« 이전계속 »
Mr. KENNARD. It will certainly be $163,000; that much is in sight, and we have allowed an additional amount for new prisoners. It seems probable, from the condition of the Federal court business here, that there will be a great many more prisoners to care for.
AVERAGE MAINTENANCE COST OF PRISONERS AT FEDERAL PENITENTLARIES.
The CHAIRMAN. You say they cost you 85 cents a day?
Mr. KENNARD. They are costing about 85 cents a day at Fort Leavenworth and about 81 cents at Atlanta.
The CHAIRMAN. Somebody was up here the other day and said it was only costing 29 cents at Atlanta.
Mr. KENNARD. There was probably some misunderstanding.
Mr. KENNARD. That may have been simply the subsistence cost, but that is quite different; this includes all the overhead of the institution.
The CHAIRMAX. But do they not work?
Mr. Harris. There are no industrial activities except farming and construction of the institution buildings at Leavenworth, but at Atlanta there is a textile mill. We are endeavoring to bring about a survey of the other two penitentiaries-Leavenworth and McNeil Islandin order to put in some kind of shops that will take up more of the time of these prisoners. Įp to this time they have been engaged mainly in building the penitentiary and its various cell wings.
The CHAIRMAX. What makes up the overhead cost for the care of these prisoners and a difference between 85 cents and 29 cents, which is 56 cents a day?
Mr. KENNARD. I suppose the 29 cents covers merely subsistence; the actual cost of meals. I have not the actual data, but that is my understanding. This charge against the District is based upon the entire amount of every kind of expense incident to running the institution, including the salary of the warden, the salary of the deputy warden, the clerks, the guards, the cost of coal transportation, clothing, etc.
The CHAIRMAN. And that is what it amounts to?
Mr. KENNARD. Yes, sir. It varies somewhat according to circumstances, the number of inmates, the time of the year, etc.
The CHAIRMAN. There must be an average cost. What is the average, 85 cents ?
Mr. KENNARD. I should say it runs about 80 cents—from 80 cents to 85 cents.
NUMBER OF DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA PRISONERS IN FEDERAL PENITENTIARIES.
The CHAIRMAN. How many prisoners have you there?
Mr. KENNARD. At the close of December we had 360 District of Columbia prisoners at Atlanta, 92 District of Columbia prisoners at Leavenworth, and a few elsewhere; there were 13 in West Virginia and 19 in Rhode Island.
The CHAIRMAN. You say you have 92 at Leavenworth, and you are now dealing with all of them?
Mr. KENNARD. No; just the District of Columbia prisoners.
The CHAIRMAN. But you are dealing with all District of Columbia prisoners who are in all the prisons, at Leavenworth, at Atlanta, and at McNeill Island, are you not?
Mr. KENNARD. We do not have any at McNeill Island.
NUMBER AND MAINTENANCE COST OF PRISONERS AT STATE PRISONS,
Mr. Harris. In West Virginia and in Rhode Island we have the women prisoners.
The CHAIRMAN. Does the same per capita cost apply to each of these prisons ?
Mr. Harris. Not to the State penitentiaries in Rhode Island and West Virginia.
The CHAIRMAN. What do you have to pay there?
Mr. KENNARD. We pay 50 cents a day in Rhode Island and 40 cents a day in West Virginia.
The ('HAIRMAX. Why do we not succeed in taking care of these prisoners in Federal prisons as cheaply as in other places!
Mr. KENNARD. That is a broad question, with which Mr. Votaw would be more familiar.
Mr. Harris. Because the State institutions do not charge us with the overhead.
Mr. KENNARD. And they probably make the prisoners work.
Mr. BYRNs. There is not a State in the Union that has a charge of 85 cents, is there? My recollection is that in my own State it is about 40 cents.
Mr. KENNARD. We are paying 90 cents in New York.
Mr. HARRIS. We are paying as high in some institutions as $1 a day for female prisoners. They are reformatories, however.
Mr. BYRNS. I mean the State cost.
