tions intended for the government of the one, have no fitness or proper application to the other.

All the railroads now in operation in the State were constructed under the authority of laws that conferred upon the corporators that undertook them the power to acquire the lands needed for the use of their road by consent of the owners, or to take lands as for public use upon making compensation, and the power to construct and maintain a railway with the proper appurtenances, and to acquire and hold the suitable necessary machinery to operate them, and then to engage in the business of common carriers on their own lines; and it is to the fact that railway corporations exercise the power conferred upon them to carry on the business of common carriers, and by their own arbitrary authority fix the rates they will demand for services rendered exclusively by them on their own lines, or, by combinations with other corporations that claim similar powers, fix the rates between the more important and distant points, that we owe the interest that the people feel in their management. Every one interested in the subject of the cost of the transportation of the products of the country to a market, realizes, in the result of the exercises of these powers by railway carriers, all the evils that are produced by the existence of a monopoly, and many methods have been proposed for affording relief; but without now discussion any of them I am satisfied that the only means that will afford the country the relief demanded is to invite and encourage competition on all the railroads in the State, between the carriers that own or control them, and others who, upon just compensation to be made for the use of the roads and their appurtenances, and for the fixed facilities needed, may choose to engage in the buiness. If the monopoly of the business on any of the important lines of railroad was taken from the corporation that owns the road, the effect would soon be perceived in the increased facilities for transportation and cheaper rates. It is because competition is not now possible that railroad managers discriminate between localities and individuals, but if the legal right of others to engage in business on the railroads of the State was one established by law, the mere existence of the right would constantly and favorably influence their conduct, though the right of competition secured to individuals by the law might never be exercised. It was with a view to break up the monopoly of the use of their own railroad lines by common carriers, and, if possible, to separate the ownership of railroad property from the prosecution of that business, that the Constitutional Convention adopted the 10th, the 12th and the 14th sections of the 11th article of the Constitution. Before the adoption of the Constitution of 1870, the public mind had become so affected with the impression that railways could only be useful to the public as long as the corporations controlling them were able themselves to carry on business as common carriers, that a disposition was sometimes apparent to consider the rolling stock and other movable property of railroad corporations as appurtenant to the railroads. To correct that impression, and to prevent its further growth, the 10th section of the 11th article of the Constitution was adopted, which declares "that the rolling stock and other movable property belonging to any railroad company in this State shall be considered personal property, and shall be liable to execution and sale in the same manner as the personal property of individuals, and the General Assembly shall pass no law exempting any such property from execution and sale." And then, to lay the foundation for the assertion of the public right to authorize competition in the

business of carriers on the roads of the State, and to furnish the basis for a proper definition of the right of the owners of railroad property, as against the public right to its use, by the 12th section of that article it is declared "that railways heretofore constructed, or that may hereafter be constructed in this State, are public highways, and shall be free to all persons for the transportation of their persons and property thereon, under such regulations as may be prescribed by law." And the 14th section recognizes the right of the State to take the property of corporations for public use to the same extent as the property of individuals may be taken.

These constitutional provisions are intended to establish that there is no necessary connection between the ownership of railroads and the prosecution of the business of common carriers by the same persons or corporations; that railroads are public highways, in which the public have rights, the most important of which is to use them for the transportation of their persons and property, subject only to regulations to be provided by law; that the property of railroad corporations may be taken by the State for public uses to give effect to its own policy; and the proper conclusion from these sections and from the whole scope of that portion of the Constitution which refers to railroads, is, that the policy intended to be supported is to break up the monopoly of the carrying business, which the owners and managers of railroads have secured, and make the lines of railroads free to commerce, subject only to the rights of the corporations and individuals to whom they belong to demand compensation for their use, and then only to the extent to which they may be used.

