Indiana University makes no claim of copyright to the original texts, which have been published before 1923 and are, therefore, in the public domain. Permission is granted to download, transmit or otherwise reproduce, distribute or display the original texts so long as the header is included in its entirety.
Indiana University makes a claim of copyright only to original contributions made by the Brevier Legislative Reports project team. All other use, including but not limited to commercial or scholarly reproductions, redistribution, publication or transmission, whether by electronic means or otherwise, is strictly prohibited without the prior permission of the copyright holder. Determination of the status of an online document ultimately rests with the person desiring to reproduce or use the item. If you have any questions or for general inquiries, contact the Indiana University Digital Library Program, diglib@indiana.edu.
This electronic text file was created by Optical Character Recognition (OCR), and has been encoded and edited using the recommendations for Level 3 of the TEI in Libraries Guidelines for Best Encoding Practices. Digital facsimiles are also provided.
The Maurer School of Law, Indiana University, Bloomington received an LSTA Grant to scan, markup, and make available the Brevier Legislative Reports. The Reports are a transcription of the proceedings of the Indiana General Assembly from the Special Session of 1858 to the Regular Session of 1887.
Introduced during the Regular Session of the 53d General Assembly showing which provoked the most discussion. The first column of figures indicate the number of the bill, and the figures that follow indicate the page on which the blil is considered.
Introduced during the Regular Session of the 53d General Assembly showing which provoked the most discussion. The first column of figures indicate the number of the bill, and the figures that follow indicate the page on which the bill is considered.
The particulars of Legislative expenses for the extra session of 1872, itemized in the
Specific Bill approved Dec'ber 21,1872, justifies our statement that the Legislature
found the cost of the newspaper subsidies for legislative reports in this city to exceed
that of the authentic Brevier.-- The cost of newspapers for that session
above that of the Brevier Legislative Reports was $356.73. The newspaper
vanished, but the Brevier is extant with all its contributions to
history.
The Legislature finding that the cost of their newspaper subsidies exceeded that of the
authorized BREVIER REPORTS, the subsidy was cut off by the act of
December 19,1872, By that act the newspaper became justly and legally recognized as but
"stationery" for the people and their representatives, and, by implication, as unfitted
and unworthy to be intrusted and authorized at the public expense as the depository of
their solemn legislative records.
The Brevier Reports have done for the people what the newspapers are
unfit and unable to do in the matter of a just and stern legislative record; and the work
has been done cheaper than the newspaper charges which have been paid out of the treasury
for their partial, personal, restricted and unreliable matter called "Legislative
Proceedings.
The BREVIER REPORTS contain a record that is impartial,--not a single
partial report can be found in any one of the twenty volumes issued.
The BREVIER Reporters in the 24 years of its publication have been
careful chiefly to make their work here a good record,and rest its claims to the
cherishment of the Legislature upon that alone. They have gone before no Committee,
lobbied none, received no approaches for individual favor, nor shaped their work at any
time with sinister or partizan objects. It has rested solely and all the time on its
merits, its integrity and its fairness; and for these it has all the time received the
favoring notice of the Legislature.
As compensation should always be regulated by the skill required, there can be no
question but that the pay for service but few are competent to perform should largely
exceed the pay for labor that many are able to do. These Brevier
Reports, in each page, contain more than three times as much matter as there is in
one page of the Supreme Court Reports,yet the Brevier Reports are furnished to the state
for two-thirds of a cent a page, while the Reporter of the Supreme Court has received
three-quarters of a cent per page, besides the copy-right.
The Constitution of Indiana having fixed this as the day and hour for the convening of the Legislature in regular session. Senators holding over and Senators-elect to the Fifty-third General Assembly met in the city of Indianapolis, in the upper northeast corner room of the Marion County Court House (the new State House being in process of erection), and were called to order by Hon. Thomas Hanna, of Putnam County, Lieutenant Governor.
After prayer by Rev. Ross C. Houghton, pastor of Roberts Park Church, in this city-
The following named Senators holding over answered to their names:
The following named Senators-elect answered to their names and were sworn in by the Chief Justice Woods, of the Supreme Court of Indiana:
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR-The fifty Districts being full-there being fifty Senators present-I now declare a quorum present and ready for the transaction of the first business before the Senate, which is the election of a principal secretary. Nominations are now in order.
Mr. SPANN-Mr. President: For Principal Secretary of the Senate I put in nomination Robert C. Sears, of Vermillion County.
Mr. COMPTON--I place in nomination Robert J. Kelley, of Vigo County.
There being no further nominations the first ballot resulted for Mr. Sears 22 votes for Mr. Kelley 28 votes.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR-Mr. Kelley having received a majority of all the votes cast, I declare him elected Principal Secretary of the Senate. Mr. Kelley will please come forward and receive the oath of office, [which was administered by Judge Wood]
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR-Nominations
Mr. HENRY-I nominate Charles F. Bobbins, of Marion County.
Mr. WILLARD-I nominate Henry C. Huffstetter, of Lawrence County, for Assistant Secretary of the Senate.
There being no further nominations the ballot resulted as follows:
For Mr. Hufstetter 28 votes, for Mr. Bobbins 22.
Mr. Hufstetter was declared elected and sworn by Judge Wood.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR-The next in order is nominations tor Doorkeeper of the Senate.
Mr. BROWN nominated Vincent P. Kirk, of Marshall County.
Mr. BUNDY put in nomination Henry L. Gordon, of Franklin County.
Twenty-eight Senators having voted for Mr. Kirk and twenty-two for Mr, Gordon.
Mr. Kirk was declared elected and sworn into office.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR-I will appoint James W. Woodrum, and Henry Neltzer; of Putnam County, and Bertie Hollis, of Greene, as Pages. The Senate is now organized and ready for any business that may come before it.
Mr. BROWN offered a resolution that the rules of the last regular and special session Senate be adopted for the government of the proceedings of the present session until further ordered with the exception that the words "President of" in line two of Section 8 be stricken out.
Mr. BUNDY-Offered a substitute providing that the rules adopted at the last session be the rules for the government of the Senate at this session.
Mr. BROWN-The resolution I offered is not intended, of course, to cast the slightest reflections on the Chair. I certainly have not any idea, nor has any Senator, to my knowledge, but that the Chair would exercise the greatest impartiality in the selection of these Committees, did the Senate intrust that duty to the Chair. In fact, the only reason I have, as far as personal reasons are concerned, is that the Chair does not reside in my camp. The Democratic party being in the majority, it will be responsible for the business done in a great degree, and it should have control of the composition of the Committees.
Mr. BUNLY-While I concede all the Senator from Jackson (Mr Brown) has to say in regard to the Democratic party being in the majority, I do not consider, if the Committees were made by the President of the Senate, that anything would occur, either upon a report made by any Committee appointed by the Chair or otherwise, where the majority would not have the same right and the same power to do ss they please. I offer the substitute because I believe the President of the Senate is entitled by precedent and by courtesy to appoint these Committees. I believe it is his right, and that is the reason why I offer it. Of course, the substitute may be voted down, but I believe it is proper and right to offer u and give the brethren on the other side an opportunity to vote for it If they want to,
On motion by Mr. BROWN the sub as laid on the table-yeas, 28; nays, 22-and the original resolution was adopted by the same vote.
On motion the LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR appointed Messrs. Marvin and Sayre a Committee to inform the House of Representatives that the Senate is organized and ready to proceed with legislative business.
Mr. BROWN asked and obtained unanimous consent to introduce a bill [S. 1] for an act to provide for the better government and management of the benevolent institutions, and to repeal Sections 2,768, 2,769, 2,856, 2,857 and 2,869 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, which was read the first time, and 150 copies were ordered printed.
Mr. SPANN moved that the bill be referred to the
Mr. BELL suggested if there be any real question upon which this bill ought to go to
the
Mr. SPANN-It seems to me this is a very important bill, and may overturn the laws
already upon the statute books for the government of these institutions, and I desire it
shall be referred to the
The motion was rejected-yeas. 22; nays, 28.
On motion by Mr. BROWN the bill was referred to the
On motion by Mr. VOYLES it was ordered that when the Senate adjourn it be till 10 o'clock to- morrow morning.
A message from the House of Representatives by S. W. Edwins, principal Clerk thereof, informing the Senate of the organization of that body, and that it was ready to proceed with legislative business, was read by said principal Clerk, when the Lieutenant Governor said to him, "You win please privately inform members to appoint a Committee of two to inform the Senate of that matter." [Laughter.]
