Gloucester County Democrat., 1904-05-19

to pay local freeholder for his supervision
and attention. And why is itdone? Well,
there are various reasons. One freeholder
doubtless wants to swell his per diem
charge against the county. Another free
holder, perhaps, has access to supply of
material belonging to some relative of his
family that he is desirous Of selling to the
county and that he uses. And thus, to-
gether, the freeholders manage to evade
their plain, manifest duty in reference to
this matter.
The State Board Of Health has criticised
the condition of the county Jail, and as a
consequence there is a proposition to re-
build the Jail at COST starting at 500, 900
will reach $4,000 On this subject this
judge says:
The State Board of Health can compel
the county to do nothing more than what
common humanity requires us to do; they
are nothing more than the mouth h-piece, so
to speak, of common humanity We are
bound to look after the lives and health Of
those that we commit to the county jail,
but VIC are not bound to furnish them with
luxuries; and want to call your attention
to this as it is very proper matter for a
grand jury to make presentment upon.
1t may possibly need legislation, but we
can certainly delay this enormous expense
that is to be saddled upon us until some
legislation is had, if legislation is necessary.
My experience on this bench Cor the last
ten years leads me to this conclusion, and
have conferred with some of the former
sheriffs and I find that my ideas and my.
recollection are confirmed. Ordinarily
there are not more than from six to ten
prisoners N the Jail awaiting the action of
the grand jury. They are in there for a
comparatively short period of time preced-
ing court. They are those who cannot give
bail
He scored the practice of fitting out
tramps with new shoes and clothing on
being liberated from Jail.
On the point Of delegating powers to
committees, the Judge said: "They can
not appoint a committee with power to act.
The Board of Freeholders have the power,
and they cannot give that power to anyone
else. Yet it has been the practice to
appoint committee on large bridge
and they either do or do not makea a
report to the Board. They are given
power in the first instance, or after they
are given power, the committee makes a
g ntraet aud goes ahead and expends the
money of the county. That is unlawful,
as we'll as improper
A committee can be appointed to exam
inc bridge and report to the Board Of
Freeholders as to that bridge, and then the
Board Of Freeholders will determine what
is to be done; but they cannot delegate that
power to committee and say to a commit
tee that they may do it. And in this con-
nection, gentlemen, / ask you from your
own experience ON the Board of Freehold
ers how seldom it is that the Board of Free
holders ever questions or criticises, or, to
use common expression, turns down.
the report of committee? Whenever any
Freeholder wants bridge built and com
mittee appointed, is it not your experience
that that bridge is always built? Is it not
very seldom that there is such criticism
or such comment or such a veto power
put upon it in the Board of Freeholders
that a bridge is made to last as farmer
would make bridge on his own place do
as long as it is safe and proper for the car
riage of his teams and merchandise oyer
the bridge.