24 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CANADIAN INSTITUTE. 



paper and hoped that it would be pubHshed in the public 

 journals. 



Dr. Cassidy was much impressed with the statements he 

 had heard. He had learned much from Dr. Rosebrugh's 

 paper. Not having devoted much time and independent 

 thought to the consideration of the subject, he would not ven- 

 ture any criticisms on it. He was strongly opposed however 

 to the enforced idleness of prisoners, and considered it of 

 importance that they should be kept usefully employed. Some 

 better employment should be found for them than trundling 

 around filled wheel-barrows. In the case of a drunkard who 

 was sent to prison, the man's labour should go to the support 

 of his wife and children. 



Mr. Elvins coincided with the views of Dr. Cassidy in 

 regard to making the labour of the imprisoned husband help 

 to support his wife and children who were the greatest 

 sufferers. 



Mr. Browning considered it hard that the labour of the 

 prisoner should come into competition with that of the free 

 labourer. He thought that it would be well if the police 

 officers were not so anxious to make arrests. 



Mr. Armstrong said that one object of Prison Reform 

 should be to bring a number of young offenders to the culti- 

 vation of the land. This would relieve the artisan from the 

 competition of prison labour. 



Dr. Meredith said that the great object of the Industrial 

 School at MimicO; was to instruct the boys in farming. He 

 decidedly objected to penal labour. The great object of 

 Prison Reform was to render them honest. They should be 

 taught to regard labour as a privilege and a boon. 



Warden Massie thought that a man who committed a theft 

 should be imprisoned until he earned a sum sufficient to 

 refund what he had stolen. The average expenses of the 

 prisoner amounted to forty-seven cents per day. What he 

 earned above the amount required for his maintenance, should 

 be passed over to his family. 