Mr. WHITE moved that a Committee of two Senators be appointed to act with a like Committee tee on the part of the House of Representatives to wait upon the Governor and inform him of the organization of the two houses;, and learn of him at what time it will suit his convenience to make whatever communication he may desire.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR-This is not in order until we are notified of the organization of the House of Representatives.
Mr. MARVIN-I have the honor to report that Senator Sayre and myself waited upon the House of Representatives, were recognized by the Speaker and reported to him that we were there by order of the Senate to report that the Senate was organized and ready for business.
Mr. FOULKE obtained leave to introduce bill [S.
2] to enable Turnpike Companies in this State to connect with turnpike roads
operated in an adjoining State, which was read the first time and referred to the
Mr. SPANN offered a resolution that, in all cases, when a bill shall bs reported from a Committee, with a recommendation that it do pass, that 150 copies of such bill shall be printed for use of the Senate.
On motion by Mr. BELL it was amended by adding the words "when so recommended by the Committee." On motion by Mi. BROWN the resolution a amended was laid on the table.
A message from the House being announced by the Doorkeeper, two Representatives appeared and one of them said: We are a Committee from. the House of Representatives, instructed to present the following resolution:
Resolved, That a Committee of two, on the part of the House, be appointed to act with a similar Committee, on the part of the Senate, to wait upon the Governor and ascertain when he will make a communication to the General Assembly.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR suggested this was an unusual course and proposed another.
Mr. MARVIN thought either way correct. The Senate two years ago did exactly as the House has done. Sometimes the Senate sent a Committee and sometimes it sent a Secretary.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR-It is this way: The Senate appointed a Committee to wait upon the House and notify the House that the Senate was ready for business, and the House should send a Committee to the Senate to notify us that the House is ready for business.. [Sotto voce, he charged the Committee to notify the House of this manner of proceeding, which caused much merriment and laughter.]
Mr. GRAHAM offered a resolution that a Com
On motion of Mr BROWN it was laid on the table-yeas, 28; nays, 22.
And then the Senate adjourned, under the order heretofore adopted, until 10 o'clock to-morrow.
In accordance with a provision of the Constitution of the State of Indiana (Sec. 9, Art. 4). the members of the House of Representatives elected to the Fifty-third General Assembly of the State of Indiana, convened in the Criminal Court Room of the Marion County Court House, and were called to order by the Secretary of State, Hon, E, K. Hawn-Major O. M. Wilson acting as Clerk by appointment of the Secretary of State.
The following named members came forward and received the oath (or affirmation) of office at the hands of Judge Niblack, one of the Judges of the Supreme Court of Indiana:
Rev. Myron W. Reed, of the First Presbyterian Church, of Indianapolis, offered prayer.
The SECRETARY OF STATE slated that there was a quorum present and announced the next business in order to be nominations for Speaker of the House.
Mr. HEFFREN placed in nomination Hon, Wm. D Bynum, of Marion County.
Mr. FRAZIER nominated Hon. A. J. Wright, of Grant County. There being no further nominations, the vote resulted for Mr. Bynum 57 votes, for Mr. Wright 41 votes.
Mr. Bynum having received a majority of all the votes cast, was declared by the Chair duly elected Speaker of the Fifty-third General Assembly.
The SECRETARY of STATE appointed Mr. Moody and Mr. Wright as a Committee to escort the newly-elected Speaker to the Chair.
Mr. BYNUM spoke as follows:
"Gentlemen of the House of Representatives:
" I thank you for the honor you have conferred upon me by selecting me to preside over
your de- liberations. I regret that I do not bring to the position that legislative
experience so necessary to a prompt and efficient discharge of the duties. I promise
you, however, that I will strive to obtain a perfect knowledge of the rules which may be
adopted for our government, and. when so obtained, shall endeavor to enforce them
impartially. I am cognizant of the fact that no presiding officer can successfully
discharge the duties of his position without the unqualified support of all the members
of the body over which he has control. I shall endeavor to so con- duct myself as to
merit not only your support, but also your confidence and esteem. If I am successful I
have no fears but what I shall receive them. The time allotted to us in which to trans-
act the necessary business of the State is short; yet by diligent labor we can and we
ought to com
Nominations for Principal Clerk being in order,
Mr. GIBSON nominated S. W. Edwins, of Madison County, for Principal Clerk.
Mr. MONTGOMERY nominated W. H> Hay, of Marion County.
There being no further nominations the ballot resulted for Mr. Edwins 57, and for Mr. Hay 39.
Mr. JEWETT nominated for Assistant Clerk William A. Peele, of Johnson County.
Mr. FRAZIER nominated W. J. Nichols, of Boone County.
There being no further nominations the vote resulted for Mr. Peele 56, for Mr. Nichols 40.
Mr. MOODY nominated for Doorkeeper Henry R. Frey, of Grant County.
Mr. STERRITT nominated D. A. Roberts, of Jefferson County.
There being no further nominations, the vote resulted for Frey 56, for Mr. Roberts 41.
Messrs. Edwins, Peele and Frey having received the majority of all the votes cast were sworn into office by Judge Niblack.
Mr. McMULLEN offered the following, which was adopted:
Resolved, That the Clerk inform the Senate that the House of Representatives has organized by the election of Hon. William D. Bynum, of Marion County, as Speaker, S. W. Edwins, of Madison County, as Principal Clerk, W. A. Peele, of Johnson County, as Assistant Clerk, H. B. Frey, of Grant County, Doorkeeper, and is now ready to proceed to legislative business.
Mr. HEFFREN offered the following, which was adopted:
Resolved, That the Rules of the last House of Representatives shall be the rules of this House until otherwise ordered, and that a Committee of three be appointed by the Speaker to report rules for the government of the House, which Committee shall report on Monday next.
Mr. MOODY offered the following, which was adopted:
Resslved, the Senate concurring therin, That the Joint Rules for conducting business in the two Houses of the General Assembly of the State of Indiana, adopted in the last General Session, be and the same are hereby adopted as such Joint Rules for the present session of the General Assembly.
Senators Marvin and Sayer appeared at the Bar of the House and announced themselves as a Committee appointed by the Senate to inform it of the organization of that body.
Mr. SHOCKNEY offered the following, which was adopted:
Resolved, That a Committee of two n the part of the House be appointed to act with a similar Committee on the part of the Senate to wait on His Excellency the Governor to inform him of the organization of the two Houses, and learn of him at what time it will suit his convenience to make whatever communication he may desire to make to the General Assembly.
Mr. MONTGOMERY offered the following, which was adopted:
Resolved, That the thanks of this House be tendered the Secretary of State, E. R. Hawn, and Rev. Myron W. Reed for their services rendered in the organization of this House.
Mr. FLEECE offered the following, which was adopted:
Resolved, That the Doorkeeper be instructed to invite ministers to open the session by prayer each morning.
Mr. WILEY offered the following:
Resolved, That a Committee of three members be appointed by the Speaker, whose duty it shall be to ascertain and report to the House at as early a day as possible how many Committee rooms are at the disposal of the House, and what kind of rooms may be had from the Commissioner of Marion County: and also what rooms may be procured of other persons and at what price such rooms may be had.
The resolution was adopted, and the SPEAKER subsequently made said Committee to consist of Messrs. Wiley, Jewett and Moody.
Mr. DEEM offered the following, which was adopted:
Resolved, That the officers of this House be requested (when the occasion will permit) to give the preference in their appointment of subordinates to soldiers who have lost limbs in the defense of our country.
A resolution was offered for the appointment of a Committee to notify the Senate that the House of Representatives is ready to proceed to legislative business.
On motion, the resolution was laid on the table.
Mr. ADAMS offered the following, which was adopted by consent:
Resolved, That the thanks of this House are hereby tendered to the State Librarian, Mrs. Winsor, for the manner in which she has arranged this hall for our reception and for courtesies extended to the members.
On motion it was ordered that when the House adjourn it adjourn until 10 o'clock to-morrow morning.
A MEMBER-I am informed that the Senate has adjourned till 10 o'clock to-morrow. I move that this House do now adjourn.
Mr. HEFFREN moved that the House take a recess till 2 o'clock-there is no use in fooling away a half day.
A MEMBER-A resolution has been passed that when we adjourn it will be till 10 o'clock to-morrow.
The SPEAKER-This is a motion for a recess. The question is on the adoption of the amendment.
