A third address by Mr. F. B. Sanborn, Concord, Mass., on “Prison Reform and Prison Science,” was largely a review of the results accomplished in the past forty years, and reminiscent of the many eminent men associated with the movement since its inception. WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 19 MORNING The session of the Physicians’ Association, held this morning, was most interesting, and was marked by some notable features. The President, Dr. S. H. Blitch, Ocala, Florida, presented a paper on “The Open versus the Close Penitentiary System of Handling Prisoners,” in which he took strong ground in favor of the former, especially in the South. He defined the “open” penitentiary system as that mode of social restraint according to which the prisoner sentenced to hard labor is required to perform skilled and unskilled service in fields, woods, and surface mining, and in such industries and occupations as do not necessitate his daily cellular or circumscribed confinement, as is the case under the “close” system. He claimed that in spite of criticism, the “open” system, wherever climatic conditions make it practicable, is far more conducive to the mental and physical rehabilitation of the convict than the “close” system. In the South, especially where the vast majority of prisoners are negroes who have been accustomed to life in the open air and to outdoor employment, the confinement in a “close” penitentiary would be most detrimental. The open-air system puts these men at work under conditions to which they have been accustomed from youth up, and the results demonstrate the wisdom of the plan. In the discussion which followed this paper, Dr. Barrows said that many penologists felt that the Southern system had many advantages, but that other industrial and reformatory elements should be added. Dr. Wines saw an immense advantage in the Southern method, and claimed that Northern prisons would find it very beneficial to have farms connected with them for the outdoor employment of convicts. The paper on “Prison Sanitation,” by Dr. W. D. Stewart, West Virginia Penitentiary, Moundsville, was followed by that of Dr. S. A. Knopf, of New York, on “The Tuberculosis Problem in Prisons and Reformatories.” The presentation made by this eminent specialist on tuberculosis was probably the most exhaustive on this subject to which the Congress ever listened. This very valuable paper, any condensation of which would do it injustice, is published in full in the _New York Medical Journal_, November 17, 1906, to which the reader is referred.