THE ORIGIN AND EVOLUTION OF THE PROHIBITION AGAINST CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT ARE TRACED, AND THE FEDERAL COURTS' INTERPRETATION OF THE PROHIBITION AS A FLEXIBLE CONCEPT THAT CHANGES WITH SOCIETY'S EVOLVING CORRECTIONAL VALUES IS DISCUSSED. THE EXPANSION OF THE PROHIBITION TO ENCOMPASS THE TREATMENT OF STATE PRISONERS AND, LATER, THE ADEQUACY OF MEDICAL TREATMENT IS CONSIDERED. THE STANDARD DEVELOPED BY THE COURTS TO DETECT DENIALS OF TREATMENT THAT VIOLATE THE CONSTITUTIONAL PROHIBITION IS EVALUATED. THE STANDARD WHICH FOCUSES ON THE INTENT OF THOSE ACCUSED OF DENYING TREATMENT IS FOUND WANTING. A REVISED STANDARD IS SUGGESTED, WHICH EMPHASIZES THE ADEQUACY OF TREATMENT AND REQUIRES THE COMPLAINANT TO SHOW ONLY THAT MEDICAL TREATMENT WAS NEEDED AND THAT CORRECTIONAL PERSONNEL FAILED TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE TREATMENT. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT MODIFIED)