The amendment was agreed to, and the motion as amended was adopted. So the House took a recess till 2 o'clock.
Mr. JEWETT moved to take from the table the resolution authorizing the appointment of a Committee to inform the Senate of the organization of the House. He was sure the Senate had taken a wrong step, and the House should not recede from its action.
Mr. STEWART was at a loss to know how the House can inform the Senate it is organized other than by sending a message to that effect by its Clerk. If the Senate does not received him, how are we to inform the Senate of our organization? He knew no good reason for taking the resolution from the table.
Mr. JEWETT did not think the House, on a mere question of dignity, should fritter
away a
Mr. ANTRIM-The mistake lies not in the action of the House. The House authorized its Clerk to notify the Senate that the House was organized. The Senate failed or refused to receive our communication. It was not a communication from the Clerk, but a communication from the House through its Clerk. We have clone all we can do. The Senate refuses to recognize our messenger. It is responsible for the delay, and the House is not.
Mr. FRAZTER-The Senate has refused to receive a notification from. The House announcing: our organization. There is but one way provided in the joint rules by which messages may be transmitted between the two Houses. There is no rule under which the Senate can send a message to the House by a member of this House. Somebody told our Committee to say something to the House. We have nothing but hearsay that the Senate has refused to accept our message as delivered by the Clerk. He made the point of order that the proper motion is to reconsider, and not to take from the table.
The SPEAKER decided the point of order not well taken.
The pending motion to take from the table was lost-yeas 43; nays, 44.
Pending the roll call-
Mr. A. W. BROOKS, of Allen, and Mr. B. S. GREEN, of Dubois and Martin, appeared at the bar of the House and were sworn in by the Speaker.
Mr. JEWETT offered a resolution for the appointment of a Committee of three to inform the Senate of the organization of the House and that it is ready to proceed with Legislative business.
A MEMBER desired the Clerk to state his action in the matter, and what the message contained.
By consent Mr. Clerk Edwins said: I went into the Senate Chamber, proceeded to the rear of the Chamber, and had the Doorkeeper or Sergeant-at-Arms announce a message from the House as usual. I addressed the President of the Senate, and read the message in the following words: "Mr. President-The House has instructed me to inform the Senate that they organized by the election of Hon. W. D. Bynum, of Marion County, Speaker; S. W. Edwins, of Madison County, Principal Clerk; H. B. Frey, of Grant County, as Doorkeeper, and is now ready to proceed to legislative business.
Mr. CAMPBELL-That is the substance of the resolution now offered, and I don't see the necessity of doing over again what we have done.
On motion of Mr. ANTRIM the resolution was laid on the table upon a division- affirmative, 55; negative, 33, as reported by Messrs. Jewett and Wilson, of Kosciousko, Tellers appointed by the Speaker.
Mr. HEFFREN introduced a bill [H. R. 1] for an act appropriating $125,000 to defray the expenses of the regular session of the Fifty-third General Assembly of Indiana, and other matters connected therewith. Which was read the first time, and under dispensation of the constitutional restriction requiring bills to be read on three several days, was read the second time by title only, the third time by sections and finally passed the House of Representatives-yeas, 93, nays 2.
Mr. McMcullen offered a resolution that the Speaker appoint a Committee of five to report the number of appointees as well as by whom appointed.
It was laid on the table.
Mr. KIRKPATRICK offered a resolution, which was adopted, that the thanks of the House be tendered Hon. 0. M. Wilson for services rendered in assisting in the organization of the House of Representatives.
Mr. HEFFREN-It is necessary that we have the Revised Statues. I am informed that they are on hand, and I move that the Secretary of State be requested to furnish members of the House with one copy each of the Revised Statues, to be returned to the Librarian at the expiration of the session.
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. MONTGOMERY offered a resolution reciting that whereas there are a great many persons anxiously awaiting the action of the General Assembly with regard to the election of officers in its gift, resolved, that a Committee of three be appointed by the House and a like Committee by the Senate to fix a time for such election in the near future.
On motion by Mr. HEFFREN it was laid on the table.
Mr. JEWETT offered a resolution that this House has learned with sincere regret of the death of Hon. H. S> Perrette, a member elected to this House from the County of Floyd, and said:
"I will not detain the House at any length, but it seems to me proper that something should be said when the House is about to take action in memory of the death of one of its members. Very few members had met him. His death occurred under more than ordinarily distressing circumstances, from the fact that the wife of his youth until within two weeks of his death was in the full flush of life. Yet she was stricken down, and he returned from her grave with the grasp of death in his ame. And his death was the more pitiful from the fact that he left three small children, the oldest of which is an inmate of the Asylum for the Deaf and Dumb. He was a man with a career not marked with any great public service, but he was a useful citizen and trusted friend. It was my painful pleasure, if such an expression may be allowed, to attend his funeral, and I never saw love manifested in a greater degree by the people of his neighborhood than at his burial. I move that this resolution be passed by a rising vote.
The resolution was so adopted.
Mr. HEFFREN-As a further mark of respect to the deceased I move that the House do now adjourn.
The motion was agreed to.
And so the House adjourned till to-morrow morning at 10 o'clock under the rule.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR called the Senate to order.
Rev Dr. Arthur T. Pierson, of the Second Presbyterian Church, opened the session with prayer.
The Secretary's minutes of yesterday's proceedings were read and approved.
Mr. BELL called up the resolution offered by the Senator from Elkhart [Mr. White] yesterday, for a, Joint Committee to wait upon the Governor, and it was adopted, Messrs. Bell and White being appointed on the part of the Senate.
Mr. VOYLE introduced a bill [S. 3] requiring County and Township officers to have and
keep a cash book; which was read the first time and referred to the
Mr. FOULKE offered a resolution requiring all bills introduced to contain a reference to the number of the statute it proposes to amend.
It was referred to the
Mr. VAN VORHIS offered a resolution requesting the Secretary of the Young Men's Christian Association to procure a minister of the Gospel to open each day's session with prayer.
Also a resolution making 2 o'clock Thursday, January 11, an hour for appropriate tributes to the memory of Hon. George H. Chapman, late a Senator from Marion County.
They were severally adopted.
Mr. YANCEY offered a resolution for a Special Committee on Woman's Suffrage
Mr. BELL moved to lay the resolution on the table.
This motion was agreed to by yeas, 27; nays, 21.
Mr. Brown offered a resolution for the appoint anent of a Select Committee of Five, of which the Lieutenant Governor shall be a member, to report rules for the government of the proceedings of the Senate.
Mr. SPANN made an ineffectual motion-yeas, 4; nays, 4-to lay it on the table.
The resolution was adopted.
Messrs. Brown, Spann, Graham and Bell were appointed by the Lieutenant Governor as said Committee.
The Committee appointed to wait on the Governor reported that His Excellency would deliver his message to the General Assembly this morning.
Mr. FOULKE offered a resolution to amend rule 8, by providing for a
Mr. SMITH offered a resolution requesting the Secretary of State to furnish a copy of official record in his office concerning proceedings of the General Assembly on the Constitutional amendment proposed in 1881, and also in relation to the Wabash and Erie Canal amendment, and certify whether the records in the adoption of other amendments show that the Constitution was complied with in this provision : "Such proposed amendments shall, with the proceedings thereon, be entered on their journals and referred to the next General Assembly."
Mr. WILLARD made an ineffectual motion-yeas, 23; nays, 26-to lay the resolution on the
table, as in his opinion it proposes to interfere with the rights of the
Mr SMITH: I hope the resolution will not be referred to the
Mr. BROWN: I am opposed to that resolution, and will state one or two reasons why I am
opposed to it. I have no objection to its going to the
[A message from the House by Chief Clerk Edwins informed the Senate that the House was ready to receive the Senate in Joint Convention to hear the Governor's message to the General Assembly]
Mr BROWN [resuming]: Now on the question as to whether the amendments are legally on
the Journals or not, the Legislature is the exclusive judge-its decision is final. No
Court can review t. If the Legislature decides that their amendments have not been
entered at large upon the journals, that is the end of it. If the Legislature decides
they have, that is the end of it. So we should not attempt to run away from meeting the
main proposition as suggested by this resolution. And it would be charging the
Senators then left their 'hanaber.in a body and proceeded to the Hall of the House of Representatives, to hear the Governor's biennial message to the General Assembly.]
When the Senate returned to its chamber the Senate took a recess (till 2 o'clock p. m.
A message from the House of Representatives announced the passage by that body of
the bill [H. R.
