OF THE 57 JAILS ANSWERING THE QUESTIONNAIRE, 35 PROVIDED SOME FORM OF LAW LIBRARY SERVICE. THE LARGER JAILS PROVIDED BETTER LAW COLLECTIONS AND OFFERED BETTER LAW LIBRARY SERVICE THAN THE SMALLER JAILS. SEVERAL JAILS DID NOT ALLOW CERTAIN CLASSES OF INMATES TO USE LAW LIBRARY FACILITIES; OTHERS IMPOSED VARIOUS OTHER RESTRICTIONS UPON INMATE USE OF LAW MATERIALS. OVER ONE-THIRD OF THE JAILS WHO HAD LAW LIBRARIES DID NOT PROVIDE INTERLIBRARY LOAN SERVICES. LAW COLLECTIONS WERE GENERALLY OF POOR QUALITY AND DID NOT MEET THE REQUIREMENTS FOR EFFECTIVE LEGAL RESEARCH. THE MAJORITY OF JAIL LIBRARIES FELT THEIR LAW COLLECTIONS SHOULD BE INCREASED IN SIZE. FUNDING OF LAW LIBRARIES WAS ALSO FOUND TO BE GENERALLY DEFICIENT AND/OR SPORADIC AND LIBRARY PERSONNEL IN GENERAL DID NOT HAVE LEGAL RESEARCH OR LAW BACKGROUNDS. ABOUT HALF OF THE LAW LIBRARIES HAD EXISTED FOR UNDER 2 YEARS. INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAMS ON LEGAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGY WERE RARE. ONE EXCEPTION TO THESE FINDINGS WAS NEW YORK, WHERE JAILS SHOWED AN OVERALL SUPERIORITY IN LAW LIBRARY COLLECTIONS AND SERVICE, DUE TO THE 1973 ESTABLISHMENT OF A LAW LIBRARIAN PROGRAM BY THE NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS. JAIL ADMINISTRATORS SHOULD EXAMINE THE PROGRAM OPERATING IN NEW YORK AND CONSIDER HOW EFFECTIVE LIBRARY SERVICE CAN BE ESTABLISHED OR IMPROVED IN THEIR OWN FACILITIES. TABLES, FIGURES, A BIBLIOGRAPHY, AND APPENDIXES CONTAINING A QUESTIONNAIRE AND RELATED SURVEY DATA ARE INCLUDED. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT MODIFIED--MJW)