A Constitutional Oversight Stalls the Penitentiary’s Jute Plant
Lawmakers intended to renew an old appropriation for prison-made jute, but a procedural misstep holds up $10,000 and suspends work until the attorney general rules.
The story, cleaned up
A cleaned-up reading of the newspaper page: spelling and layout repaired, one story lifted off a crowded page. It follows the original closely but it is not a transcription. The original page is below; read it if a detail matters.
A serious oversight of the legislature in the proper construction of the constitution came to light yesterday in connection with the appropriation for a plant for the manufacture of jute at the penitentiary. A voucher for $10,000 was presented yesterday and an examination of the law disclosed the fact that, while the legislature undoubtedly intended to re-enact an old appropriation, it did not fully comply with the provisions of sections 4 and 8 of the constitution. In consequence, work on the penitentiary will be suspended until the attorney-general’s opinion is secured.
“Work on the penitentiary will be suspended until the attorney-general’s opinion is secured.”
Prison labor was a major source of revenue and controversy in 1890s Washington, and the jute plant was meant to turn convict labor into cheap sacks and rope. The episode shows how even well-intentioned legislation can founder on procedural details—and how incarcerated people's work has always been entangled with state budgets and constitutional limits.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.