On motion by Mr. BELL the Constitutional rule requiring all bills to be read on three several days was set aside-yeas, 43; nays, 3-the bill read the first and second times by title only, the third time by section, and finally passed by yeas, 45; nays, 3, with an amendment by unanimous consent adding an emergency clause and an amended title.
The Senate resumed the consideration of the resolution pending at the noon recess.
Mr BELL objected to the resolution because it proposes to call for an opinion from the Secretary of State as to the legality of the action of the last Senate on the proposed Constitutional amendments. I do not think this is the time to discuss that question. As far as I am concerned personally, whenever that question comes before the Senate I propose to act as a man and as a lawyer-especially as a lawyer-and if convinced that the action of the last General Assembly was regular and legal, no one will say so more promptly than myself, notwithstanding lay opinion on some of these amendments. And even if they had not been so fixed I would easily take that position. If the resolution be amended so as to call for no opinion, for one I should have no objection to it. I think it premature to discuss the other question now, I think it one of the highest importance, entitled to our best consideration, and I have no doubt it will receive it. I think there is much in this bill that ought not to be there. I hope that tho Senator will leave out all that refers to the Wabash and Erie Canal, and for one I would like to have the question of the pending amendments to the Constitution. and the regularity of their passage by the last General Assembly comes, up unicumbered by any other question, whatever. Let us meet it like men, I pledge myself to fairness in its consideration, and I have no doubt other Senators will meet the question in the same spirit.
Mr. BROWN moved to amend by striking out all after the words or figures " 1881."
Mr. FOULKE: I am opposed to the amendment as offered by the Senator from Jackson [Mr.
Brown]. This matter of the certification of these papers is a matter of paramount
importance, if we may judge by the intensity of feeling shown on both sides, and by
the entire people of this State. It is of more importance than any matter which has
been before the General Assembly of Indiana for many years. It is true, this is a mere
Parliamentary question, but to a proper determination of how we shall act in this
matter, it is necessary to have documents and papers, both as to the law and as to the
facts. As to the facts, we must get everything necessary to the certification of the
proceedings had at the last General Assembly, and as to whether or not those
proceedings were fatal, it is necessary to know what the law is and it is proper to
know what has been the former practice as to amendments proposed to the Constitution
of this State. It is true the custom does not make law, but legislative interpretation
as to the passage of such amendments is certainly a good argument in the consideration
of this question. It seems to me we should have everything before us. I am not willing
that the
Mr. WILLARD: It seems to me we will have a
Mr. VOYLES: The design of the Senator from Delaware [ Mr. Smith], as I read his
resolution, is to obtain not only a certified copy of the proceedings in relation to
the Constitutional amendments, but also an opinion from the Secretary of State on that
subject. I do not know why he should seek an opinion on that subject, unless it be to
give him an opportunity to carry out some of his former pledges. I am reliably
informed that he was invited to give his opinion on those amendments during the last
canvass, and he said he was formulating his opinion and in the due time would
promulgate that opinion. It may be that the Senator from Delaware desires to give him
and opportunity to promulgate his opinion. But aside from that, I think we can get at
the facts without reference to anyone' opinion on the legality or standing of the
amendments. I think the proper way will be to refer the resolution to the
Mr. SPANN: It seems to me that there can be but one object with Senators on the other
side of this Chamber in urging that this resolution be referred to the
Mr. BELL: I regret that this question is being forced upon us as a political
question. Neither do I know by what authority the Senator from Rush [Mr. Spann] states
what the action of the
Mr. CAMPBELL: I am unable to comprehend why the simple resolution that the Senator
has offered should be regarded as in any sense partisan, neither can I comprehend why
It should have any reference, directly or indirectly, to the sentiments of any member
of the Senate on the temperance question; neither do I understand that the resolution
asks, directly or indirectly, the opinion of any body. It asks for documents to be
placed on our desks that we may know exactly the wording of the records, as we have a
right to know. I do not see that this vote should have any partisan bearing whatever.
I understand the object of sending any paper to a Committee is for the purpose of
having the opinion of that Committee in regard to the validity of such paper or
proposed action. The resolution asks for no action except the transmission to us for
the perusual a simple public record. I apprehend no Senator questions the validity of
such transmission, and that nobody doubts but that we have a legal right to ask that a
copy of such records may be spread before us. Then why should the resolution be sent
to the
Mr. FOULKE: I am opposed to leaving it to the discretion of any Committee as to
whether The Senate shall have sufficient data for its investigations, and that is what
this proposition is. Are we to have full and complete data for our investigation as to
whether these amendments are before us or not? I see no reason for submitting it to
the
Mr. SMITH: In the Introduction of this resolution I had no idea of causing this
debate. There is nothing in it but to request the Secretary of State to furnish
certain information. It asks no opinion. I would not be willing to respect his
opinion, because it is no better than that of any Senator on this floor. Senators have
gone into a discussion of the Constitution and other things not connected with this
matter. The question before the Senate is upon the reference of the resolution to the
This motion was rejected-yeas, 21; nays, 27.
Mr. BUNDY moved to amend the motion to commit by adding instructions to report not later than Wednesday.
The amendment was agreed to.
The motion as amended was also agreed to.
Mr. CAMPBELL offered a resolution instructing the Secretary of State to place on the desk of Senators a copy of the Revised Statutes, and take a receipt therefor from each member accepting a book, with the understanding that the copy shall be returned at the expiration of the member's term of office.
On motion by Mr. SPANN it was amended by by providing that the books shall be returned at the expiration of this Session.
The resolution as amended was adopted.
Mr; HILLIGASS offered a resolution requiring the Superintendent of Public Instruction to furnish a statement of the total amount of money unloaned school fund in the several Counties of this State.
On motion by Mr. BUNDY it was referred to the
Mr. WHITE offered the following:
Resolved, That on requisition of the Secretary of the Senate,the State Librarian be and is dircted to furnish the necessary stationery suplies for the use of the Senate Chamber for transacting of the business of the Senate; and on requisition of the Senate Chairmen of the Standing Committes be furnished for the use of said Committees in transacting the business of the State before them the necessary stationery supplies.
It was adopted.
Mr. BROWN moved to reconsider the vote by which the resolution concerning stationery for the Senate was adopted.
Pending which the Senate adjourned.
Mr. Speaker BYNUM called the House to order and announced prayer by Representative Frazee, of Rush County.
The Clerk's journal of yesterday's proceedings was read, corrected and approved.
A message from the Senate by Principal Secretary Kelley announced the passage of a resolution by the Senate for the appointment of a Joint Committee to wait upon the Governor. This resolution was concurred in by the House, and the SPEAKER made the Committee on the part of the House to consist of Representatives Shockney and Wilson, of Marion.
Mr. HEFFREN offered a resolution requiring the secretary of State to furnish a copy of the Revised Statues to each member of the House.
Mr. WRIGHT moved an amendment requiring each member to receipt for the copy furnished.
The amendment was laid on the table and the resolution was adopted.
The SPEAKER announced the appointment of pages, to-wit: Wm. Moriarty, George Mitchell, Daniel McCrossland and Richard Slater.
Mr, SHOCKNEY, from the Committee appointed to wait upon the Governor, reported that His Excellency was now ready to deliver his biennial message to the Legislature. On his further motion the Clerk was directed to invite the Senate to a joint Convention instanter for the purpose of hearing said message, and a Committee of two was appointed to conduct the Senate to the hall of the House.
Mr. COPELAND offered the following;
Resolved, By the House (the Senate concurring: therein) that we, the
Representatives of the State
It was adopted.
The SPEAKER announced the Committee on Rules, authorized by the resolution of the gentleman from Washington, adopted yesterday morning, to wit': Messrs. Heffren, Wilson of Marion, Wright, Moody and Frazee.
The House then took a recess till after the Joint Convention.
The Senate appeared, preceded by the House Committee of escort. The Lieutenant Governor, seated on the right of the Speaker, called the Convention to order, Governor Porter then delivering his message as follows:
Gentlemen of the Senate and House of Representatives : The circumstances under which you assemble could not well be more satisfactory. The condition of the State has never been more prosperous. During the year just ended the products of our fields have been unusually abundant. Our manufacturing and mining industries have yielded good returns. Within the last year 560 miles of railway nave been built within the State-a larger number than in a any previous year. Of the ninety-two Counties in the State, there are only four through which railroads do not pass, and three of these happily border on the Ohio River. More than 225,000 acres of land have, during the year, been brought for the first time into cultivation. The practice of underdraining soils charged , with an excess of moisture has never been so energetically prosecuted. Along with it has come increased productiveness and a lessening of all malarial diseases. Our common schools, under the careful (superintendence of a diligent and capable officer, have increased n usefulness and in public favor.
