12 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE Mr. a committee of twelve persons to examine the gaol before their next meeting?— John McMullen. j ^ ave heard that such is the present practice. 1 J Then any difficulties thrown in the way of the practice must arise either with the ( 2 May.) inspector, or with that committee ?— 1 do not think that follows. What other bodies can throw any difficulties in the way of contractors furnishing the supplies ?— Difficulties of that description, I should suppose, must originate from inferior officers, and generally from their representations. What inferior officers can do it ?— 1 should think that all the inferior officers of the gaols have access, both to the inspector and to the committee of the grand jury, and have an opportunity of making to ihem such representations as they think proper; and I further am induced to think, that many of the articles furnished by the contractors, must necessarily be of that description of which the principal members of the committee of the grand jury, as well as the inspector himself, may be but imperfect judges. The committee are appointed by ballot ?— I do not know that fact. Are you aware of the sums presented in the year 1822 for food, clothing, bed- ding, coals, candles, oil, soap, and employment for all the prisoners in the city of Dublin?— I do not know the exact amount. Would you conceive 5l d. a head per day for all the expenses of a prisoner, in- cluding food, clothing, employment, medicine, incidents, and every expense, an exorbitant allowance or too large?— There is a great difficulty in answering the question ; employment is brought in as a part of the expense, whereas it should be a saving; according to the scale of expense in our prisons, I should think that charge unnecessarily high. For all things included, you think 51 d. exorbitant ?— The amount does not ap- pear exorbitant, at the same time the Committee must be well aware, that, in many other prisons, the expenditure is much smaller. Name the prison in the empire that you know of, where the expense is less than 5 5 d. per day for every expense of a prisoner ?— The Glasgow and Preston houses of correction, and the Maidstone gaol, which I have already mentioned. What is the allowance in the Preston house of correction ?— The whole expense was only 100/. in one year, or thereabouts. Do you think 5\ d. a day too much to expend upon the food and clothing, and every incident?— I cannot think it too much to be actually expended in the food and clothing of any individual, whether prisoner or otherwise; but I am clearly of opinion that the public ought not to pay 5$ d. a day for the support of prisoners who can be employed; they ought to earn a large proportion of the expense incurred in supporting them. If then the expense of the prisoners in the city of Dublin appear to be under 5i d. a day, you cannot think that they are extravagantly supplied ?— Certainly not extravagantly. t Are you aware of any traverse having been taken to any particular presentment by the grand jury ?— I am aware of a traverse having been made in the course of last term by the parish of St. Mary, under circumstances which I consider ex- tremely hard, and which show the severe and oppressive operation of the present grand jury system ; in that term the treasurer claimed from that parish, arrears of 1,250/. which were fiatcd by the court; the warrant which apprized the church- wardens of that fiat, was not delivered to them until the period allowed by law for traversing had expired; a traverse was nevertheless attempted on the part of the parish, but the court was obliged to confirm its previous fiat, admitting the great hardship of the case, but ruled by the letter of the law ; the sum disputed by the . parish amounted, as I am informed, to between five and six hundred pounds, and which I firmly believe, is not clue to the treasurer; the whole amount claimed by the treasurer was 1,251/. 5s.; this sum is composed of various arrears alleged to have accrued during a period of more than fourteen years; it was disputed by the parish in the year 1820, and at that period two accounts were furnished to the churchwardens in support of it, one of which alleged that 1,289/. 10, y- 4kd. was due, and the second, that the true balance was no more than 859/. 15 s. 4\ d. ; the latter of these accounts was calculated and stated by Mr. Jameson, an eminent public accountant. It further appears, that returns of the insolvent arrears of the parish for Easter term 1817, Michaelmas 1818 and 1819, and Easter 1820, were made on oath by the collectors, from which it can be shown, that errorsiexist even in the account stated by Mr. Jameson, and that credits should have, been given to the parish which are. omitted. In the accounts stated by the. treasurer, it is represented