Mr. KENNARD. I have not a schedule of those rates, but Mr. Votaw's office has.
The CHAIRMAN. Somebody ought to be able to tell us why it costs so much more to run Federal prisons than it does to run State prisons.
Mr. KEXXARD. Of course, there is this element to be taken into consideration: The larger the number of prisoners in an institution the less the per capita cost. If we should reduce the number of prisoners at Atlanta to half the number we now have there, the per capita cost would almost double, because the overhead does not go steadily up and down with the number of prisoners. We could probably take care of many more prisoners without materially increasing the overhead. That is one of the important elements always involved in the calculation of costs. Cost computing is one of the most complicated matters with which we have to deal.
The CHAIRMAN. How do the States do it?
Mr. KENNARD. It may be that some of these State institutions carry many more prisoners than we have at Leavenworth or Atlanta.
Mr. Harris. They only charge for the subsistence and charge no overhead. I imagine these State institutions are very much more expensive per capita than the Federal institutions.
The CHAIRMAN. Then at that rate we ought to transfer all of these prisoners to the State institutions.
PROFIT FROM OPERATION OF MILLS AT ATLANTA PENITENTIARIES.
Mr. KENNARD. I am inclined to think the Federal Government should care for its own prisoners and make them self-supporting. That is a condition which is in process of development at Atlanta.
The CHAIRMAX. Where?
Mr. KENNARD. By the operation of the cotton duck mill at Atlanta.
The CHAIRMAN. That was several years ago. Are they producing anything?
Mr. KENNARD. They are producing revenue and paying the prisoners a little something.
The CHAIRMAX. Do we get anything out of it?
Mr. KENNARD. The Government gets the profit. The mill is a unit of revenue.
The CHAIRMAN. What do you mean by a profit?
Mr. KENNARD. The annual statement shows a net profit to June 30, 1921, at $63,670.80.
The CHAIRMAN. Is that over all expenses?
Mr. KENNARD. Yes, sir; on the regular business statement of the mill.
NOTE.-See page 418 of the annual report of the Attorney General fiscal year 1921.
The CHAIRMAN. Does it cover all the expenses of the institution?
Mr. KENNARD. Oh, no. Solely the operation of the mill-assets. liabilities, receipts, and expenditures. They have shown a profit in the past and expect to show a much greater profit this year.
Mr. Harris. This is the first year they have had contracts from the Navy Department and the Post Office Department. Of course, the product of the mill is only sold to Government activities.
The CHAIRMAX. Are they making cotton?
FURNITURE AND REPAIRS, ETC.
The CHAIRMAN. The next item is, “For furniture and repairs, including carpets, file holders, and cases, $3,000."
Mr. SHERWOOD). That is for the purpose mostly of purchasing transfer cases to which the files are transferred from the upright sections.
FILE HOLDERS AND CASES.
The CHAIRMAN. Is it necessary to have this amount between now and the 1st of July? Can not you wait and take it out of your appropriation for next year?
Mr. SHERWOOD. I understand that the files are filled up and that there is very little space left. There are some requisitions in, waiting for money. This amount will about take care of us for the balance of the year.
The Chairmax. Do you ever try to curtail any of this expense?
Mr. SHERWOOD. The fact that we are emptying the upright file cases and putting the papers in transfer cases would indicate that they were doing everything they could to save.
Mr. STEWART. The upright cases cost a great deal more. We are just buying the transfer cases to empty the upright cases, so that they can be used again.
The CHAIRMAN. If you do not get this money, will you buy the cases out of your next year's appropriation ?
Mr. SHERWOOD. We would probably have to put the files now in the upright cases on the floor to make room for the files which they need almost constantly.
The L'HAIRMAN. How many of these files do you have to have now? Mr. SHERWOOD. We need at this time in the neighborhood of 300. The CHAIRMAX. How much do they cost apiece?
Mr. SHERWOOD). They cost about $1 a piece. Last year, I think, we paid $7.
The CHAIRMAX. That would be $1.200.