The State is indebted as follows:
The accumulated interest upon the twenty-four old bonds above mentioned should be added, but the precise amount can not now be stated.
The indebtedness of the State to the school fund is evidenced by five non-negotiable bonds for the aggregate sum of $3,904,783 22, bearing 6 per cent interest; and the indebtedness to Purdue University is evidenced by one bond for $340,000, bearing 5 per cent. interest.
This amount, it will be perceived, falls considerably below the estimate for 1882.
The estimate required by law to be made by the Auditor of State to the General Assembly at each biennial meeting, of the expenditures to be made from the Treasury for the ensuing two fiscal years, can not, of course, anticipate all the expenditures which may prove to be necessary. There are always in the case, even items included in his estimate, appropriations which exceed the sums estimated, and there are always appropriations for other proper and necessary objects which naturally could not be foreseen when the Auditor's estimate was made. A chief purpose of the Auditor's estimate is to enable the Legislature to perceive within what limits other disbursements must be confined. In order to avoid the necessity of a higher rate of taxation. When appropriations, however, have been made by the Legislature in excess of sums estimated, or for objects not included within the estimates, it is proper that they shall be brought to public attention, in order to undergo a fair public scrutiny.
It will be perceived that the receipts to the general fund from all sources during the fiscal year 1881 and 1882 have fallen short of like receipts during the fiscal year 1881. The receipts to the general fund in 1880 were $1,477,609 92, and in 1882 were only $1,260,401 64, falling off of $217,208 28 during the latter year. The cause of this decrease is as follows:
The appraisement of all taxable real estate in this State was, prior to the passage of the statute of 1881, required by law to be made once in five years. The last appraisement was made in 1880. The next preceding one was in 1875, when the prices of real estated were yet inflated. The appraisement of 1880 fell below that of 1875 $155,424,597. The assessed value of personal property in 1880 was also less than 1879 by $54,223,545. None of the taxes levied under this lower assessment were payable to the State Treasurer until in May, 1881. At that time half of the State taxes for 1880 were required, by law, to be paid into the Treasury. The other half was not required to be paid into the treasury until January, 1882. The taxes collected for the fiscal year 1881 were one-half collected under the high valuation of real estate made in 1875, and one-half under the lower valuation of 1880. The taxes for the fiscal year 1882 were all collected under the lower valuation of 1880.
The taxes received into the General Fund of the State Treasury in 1881, fell short of the taxes receive to 1880, for the reasons above stated, $42,175 33, and in 1882 fell short of the taxes received in 1880 $158,063 97.
For the last fiscal year the State Government has had to be conducted on less revenue than for several years preceding.
Although, however, no new appraisement of the real estate will be made for purposes of taxation until the year 1866. the great increase of personal property has begun to be apparent of the tax lists, and by 1884 will probably have swollen the total value of taxables to as high an amount as they have ever been in any recent period of the State's history.
In addition to the revenues of the State will be apparent hereafter by the higher appraisement of the State Board of Equalization, during the years 1881 and 18S2, of the right of way and other property of Railway Companies The enlarged earnings of these Companies were deemed to justify an average increase to the extent of 10 per cent. in the valuation of property returned by them for taxation. n addition to this increase there has been an increased assessment, through the vigilance of the Auditor of Scale, by securing an assessment of buildings and improvements, such as machine shops and other expensive structures, situated on what the Courts have interpreted to be the "right of way" of these Companies, which, since 1872 had for the most part escaped taxation. The revenue, however, from the taxation of such buildings and improvements would be still further augmented, without an infliction of injustice, by a requirement that they shall ba appraised by local officers in the Townships in which they ara situate. The State Board of Equalization can never ascertain their value with satisfactory accuracy.
Under a loose interpretation given to our statute concerning Voluntary Association, the State's revenues from Insurance Companies are being diminished, and an injury is being inflicted upon many communities by irresponsible and fraudulent Insurance Companies, from other States and at home, which are engaged in the transaction of business under the shelter of that enactment. These Companies have so far afflicted the business of sound and responsible Companies, doing a fair and legitimate business, and honestly paying their taxes, as seriously to diminish their earnings and to make some of them contemplate a withdrawal of their agencies from the State. There is need for a prompt adoption of such, measures as will put a stop to fraudulent and speculative schemes which, sheltering themselves under the law of the State, inflict great injury upon our citizens and bring reproach upon the State itself.
The average daily number of inmates in the Hospital for the Insane, during the last fiscal year, was 1,070. The average cost per capita for maintenance, exclusive of clothing, is stated to have been $184,97.
The number of pupils at the Institution for the Education of the Deaf and Dumb, at the end of the last fiscal year, was 344. The average daily attendance is not given in the reports. The cost per capita is stated to have been $156.32,
The number of pupils enrolled at the Institute for the Education of the Blind, during the fiscal year, was 126, The reports do not give the average dally attendance. The cost per capita is stated to have been $216.67.
The number of pupils at the Soldiers' Orphans' Home and the Asylum for Feeble Minded
Children, institutions under one roof and one government, is stated in the
Superintendent's report to have been as follows: Soldiers' orphans present at the end
of the fiscal year, 137. Twenty other orphans are accounted for by the
Superintendent's statement that three have "eloped," and that seven teen have failed
to return after the summer vacation. Of feeble-minded children, eighty-one pupils are
reported as having
The two last named institutions are not, with respect to the reports required of the Trustees and Superintendent, governed by the statute relating to the other benevolent institutions The statute does not define with the same particularity what the reports shall contain. Nor does the statute relating to any of chem define the mode of determining the cost per capita of maintain their inmates. An examination of the reports of the several institutions will, I think, snow that a uniform rule of ascertainment does not prevail, and that the mode of ascertainment In one or two of them, quite unintentionally no doubt, is untrustworthy.
I recommend that a common requirement be adopted with respect to what shall be shown in the reports of the Trustees and Superintendents of the several institutions, and that the manner in which the cost per capita of maintains the in mates shall be ascertained, shall be specifically defined by law.
Your attention is respectfully invited to the recommendations contained in the report of the Trustees of the Hospital for the Insane, and which are strongly reinforced in the able and instructive report of the Superintendent of that institution.
The capacity of the buildings erected by the State for the care of the insane, spacious and imposing as they are, is sufficient for little more than half of the State's insane. Those who are unable, for lack of room in the State's Hospital, to be admitted as patients, suffer great and often cruel, neglect. They are confined in uncomfortable and sometimes shocking quarters in Poor Houses, where they received insufficient attention, or they are a burden upon poor kindred who are unable to make adequate provision for them, and to whom they are a source of distressing anxiety. and often of danger. Or provision for the insane is so inadequate that it falls quite below the provision made for the same class of sufferers by neighboring States. The mode suggested by the Superintendent for enlarging hospital accommodations is commended to your earnest consideration.
The provision contained in our statues for ascertaining the number of insane, deaf and dumb, blind and idiotic persons is imperfectly executed. Township Assessors are charged with the duty of ascertaining, at the time of assessing personal property, the number of such persons in their respective Townships; but this requirement is so frequently neglected that these lists furnish very imperfect information. A specific penalty should be prescribed for a neglect to perform this important duty.
The clause in the revised code which provides that a summons against an insane person who has no guardian shall, where such person is confined in a Hospital, be served upon the Superintendent, is regarded generally by the legal profession as not being applicable to writs of summons issues in divorce cases, and against administrators and guardians in the course of the settlement of estates. The consequence is that inmates of the Insane Hospital are often greatly excited and their recovery retarded by a personal service upon them of writs. This clause of the statute should, it would seem, be made to include all writs of summons in civil proceedings.
I recommend that in the department for women in this Hospital it shall be required by law that at least one of the physicians shall be a woman. There are now in this State not a few women who bear diplomas from respectable Medical Colleges, and who are qualified by professional attainmen's and experience to fill places as physicians in public institutions with credit and usefulness. It would be peculiarly fit that their services should be sought in cases of insanity among members of their own sex.
