far as your committee is able
| to ascertain, the management was COM
| petent business like, economical and
honest, and a great many permanent inn
provements We're made in the property
under control of the State during that
| time, which should have been of great
| assistance to the future management
| in helping to put the prison on self
sustaining basis. The testimony Of the
superintendent who took charge in 1897,
Shows that the institution was not in debt
more than 1000 or $4,000 at that date;
| and consideration of the evidence will
| show that the management up to that
| time had been prudent and economical.
| But since that time, SO far as your COM
mittee has been able to go into the work
| ings of the institution, we find incompe
| tency and extravaganza on almost every
hand. The present superintendent OF the
| State Prison testified that when he took
| charge he found everybody from the bell
| boy to the superintendent making pur-
| chases; the system of book keeping was
| poor; and practically no business rules
| or principles were applied to any of the
| departments. Incompetent men were EN-