The fundamental doctrine of the State Constitution is that railways are highways, and that, considered alone in that character, they belong to the public, subject to the control and regulation of the State; and adopting the language of the Supreme Court, employed in some of the cases in which that tribunal has sustained subscriptions made by public bodies in aid of the construction of railroads, they are improved highways, and the corporations that, by the permission and under the authority of the State, invested their means in making the improvements, acquired fixed, exclusive and vested property interests in the highway as improved, which the State has no constitutional power to disturb or displace, except in the exercise of the right and power of eminent domain, and upon making just compensation. But, it is true, as before stated, that the corporations that constructed and improved these highways, in addition to the powers conferred upon them to construct and maintain their roads, were authorized to employ upon them the most improved methods of transportation, and to engage in and carry on the business of common carriers of passengers and freights; and under the Constitution, their right to carry on that business cannot be taken from them by legislative action, nor by the exercise of the right or power of eminent domain, for after others havé acquired the right to engage in business as carriers on the lines of their railways, there remains to the corporations but the right of participation in a common right which cannot be taken by the State in the exercise of any of its powers.

It will be observed that the theory of the Constitution thus presented concedes to the owners of railroads the right to conpensation for the use of their roads, to the full extent that its use may be required or taken, and it will be easy for the General Assembly to prescribe rules under

which carriers will be authorized to place upon any of the railroads of the State a definite number of engines and carriages to make stated trips from and to certain points, to move at an established rate of speed, to use the appurtenances of the road, and the fixed facilities provided by the corporation, or the right to provide facilities at different and convenient points along the line, all to be governed by such equal and proper regulations as may be prescribed by the corporation. But the exclusive right of railroad corporations to carry on the business of common carriers on their lines is not supported by any just view of the law. They may, notwithstanding the fact that other carriers engage in business on their lines, continue to prosecute the same business, but upon the highway of commerce in which they are interested as owners, they, while employed in the office and duty of carriers, have no superior rights to others.

In the conclusion of this view of this important subject it is due to myself that I should say, that the interests of the country demand that the power claimed by private persons and corporations to control all the great lines of intercourse between the remotest points on the continent, and the great centres of commerce and trade, cannot be longer endured. In the infancy of the system, when railroads were merely subordinates to the natural lines of transportation, and their only competitors for business were the wagons of the pioneers, rights and powers were conceded to the corporations that controlled them, that are utterly inconsistent with the relations they now bear to the commerce of the country. They have superceded the rivers and the lakes, and, like them, must be made free, subject to no other burdens than such as are necessary to compensate those that own them; and no system of regulations which concedes the unfounded claim of railroad corporations, that are also engaged in business as common carriers, to the exclusive use of their lines for their own business, will or can be effectual to prevent the abuses, unjust discriminations and extortions under which the people have suffered so much, and of which they so justly complain.

PENAL AND REFORMATORY INSTITUTIONS.

THE PENITENTIARY.

At an early day the report of the Penitentiary Commissioners will be laid before the General Assembly, and I have the satisfaction of informing the representatives of the people that what was expected when the law now in force for the government of the Penitentiary was passed, is realized that the institution is now, and has been for some months past, practically self-sustaining.

On the 17th day of April, 1871, the General Assembly, embarrassed by the unexpected and unfortunate controversy in relation to the proposed relocation of the seat of government, suspended its session until the fifteenth of November following, and left the Penitentiary management without the means of providing employment or support for the convicts, and largely indebted and without credit, so that in fact there were no means of carrying on the institution. I was compelled to convene the General Assembly, and to again urge such changes in the law for the government of the Penitentiary as experience had shown to be necessary, and to ask an appropriation from the treasury for the support of the institution, if such a law could not be passed. I accordingly

issued my proclamation convening the General Assembly at Springfield on the 24th day of May, 1871.

I was, when I issued the proclamation convening the Legislature, fully aware of the certainty that my motives would be misunderstood and unjustly censured, especially as I was compelled to say that I regarded the prosecution of the work upon the new State house as important not only to the general interests of the State, but as a means of providing immediate and remunerative employment for the convicts in the penitentiary. In my message communicated to the General Assembly at its meeting on the 24th of May, 1871, I frankly stated my views in relation to the subject of appropriations for the prosecution of the work on the State house, and at the same time I said that "It has been my earnest desire, since the commencement of my official connection with the government of the State, to see the penitentiary so conducted as to accomplish the reformation of criminals, and at the same time be as little burdensome as possible to the people of the State, and notwithstanding the unsatisfactory results of past operations, I still believe that with proper legislation and judicious management it may be made eminently useful as a penal and reformatory agency, and at the same time substantially self-sustaining;" and at the same time I felt it to be my duty to add, "the only practicable system for the successful management of the penitentiary, in my judgment, is that which combines the retention of complete control of the discipline and government of the convicts by the State, with the lease of their labor to persons engaged in special pursuits, etc.," and the General Assembly, soon after its meeting, passed a well considered act which embodies and gives effect to this principle, and executed as the law has been by the Commissioners, whose names appear to the report, all that was then predicted has been fully accomplished.