Three claims of considerable magnitude are pending against the State for work and materials under contracts entered into the Provisional Board of the Insane Hospital, it being the Board charged by law with the duty of constructing the building for the department for women. Two of the claims have been refused. One has been allowed by a compromise with the contractor, subject to a condition that the Legislature shall make an appropriation for its payment, there being now no appropriation available for that use. The facts relating to the case, briefly stated, are these: The Provisional Board advertised for bids for the brick work of the building, the work to be executed and paid for according to the plans and specifications of the State's Architect. The specifications provided for a measurement of the work in the wall as the work progressed, according to the rule of mason measurement of work in the wall, then in use in Indianapolis. The bid of the claimant, John Martin, was accepted. Before, however, a formal contract had been entered into with him, the State's Superintendent of Construction, himself a member of the Board, desired that what were the rules of mason measurement of brick in the wall at Indianapolis should be precisely defined in the contract, requested the claimant to allow a clause to be inserted providing that the measurement contemplated should be according to the printed rules of the master builders and contractors for brick work in this city. The clause having been inserted, the contract was reported to the Board and signed on behalf of the State by Governor Hendricks, the President, and by every other member. Before the allowance to the claimant was made, for which he will ask an appropriation, the work was carefully measured by the State's architect and by two experts especially appointed by the Board for that purpose, and their several measurements having agreed, the allowance was made in conformity thereto.
It is perhaps due to Mr. Martin to state that in a report made to the Governor by the Superintendent of Construction, when the work was nearly completed, he referred to his work as having been prosecuted diligently, and in the most satisfactory manner, and added that he felt it due to Mr. Martin to make a public record of the fact that he had "from the beginning manifested a constant, active and earnest interest in his work, with evident purpose, that it should be an honest job, creditable to the State as well as to himself."
The capacity of the Institute for the Education of the Blind is now insufficient for the accommodation of more than half of the blind youth, who, by law, are entitled to the benefits of the Institution. The edifice was completed for the admission of blind pupils more than thirty years ago, and has never been enlarged. Applicants are constantly refused admission to the Institution on account of the want of rom. Provision should be made by law for an enlargement of the building.
The Soldiers' Orphans' Home and Asylum for Feeble Minded Children should be regarded,
on account of the character of both classes of pupils, with particular favor. It has
had to struggle under the difficulty of narrow appropriations, and, during a party of
its history, with other difficulties hardly less serious. The instructors have,
however been diligent and devoted to duty, and the progress of pupils has been highly
satisfactory. The soldiers' orphans have been particularly proficient in their
studies, and the success attained in unfolding and strengthening the faculties of the
feeble minded children has been most
Your attention is particularly invited to the report of the House of Refuge for juvenile offenders. The average number ot inmates during the year ; was 350. The expense of providing the equipments and instructors requisite for teaching the boys in this institution the most useful manual occupations has been found too great, in the opinion of past Legislatures, to warrant in making the necessary appropriation. A boy, as the case now is, though instructed in the simpler braches of education, leaves the Institution, in most cases, little better fitted to earn a livelihood, so far as manual skill is concerned, than when he entered it. He is to apt, on that account, to fall back into a life of crime. A system of industrial education has recently found much favor, which, not professing to teach manual trades, gives boys a dexterity in handicraft which maybe equally useful in many different trades. It instructs them in the use of what, it has been said, are the "half dozen universal tools," viz : the hammer, saw, plane, chisel, file and square. It is said that "in all the constructions a certain number of typical forms are found, which, being more or less modified, adapt themselves to special cases. These forms will also shape themselves into groups, each to be worked out in a certain way and with special tools; and the student taught to work out these forms each in the best way and with the tools best suited for the work will be far advanced in the skill which will make him available and useful in construction." A boy instructed in this way in a knowledge of forms and acquiring aptness and dexterity in the use of tools, would leave the Institution with a feeling of capability and self-confidence; could more readily obtain employment, and could speedily qualify himself for almost any of the various lucrative trades. One teacher it has been found can instruct thirty-two students at a time in this system, and boys going through the exercises in separate classes at different times, the education can be imparted with very little cost either in implements or materials. I invite your attention to the schools that at Boston, St. Louis and elsewhere, have recently entered upon this new system of industrial education for indigent boys, and to the propriety of such legislation as will give it a fair trial in our House of Refuge.
Under the guise of committing children to this i institution as incorrigible, or as juvenile offenders, children are often sent to it by the Courts who are simply poor, or whose parents, desiring to get rid of the cost of care of rearing them, are willing to make them a charge upon the State. Children merely poor should not be allowed to be thrown into association with juvenile offenders, and the sternest; vigilance should be practice to prevent negligent parents from shifting upon the State the responsibility of maintaining and rearing their offspring. Besides, it is not possible to ascertain to what extent the class of boys intended to be received into this Institution are reformed, if children not criminal or incorrigible are admitted. Sufficient provisions should promptly be made by law against the abuse of admiting boys not belonging to the classes of criminal and incorrigible.
The recommendation of the Superintendent that boys released from the Institution upon tickets of leave shall be placed by law under the surveillance of the Township Trustees in the Counties to which they are sent, seems to be a most judicious one. A knowledge by boys thus released that their conduct was watched by persona of character, for an honest purpose of preserving their morals, would help to restrain them from returning to crime. The additional advantage would also be gained that if they should fall again into a profligate life they could promptly be returned to the Institution for further discipline.
The management of the Reformatory for Women and Girls deserves unqualified commendation. A desire to keep expenditures within the limits of appropriations and to administer the Institution with proper economy, has been constantly evident. The proportion of inmates who, after their return to their homes, lead correct lives is greater than the most sanguine might reasonably have expected.
There is reason for regret that in selecting a site for the Reformatory more regard was not had to convenient facilities for sewerage. The only means for conveying the sewerage from the building is by the current of a rivulet that, after passing through the grounds, runs through a populous part of Indianapolis. With all the care that can be exercised, and an exhaustion of all means of purification, complaints are made of offensive odors. The stream, after passing through the grounds of the Reformatory, runs in part through and in part near the edge of the United States Arsenal grounds, and persons there employed have induced the authorities at Washington to cause a suit to be instituted in the United States Circuit Court at Indianapolis to enjoin the Trustees from allowing the sewage to be conveyed through said stream.
Nothing but a belief that the present Legislature will, by a proper law, provide for building a sewer by which the waste from the Reformatory will be carried off by other means than said stream has, it is believed, prevented an allowance of an injunction. Provision by law for the construction of a proper sewer is imperatively necessary.
An act was passed by the last General Assembly providing for the construction of such a sewer at the joint expense of the State and city of Indianapolis; but, as the consent of the city to bear its proportion of the outlay was requisite before the work could be undertaken, the work fell through, the city not having given the needed consent. As the sewer will be of material benefit to the city, it is just that it should bear a due proportion of the expense.
The necessity for a walled enclosure for the purpose of allowing a space for needful exercise for women sentenced for crimes whom it would be unsafe to permit to be at large upon open grounds is evident, and an appropriation of the comparatively small amount asked for by the managers would seem to be most proper.
The State's Prisons at Jeffersonville and Michigan City are more nearly self-supporting than they have been for several years.
The average number of prisoners at the former Prison during the past year was 564. The average number of prisoners at the Prison of Michigan City was 621.
The specific appropriation bill which failed at the last session of the General
Assembly, on account of its consideration having been deferred to too late a period of
the session, contained an appropriation of $5,000 for building special wards at the
Prison of Michigan City, for the use of insane prisoners, and for a transfer to that
Prison of all insane prisoners in the Prison at Jeffersonville. I earnestly urge the
appropriation of a proper sum of money for the building of cells at the former Prison
for insane prisoners, which shall be remote from the cells of other convicts. The
insane convicts are at present, for want oi any other provision, kept in cells so near
those of
The abbreviation of the terms of sentences allowed by statute to prisoners for good conduct is believed not to be sufficiently liberal. No incentive to good behavior is found to be so strong with them as a knowledge that such behavior will shorten the term of imprisonment. I earnestly recommend legislation giving to prisoners whose conduct has been continually exemplary, a larger credit for good conduct on their sentences. The effect of such legislation would be followed, I have no doubt, by a great improvement in discipline, and a lessening of expense in the conduct of the Prisons.
Complaint is made by the city authorities of Michigan City that the sewage of the Prison at that city, which is conveyed into a small stream called Fish Lake Creek, occasions a nuisance injurious to the health of the inhabitants. The growth of the city has recently been rapid, and its limits now extend beyond the point at which this refuse is conveyed into the stream. The necessity for the construction of a sewer by the State seems to be urgent.