Mr. SHERWOOD. Then there are some filing cabinets, and we have some requisitions for other furniture that has been waiting for the money to buy the goods with. The $3,000 will, I think, be needed, Mr. Chairman.
The (HAIRMAN. There is not much to be said about a thing like this. It seems to me that you should be very careful about coming in for a deficiency.
Mr. STEWART. We have no money left in this appropriation, and very important files and papers of the department will have to be taken out of the regular cases and just stacked up. They ought to be in transfer cases eventually.
The CHAIRMAN. You only estimated for $6,000 for 1923?
Mr. STEWART. Yes, sir; that is true. We want to get along with just as little as we can, but with such a large department as we have, $6,000 is a very limited amount with which to pay the current bills.
MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES, INCLUDING TELEGRAPHING, ETC.
The CHAIRMAN. The next item is, "For miscellaneous expenditures, including telegraphing, etc.," for 1919, 85 cents; for 1920, $361.22; and for 1922, $8,000. Please tell us about this.
Mr. SHERWOOD. Those deficiencies seem to have been caused by the telegraph bills which, of course we did not know anything about at the time. They were in the field and sent from the field in to the department. The companies did not get the bills in.
The CHAIRMAN. Is it an audited amount?
Mr. Harris. They are audited, but they have not been sent to the Treasury Department, because under the rule we must obtain a deficiency first.
The CHAIRMAN. What about this one for 1920?
Mr. Harris. We have had a great deal of difficulty with the telegraph companies in submitting their bills promptly. Under the rules of this committee for years the lump-sum appropriations, other than the contingent appropriations, are not available for telegraph bills to and from the department. The bills are often submitted under the lump sum first. We refer them back and then have considerable difficulty in having the companies send in under the proper appropriation. Ühis accounts for the delay.
The CHAIRMAN. What is the $8,000 ?
Mr. SHERWOOD. After having put aside certain allotments, the balance available is $12,000.
The CHAIRMAN. Did you allot the money?
Mr. SHERWOOD. Quarterly allotments, but on these various items we allotted a certain amount of money and those were deducted from the $40,000 and left a balance, as I say, of $12,000, which has now been entirely exhausted.
The CHAIRMAN. You do not try to live within the appropriation?
Mr. SHERWOOD. Yes, sir; but certain things were necessary to be done, and certain repairs done.
The CHAIRMAN. You do not mean that you consider repairs an emergency to justify a deficiency?
Mr. Sherwood. They seemed to think that they had to be done. Mr. Harris. The big bills are telephone and telegraph bills.
Mr. STEWART. The repairs did not amount to a very great deal. and by no means brought about this deficiency. The main reason for this deficiency is the decided increase in the expense for telegraphing and telephoning.
The CHAIRMAN. Is that because they do not use any discretion in the use of the telephone and telegraph?
Mr. STEWART. The Bureau of Investigation has done a great deal of telegraphing and telephoning, and the cost has run up much larger for that purpose than we anticipated.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there any reason why the department should go on disregarding the appropriations; why not live within them?
ALLOTMENTS AND EXPENDITURES FOR MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS FOR 1922.
Mr. STEWART. If you shut off the telegraphing and telephoning, Mr. Chairman
The CHAIRMAN (interposing). I know, but how much for telegraphing and telephoning? Let us find out how much you paid out for each one of those things. Mr. Harris. About $1,000 a month for telegraphing.
The CHAIRMAN. Let us have a definite, systematic statement of just what items the expenditures were for so that we will really know whether anybody is trying to live within the appropriation. We might as well have it understood that these appropriations are made to be lived up to and not disregarded indiscriminately by the different departments.
Mr. SHERWOOD. The telegraph bill alone last month was very close to $1,000.
The CHAIRMAN, Let us have a definite detailed statement as to how much you spent for each one of these items.
Mr. STEWART. We have not that here, but we will be glad to put it in the record.
The CHAIRMAN. Send it down here so that I can see it. I do not see the record half the time.