I feel it to be my duty to express my obligations to the Commissioners for the intelligence and fidelity with which they have discharged their duties, and I have no doubt the Warden and his subordinates, of whose services the Commissioners speak so highly, fully merit their commendations.

But notwithstanding the success of the efforts of the Legislature and the officers of the penitentiary to improve its discipline, and to relieve the treasury from the burden of its support, I can but consider what has been done as but mere preparation for the commencement of real prison reform.

I do not propose any change in the principle or the general structure of the law now in force regulating the management of the penitentiary. Under its provisions the labor of the convicts may be made to pay the expenses of the penitentiary, and under judicious management and favorable conditions of the general business of the country, possibly produce a surplus of greater or less amount, which ought to be employed for the benefit of the unfortunate persons by whose labor it is produced.

Nor do I think it possible to specifically direct the application of any surplus earnings so as to best promote the interests of the convicts. I therefore recommend that authority be given to the Commissioners to appropriate whatever may remain of the earnings of the penitentiary, after the payment of all its expenses, to the improvement of the condition of the convicts, to making temporary provision for the support of the more helpless and destitute, after their discharge, until they can find

employment, or to aid them in doing so. It is impossible for persons. unfamiliar with the actual state of the case, to imagine the utter helplessness of many convicts when discharged from the penitentiary. Committed to the institution when comparatively young, and while there cut off from all intercourse with their fellow men, they come forth ignorant of all the methods of obtaining honest support, they are outcasts who feel that they would not be benefited by making their actual situation known even to the benevolent, and they are therefore almost inevitably driven to seek the society and the aid of those whose character and habits of life are such as will afford no support to any intention the convict may have formed to pursue better courses. No reformatory system can be considered to be complete without some provision for the temporary shelter and support of persons of this class, nor without affording them aid in finding employment.

THE REFORM SCHOOL.

One of the institutions maintained by the State, and that from its objects and organization may, without great impropriety, be classed with its charities, is the Reform School at Pontiac.

This institution, though yet in its infancy, will, if it is so managed as to maintain public confidence hereafter, exercise an important and salutary influence in the improvement and reformation of a class whose condition has always excited the deepest interest.

Juvenile offenders, whose crimes are most frequently the result of the incapacity or the negligence of parents or guardians, or of neglected orphanage, or as experience has demonstrated with respect to many of that class, of latent intellectual or moral incapacity or disease, while they attract and enlist the sympathies of the philanthropic, furnish the most encouraging field for the employment of reformatory agencies, and it is to be hoped that as the State advances in wealth and culture a greater degree of attention will be given not only to the classes intended to be provided for and benefited by the Reform School, but to neglected childhood wherever it may be found in the State.

It has been found extremely difficult in practice for the courts to harmonize some of the provisions of the law which provides for the commitment of persons to the Reform School, and the general laws that provide for the punishment of offenders by confinement in the penitentiary, with the obvious demands of criminal justice. As an illustration of the difficulty adverted to, it will be observed, by reference to the provisions of the act of 1867, in relation to the Reform School, that all courts of competent jurisdiction are authorized to exercise their discretion in sending juvenile offenders to the county jails in accordance with the laws, or in sending them to the Reform School, provided that no person shall be sent to the Reform School for a term that will detain him beyond the time when he shall arrive at the age of eighteen years. The practical effect of this provision is that a class of persons that are under the age of eighteen years, but have nearly attained that age, are deprived of the benefit of the institution. If they are within a few months of that age, a sentence to detention in the Reform School, until they attain the age of eighteen years, is but for a nominal term, which subjects the State to the expense of conveying the offender to the institution to remain for a time too short to be productive of benefit, while a sentence to confinement in the county jail produces all the mischiefs in