The number of persons in the State of School age, viz., between the age of six and twenty-one years, is 709,424. The number admitted to the schools was, in 1882, 498,792. The average daily attendance of pupils last year was 30,513. The number of school teachers is 13,259. The number of school houses in the State is 9,556, of which forty-eight are log, eighty-three are stone, 2,481 are brick, and 6,944 are frame.
The amount of Public Fund is $9,138,408.31. The addition made to it annually taking as a basis an average of the pest five years, exceeds $54,000. This sum does not include the large sum-about $260,000 a year-received from particular licenses and other sources, and applied each year to tuition.
The amount of tuition money derived from interest on the school funds in 1882 was $650,173.41. The whole amount received from State and local tuition taxes was $2,059,616.44. The proportion of the entire expense of tuition paid from taxes, State and local, was 75 per cent.
It will thus be seen that, ample as our school fund is, three-fourths of the expenses of tuition are derived from public taxes. The fact that these taxes are paid without complaint, is the highest evidence of the esteem in which the Public School system is held.
The report of the State Superintendent of Public Instruction is replete with interesting facts and suggestions.
The State Normal School is shown, by the report of the Trustees and Superintendent, to be in a highly flourishing condition. The average number of students during last year was 302. The need for a moderate appropriation for the purchase of apparatus for the instruction in the sciences is urgent.
The important suggestions contained in the reports of the Trustees of the State University and of the Trustees and Presdent of Purdue University will properly engage your most considerate attention.
The State Board of Agriculture has shown commendable zeal during the past year in the discharge of its official duties. It is required by law to hold a meeting in the month of January of every year, together with the delegates from the several County Societies, for the purpose of deliberation and consultation respecting the "wants, prospect, and condition of agriculture throughout the State." At this meeting reports from the County Societies, required to be made annually, with regard to the condition of agriculture in the several Counties, are delivered, pursuant to law, to the President of the State Board. It was doubtless the expectation of the framers of the statute that these County reports would furnish the chief basis for the deliberations and consultations of the Board relating to the condition and prospects of agriculture in the State. If filed a proper time before the January meeting they doubtless would but not baing delivered until after the meeting has begun, they can not be examined during the meeting with any care, and therefore form no basis for consultation or deliberation. The consequence is that they are, as a general rule, hastily prepared, contained little varied or specific information, and fall to present with fullness or vividness the condition of agriculture in the Counties.
If the reports were required to be delivered to the Secretary of the State Board by the 1st of December of each year, and it were made his duty to present to the Board at its January meeting a copious abstract of their contents, and to arrange and index them so that the several subjects could be readily referred to they would soon form a basis for the deliberations and discussions of the Board, and their quality would be greatly improved. It would be good policy for the State to offer a reasonable premium annually for the best County report. This would excite emulation, and in the end would make these reports of much value to our farmers.
Some of the professors of Purdue University-the State's Agricultural College-devote the greater part of every year to studies and experiments in agriculture. If these particular professors were made members of the State Board, they would impart much freshness and interest to its discussions, and give to it increased energy and spirit. I recommend that two members of the Faculty of Purdue University be made ex officio members of the Board.
The number of coal mines in the State is 150. The number of miners employed in them is 5,100. The production exceeds 2,000,000 tons a year.
The law in relation to coal mines, through carefully framed, is believed to need some amendment in order to give proper security to the lives of miners. The State Inspector is a practical miner of long experience, and thoroughly acquainted with the needs of miners. Hempen ropes for hoisting are, in his opinion, unsafe in cases of fire. Besides, no ordinary inspection can detect with certainty secret defects which often render them unreliable. Steel wire ropes should be required to be substituted in their place. Every mine, in the Inspector's opinion, should have at least two outlets. Where a furnace is employed for the purposes of ventilation, and one of the outlets i used for the escape of smoke and steam, the outlet so used is useless as a means of retreat in case of sudden danger. A mine in this condition has practically but one outlet. An additional one should, in such cases, be required.
It is made the duty of the Mine Inspector to examine all scales used in any coal mine
for the purpose of weighing coal taken out of the mine, Miners are usually paid by the
ton for their work. Justice to them and the preservation of harmony between them and
their employers require that correct scales shall be used. The State, however, not
having provided the Inspector with sealed weights, he has no accurate means of
determining satisfactorily whether scales are correct. The
The General Assembly, at its special session in 1881, enacted a law providing for an appointment by the Governor of a Commissioner of Fisheries Commissioners had previously been appointed, under provisions of law, in thirty-one States of the Union and two of the Territories. I appointed to the office a gentleman who had given much study to the habits of fishes and to their propagation, and had been specially successful in the cultivation of the carp. I invite your attention to the suggestions contained in his report. The law of 1881 seems to have been intended rather to set on foot an intelligent investigation into the best means of restoring our many fishing streams, and of preventing a renewal of the reprehensible practices by which they have been impoverished, than to provide an efficient plan for supplying these streams, or to prevent a wanton or thoughtless depopulation of them. The business of fishing, if our fishes were undisturbed in the spawning season would soon become a profitable industry, and would give employment to many citizens. A most wholesome and nutricious food would soon be made abundant. The temperature of our streams and lakes, and their purity, adapt them to a great variety of fishes. The black bass, which multiply so rapidly when their spawning grounds are undisturbed, that artificial propagation is never necessary, is native to our streams. The carp can be successfully and inexpensively cultivated. It has been described by Professor Baird, United States Fish Commission- er, as being emphatically a farmer's fish. On account of requiring little more care than his swine and poultry. If Indiana has lagged somewhere behind a majority of her sister States in providing for restocking her nearly numberless streams and the beautiful lakes which abound near her northern border, shall she not make up for time neglected by a prompt adoption of the best methods, by the passage of wise protective laws, and by a resolute spirit on the part of her inhabitants to secure their enforcement ?
The Department of Statistics, separated by the last General Assembly from the Department of Geology, has been conducted with zeal and energy, and has collected statistics on a variety of subjects of general popular interest. Its monthly crop reports have been received with much favor by farmers and dealers in produce. It has, during the pass year. organized a corps of efficient weather observers, who have reported monthly to the head of the Department, their daily observations. These reports, having been transmitted regularly to the office of the Signal Service at Washington, have been commended for their fullness and accuracy, and they are contributing to the stock of knowledge which will gradually enable skillful observers to make longer and more accurate forecasts of the weather. The corps has been equipped with a small outfit of intruments by the United States Signal Service, but has served without any compensation.
The report of the Commissioner is so replete with information of general value that it will, no doubt, be examined by you with interest, and aid you in some parts of the work of legislation.
The report of the State Geologist has attracted much attention among scientists on account of its bringing to light new organic remains found among the rocks of the State, and on account of surface discoveries of a novel and important character. His tests of Indiana building stone, showing the superior quality thereof with respect to the important features of endurance and elasticity, have opened new markets for the stone and much increased the sale thereof. Beds of gravel have also been found by him, at places where the existence of such deposits had not before been suspected, which are furnishing material for improved roads. The State Geological Cabinet has been increased during the past year by an addition, with trifling expense, of more than 40,000 interesting and valuable specimens. New coal deposits have also been discovered and public attention directed to them.
This Board was established by an act of the last General Assembly. Twenty-six States had previously established like Boards. The work of the Board has been prosecuted with zeal. Its report, and the report of its executive officer, give a full statement of the work done since it entered upon the discharge of its duties.
The large collections made by the Attorney General of moneys received by various officers, which were payable to the State, but had been withheld, and the result of important suits in which the State has been interested, as well as the condition of pending suits, are shown by his report. The litigation involving the title to the valuable tract, of land near Indianapolis, purchased 'many years since as a sue for the House of Refuge, but not used as such, consisting of 100' acres, has been decided in favor of the State, and the State has quiet possession of the land.
By a reference to the report of the Secretary of State, it will be seen that a deficiency has existed for several years in the appropriations for public printing. The work is done for a fair price, but the cost of what necessarily must be done exceeds somewhat the sums appropriated. In this connection I beg to call your attention to the fact that the law should define with more precision what printing shall be paid for out of the general appropriation.
