It will be recalled that the revisions of 1821 and 1838 substituted for county workhouses town workhouses, though at least one law still permitted a sentence to a county workhouse. In 1840' a committee was appointed to prepare a bill for the next session to make county jails, erected on the plan of the Hartford jail, county workhouses, and to specify the offenses for which persons might be committed. The law was passed in 1841. When a jail had been fitted for this new purpose, the judge of the county court and the county commissioners were to certify to the fact under their hands or the hands of a majority of them, and have the certificate recorded in the county records. They also made the rules for the government of the workhouse. Thereafter persons subject to confinement in a county workhouse might be committed to the jail. The maximum term was made 60 instead of 40 days for a first offense, 120 for a second, and in either case until the costs of prosecution and commitment had been paid. Those who might be sentenced to a county workhouse were those already liable to confinement in a town workhouse, and the justice might commit to either at his discretion." The right to release a reformed inmate was entrusted to three inspectors, appointed by the judge and the commissioners, who were also to apply the avails of each prisoner's labor, except a convict's, towards his support and the costs of commitment, including the fine, if any, and to use the balance at their discretion for the support of his family or otherwise for his benefit. If the inspectors decided that any 'P. A., p. 38. 'C. 21. 'Three in number, appointed by the general assembly (1875, 22, § 1). 1841, c. 21, § 1. • Ibid., § 9. 'Ibid., § 5. After 1866 (p. 644, § 82) by the commissioners. 'Ibid., § 8. 'Ibid., § 7. 3 inmate of a county workhouse should be released because of good conduct or the state of his health, they might release him upon the payment of what was due for the cost of prosecution, commitment, and support. If he was unable to pay this, they might accept his note, payable to the town treasurer where he was committed, and discharge him. The town paid the amount and received the note.1 This might also be done for one held only for fine and costs.2 A later law conferred a similar power upon the state's attorneys in the counties. With the advice of the superior court or, in vacation, of any judge of the court, they might release a convict in a jail or county workhouse who was held "for non-payment of fine and costs only," if he had no means of satisfying the same." The attorney took his note and, if possible, security for its payment. No justice or judge of a police or a city court had authority to discharge.* 66 The law of 1841 permitted any one convicted of a crime punishable by imprisonment in the county jail to be confined instead in the workhouse. By an act of 1845 ° those liable to sentence to a workhouse, upon the complaint of a grand juror, might, at the discretion of the justice, be committed to the workhouse or to the jail. Except that the two institutions were practically identical, this would have been against a wise differentiation. In the revision of 1875 this was retained, as was also the law of 1830,8 given in chapter three, which permitted justices to send for not more than ninety days to town workhouses convicts who would otherwise have been confined in the county workhouses or jails." 11841, c. 21, § 9. Ibid., § 11. 1857, c. 31; 1862, c. 30; 1875, 540, § 23. * Before 1857 this power applied only to jails, not to workhouses. The revision of 1849' reenacted both the laws for town workhouses and those for the use of county jails as workhouses, without change, except that the sentences to the former were made the same as to the latter, and appeals might be taken from any order by a justice to the county court, as allowed by the act of 1841.2 3 By laws of 1853 and 1859, the surplus of the earnings of convicts was to be paid to the state on or before March 4 each year. 5 The revisions of 1866 and 1875 made this the rule for any surplus from the earnings of county workhouses over and above necessary expenses. The former law regarding the use of the surplus earnings in town workhouses for the support of the families of the inmates was repealed in 1866, perhaps because no surplus was obtained. Only minor changes were made during the period in those who might be confined in workhouses. One wise provision was added in 1866, namely, that those liable to commitment to workhouses were in no case to be committed to the state reform school. This was the newly organized institution for boys. In 1845 permission was granted the county commissioners to employ a chaplain or religious instructor for jails and workhouses, prescribe his duties, and pay him out of the net earnings of the institution. The revision of 18751° made no important changes. Appeals were to the superior court," and county commissioners alone certified to the existence of the county workhouse and appointed inspectors. The certificate was to be recorded in the records of the superior court.12 12 2. CARE OF SICK The purpose of the laws regarding sickness in 1875' was the same as in 1838, to check contagious and infectious diseases. The period, however, saw the incorporation of two additional hospitals and the first appropriations for the support of private hospitals. In 18542 an annual appropriation of $2,000 was granted to the General Hospital Society of Connecticut for its hospital in New Haven. It was to be expended, under the direction of the governor and the commissioners appointed by the general assembly to visit and superintend the hospital and report their findings, for the support of charity patients and to be used so as to benefit the different towns as they made application. 3 In the same year, 1854, the Hartford Hospital was incorporated. One year later, the comptroller was directed to draw upon the treasurer for $10,000, payable to the treasurer of the Hartford Hospital, when evidence was submitted that $20,000 had been subscribed and paid in by private individuals, and satisfactory obligations had been given that the hospital would be open to receive on equal terms mariners and other persons from all parts of the state. $20,000 was appropriated in 1869, on condition that an equal amount be subscribed for building purposes. Two years later a like amount was voted, to be paid when $11,000 had been raised towards paying the debt for building purposes. Besides these sums, $2,000 was granted in 1860' for charity patients, and a year later it was made an annual appropriation. 6 5 Previously, the same thing had been done indirectly for 1 Pp. 258-260. 'P. A., p. 218. 'P. A., 1855, pp. 189, 190. 'P. A., p. 161. P. A., p. 160 et seq. P. A., p. 294. P. A., 1871, p. 246. P. A., 1861, p. 71. the General Hospital Society. It was the custom in the years 1849-1852 to require a bonus from newly-chartered banks, which were directed to pay it to some charitable or philanthropic society. Two of these bonuses, for $5,000 and $2,000, were ordered paid to the General Hospital Society.1 After the precedent of public appropriations to hospitals had been established, the General Hospital Society demanded its share. The grant of 1869 to the Hartford Hospital was duplicated for New Haven on the same terms. Five years later $50,000 was granted, payable when $15,000 had been given or subscribed. In 1866, aid was also given to a new homeopathic hospital. The amount was $10,000, conditioned upon the spending upon grounds and buildings of an equal sum raised by private subscription and upon an agreement that the hospital be open to the practice of physicians of whatever school the patients desired. Near the close of the period, in 1871, the Hartford dispensary was incorporated. New Haven followed in 1872. These were private institutions and were not aided by the state. 3. PROTECTION OF INDIANS The laws in 1875 for the protection of Indians were not very different from those of 1838. An overseer was to be annually appointed by the superior court of the county for each Indian tribe, to care for its lands and money. He was to give a bond, with sufficient surety, "in a sum onethird more than the amount of the estate of such tribe," conditioned upon his faithfully accounting for the tribe's property. Each year he was to settle his account with the 'Leg. Docs., 1857, no. 20. 'P. A., 1869, p. 300. 'S. A., p. 72. 'S. A., 1874, p. 335. 'S. A., pp. 33, 34. *1875, 5, §§ 1, 2. |