1.-4.

16

Mr. Woodward. 14th Aug., 1878.

. It would be estreated, the costs of the prosecution paid out of it, and the balance preserved for tho prisoner. It is a strange fact that the Government conserves the prisoner's property, but makes him ■no charge for his keep when in gaol. lam now nursing a property in Nelson belonging to a man who is in gaol, and who will get the benefit when he conies out. 406. Is there no percentage deducted ?—No. There was a case in Christchurch in which money was found on a prisoner, and, as he had been found guilty of robbery, I used the discretion given me by the Act to hand over the money to the prosecutor. He had lost about £400, and I paid over to him about £SO. 407. Mr. Gisborne.] I understand you hold strong opinions in favour of the appointment of an Inspector, it being understood he should be an expert in the management and discipline of gaols ? — I am of strong opinion it is a thing we absolutely need. 408. I presume you do not find it possible as a A'isiting Magistrate to investigate the technical details of the management of the gaol ?—lt is not possible. 409. Supposing thero was a gaoler in whom you had no confidence, and he was carrying on a course of jobbery and corruption, could the A^isiting Justices detect and check his proceedings?— AVell, as things are situated here, the very worst man could not do much harm. There is no work done for payment except a small sum received for oakum. There might be collusion between a contractor and a gaoler, but much harm could not be done. 410. Could not stores, such as kerosene, be taken away without the Justices knowing it ? Certainly; there is no check on that. Of course it is probable it would he noticed if heavier requisitions than usual were asked for. I generally, before signing a requisition, see if the quantity is about the same as usual. 411. Do you think prisoners would be deterred by fear from making complaints ?—Possibly. I have heard so, but never have believed it ; still it is possible. 412. Is it possible for warders to get money from outside for favouring prisoners ? —Yes; and seeing the small pay they get, I should not be surprised if they took money for that; though I do not believe that they do. 413. Mr Tole.] Do the Visiting Justices visit the stores periodically ?—No ; that was the work of the Stores Department ; but, now r that is abolished, there is little or no check. 414. Hon. Mr. Gisborne.] Had the Stores Department anything to do with perishable articles ? —Not with food. The Visiting Justices see that the food is wholesome, and the quantity is arranged by the number of prisoners. 415. As to the wood and coal ?—There is a monthly supply of that. 416. Could not a gaoler so disposed use that for his private purposes ?—AVell, there is no check in that respect. 417. That used to be checked by the Stores Department ? —I am not sure. The supply of clothes was. 418. Mr. Wakefield.] Could not the clothes be made in the prison? —We have not had enough men to do it. We have made boots. 419. Cannot the women do it ? —They have enough to do in washing and mending. 420. Do they wash for any other institution besides the gaol?—No; that keeps them employed. 421. There is no means of making the prisoners work at their several trades ?—No ; except shoemakers and carpenters. Of course it would be a good thing to do, but we have not the means in this small gaol. 422. In a central gaol it could be done ?—Yes.

Thursday, 15th August, 1878. Mr. E. Pearce, examined. 423. The Chairman.] We have had the evidence of the Gaoler and one of the Visiting Justices, and I understand that you and Mr. Woodward have been the two Justices most active in connection with the Wellington Gaol. Ido not want to go over the ground again, on which your answers will probably be the same as those of previous witnesses ; but I wish to get your opinion on a few points, and any suggestions you have to make from your experience as a Visiting Justice. In your experience, can the Visiting Justices conduct their inspection so as to know what is going on in the gaol ?—Do you refer to discipline generally ? 424. Both to discipline, to adherence to the Regulations, and the management generally. Is further inspection necessary ? Do you think skilled inspection is necessary, altogether apart from the business of A'isiting Justices?—lt would probably be wise if there was an Inspector appointed to occasionally visit the gaols; but, at the same time, I believe that the Visiting Justices are able to see that discipline is maintained and the rules are adhered to. If the Visiting Justices do their duty it ought to be sufficient. At the same time, I believe there ought to be some permanent head of the department, who should watch the administration of the gaols, or that there should he a visiting Inspector; but I believe if the Visiting Justices do their duty it is not absolutely essential. 425. During your experience as a Visiting Justice, do you know whether all the Justices attended regularly to their gaol duties ?—No, they did not all attend regularly. 426. I presume it is because there is no rule with regard to visiting?-—There is no rule. 427. Are there, in your opinion, sufficient means of classification in the Wellington Gaol?— Certainly not. 428. Do you think it would be advisable to improve the gaol iv such a way as to enable prisoners to be classified?— Yes; by increased building accommodation. I should say, with regard to the female department, that there is sufficient room to classify. 429. From the evidence we have already had, it appears that there is no distinction made between

Mr. Pearce. 15th Aug., 1878.