Attention is called with pleasure to the energetic and successful efforts of the Adjutant General to increase the numbers and improve the discipline of our active militia. The encampment held at Indianapolis last summer, at which some of the most prominent militia companies of the country engaged in a competition for prizes with our own companies, and with one another, drew to it a vast number of interested spectators, gave a renewed impulse to the martial spirit, and has been productive of excellent results. I take this occasion to render acknowledgements to the gentlemen composing my staff for their arduous and disinterested services on that occasion. Since the encampment broke up, many new companies have been formed, and a disposition to elevate the standard of attainment in all military exercises has been manifest. The recommendations contained in the Adjutant General's report are commended to your careful consideration. I particularly urge upon you the importance of passing a law, in conformity to his recommendation, to provide for copying into record books, to be procured for that purpose, the muster-in ar.d muster-out rolls of the Indiana soldiers. These contain an account of the service of each soldier. When this record shall have been made, a frequent handling of original papers will be unnecessary. and the papers will thus be preserved from injury. It will be a reproach to the State if a performance of this duty shall be longer neglected. There is a necessity also that you shall provide, without delay, a fire-proof vault for the purpose of securing these papers against the hazards of fire. Their destruction would do incalculable injustice to persons having the strongest Claims to grateful recognition by the State.
In conformity to a requirement contained in the act of 1881, concerning the publication of the new revised statutes, I appointed the gentlemen composing the Board of Revision, Commissioners to prepare these statutes for publication and to Superintend the publication thereof. The last delivery of the copies required by law to be filed in the Clerks' offices of the several Counties was made in July, 1882.
The act of 1881 provided that the Commissioners should hold their positions until the first day of November of that year, and that the Commissioners and the Governor should, on the final adjournment of the General Assembly, advertise for bids for the printing and delivery of the statutes. A clause required the Commissioners to annotate the contents of the volume, so as to show, by proper reference, the time when all statutes in eluded in the volume went into force.
A literal compliance with the terms of the aet Of 1881, with respect, to the time for advertising for bids, was found to be impossible. The work assigned to the Commissioners could not, by the utmost labor they could bestow, be completed within the time prescribed, and no intelligent bid or bid at all favorable to the State could have been expected had bids been solicited when the work was in the incomplete condition it was at the time of the adjournment of the Legislature. Besides, the volume containing the session arts of 1881 was so large, on account of the bills brought before the Legislature by the Board for the revision of laws, that the printing could not be completed until a period much later than had been usual in the printing of session acts Hence the annotation of the time when the acts passed at the session of 1881 took effect could not be made as early as the Legislature had contemplated. When the time fixed for the expiration of the offices of the Commissioners arrived they, therefore, from public motives and at much personal inconvenience, continued in the performance of their labor, without any provision for further compensation, until the work contemplated by law had been completed and the statutes were ready for delivery.
The act of 1881 prescribed with particularity what kind of type and in what style the Revised Statutes should be printed. The contract was let in conformity to the terms of the act. Had the volume, however, been prepared in that manner it would have been most inconvenient and unsightly. Fortunately the contractor was willing to print the volume in a much better type, and to bind it in a much more attractive style, at the price which had been named in the contract and it was accordingly prepared in this manner, with the consent of the Commissioners and to the general satisfaction of the legal profession. It is a volume which the Commissioners have truly said is "a credit to the printers' art."
The cost of the printing, binding and delivery was $22,233 76, being $2 766.24 less than the appropriation for the purpose.
The Commissioners in their contract took the precaution to provide that, as soon as the number of volumes prescribed by law had been printed, the stereotype plates employed in printing it, should without additional charge, be turned over to the State.
No provision having been made by law for securing a copyright, the Commissioners took out a copyright in their own names, which they promptly assigned to the State. In compliance with a request from them, I recommend the passage of an act formally accepting the assignment.
The stereotype plates can occasionally be used to advantage by the State, and could also be used by private parties, in printing separately for circulation, particular acts contained in the volume. I recommend that provision be made by law, for a temporary use of the plates by private parties, for a proper consideration, at the discretion of the Board of Public Printing.
For the laborious work performed by the Commissioners after the end of their term of office, I have no doubt it will be the pleasure of the General Assembly to provide a proper compensation;,
The progress of the work upon the new State House since the General Assembly last met has, on the whole, been satisfactory. While in 1881 the work did not proceed quite as actively as had been anticipated, it has during the year just closed been prosecuted as diligently as the most sanguine could well have hoped. Under the careful and vigilant supervision of the Commissioners, it is believed that it has been thoroughly well executed, and will bear the sternest tests. It is a subject of great regret that the execution of the remainder of the work is liable to be retarded by a dissatisfaction on the part of the contractors, arising from losses said by them to have been necessarily incurred while they have been engaged in a diligent and faithful performance of their contract. The cost of materials and the prices of labor have risen, as they claim, altogether above what they expected, or what might reasonably have been expected, when they entered upon their undertaking. If they should decline to proceed further under existing circumstances, grave duty will be devolved upon you in determining what curse will be the wisest to secure an early and satisfactory execution of the unfinished part of the work.
Provision was made in the contract that changes directed by the Commissioners, with the consent of the contractors, during the progress of the work, should not operate to discharge the liability of the sureties upon the contractors' band, and in every instance where changes have been made they have been made with the consent of the contractors, and in conformity to an opinion of the Attorney General that the change would not release the sureties.
At the last session of the General Assembly an ; act was passed empowering the Governor to appoint a Civil Engineer to make a survey of the wet and swamp lands of the Kaukakee region in this State, and to take levels, and make careful estimates, with a view of ascertaining the cheap est and most practicable outlets and routes, by which to effect successfully a drainage of that vast body of fertile lands. An appropriation of $5,000 was made to enable the Engineer to prosecute the work, and the Governor was empowered at his discretion, to direct surveys to be made of other wet lands for a like purpose.
The vast region of the Kaukakee is shown to be one of the most fertile regions of the
State, and, by the excavation of a nearly straight channel to conduct the water of the
river, a sufficient fall can be obtained to effect a thorough damage. The ease with
which the channel can be constructed is most gratifying, and the cost of effecting a
drainage, however considerable it may appear, bears no sort ot proportion to the
additional value which drainage will impart to the lands. These lands, on account of
their proximity to Chicago, are covered by a network of leading lines of railroads.
The estimates of the Engineer, who is of a cautious and
It was hoped that the rocky bottom of the bed of the river, which begins in Illinois, two miles west of our State line, would not at that point oppose any obstacle to a thorough drainage, but the Engineer believes that the water, flowing through its new channel, holding particles of earth in suspension, would be likely to deposit a sediment at that point and make a bar which might render lands adjacent to the river liable to overflow. He thinks that for a distance of half the length of the contemplated channel the work of drainage can safely be prosecuted without delay, but that the rest of the work should await an acquisition of the right to remove for a specified distance the rocky obstruction referred to. A belief has been expressed, however, by some hydraulic engineers that until the new channel shall practically cease to make the stream muddy any tendency to create a bar at the point mentioned might probably be prevented by one of the small vessels needed, at any rate, to be maintained in the river for some time after the completion of the work, being fitted with simple mechanical appliances, enabling it to stir the sediment and keep it in suspension until it can pass off in the current which flows freely over the rocky bottom of the river at that point.
With respect to the manner in which this important understaking shall be prosecuted, there will no doubt be found a diversity of opinion. The law of 1869, which intended to provide a practical scheme for the the accomplishment of the work, was repealed by the General Assembly soon after its enactment. It was found that the effect of the law would be to subject to sale for a non-payment of assessments the lands of most of the small proprietors. Such proprietors can not pay any considerable assessments until an increase of crops, occasioned by the reclamation of their lands, provides them with the means of payment. Some method must be devised, if they are to be protected by which the work may go on and there may be a reasonable delay in the collection of the assessments. With respect to the portion of these lands included n the grant of swamp lands made to the State by the United States, the State engaged, when it sold them, that the proceeds of the sales should be applied toward draining them. It must be confessed that this engagement was imperfectly kept. The more sanguine proprietors have hoped that, in consideration of this face, the State would at its own expense undertake to drain these lands. It does not, however, seem to me likely that the Legislature would be willing to charge the State with the expense of so considerable an undertaking. But the fact that the State so imperfectly kept its engagement should certainly incline it to a course of liberal legislation. It is believed that it would be competent for the State itself to advance money, retaining a lien on the lands for a return thereon; but if this should be deemed inexpedient it might empower the Counties to be benfited by the drainage to guarantee bonds to be issued in payment for the work, retaining a lean on lands benefited in analogy to the provision respecting aid to Gravel Road Companies. The subject is one of so great importance that it should engage your early and most earnest attention.
For many years complaints have been made in the more populous Counties that the fees and salaries of officers were too large for the services perforated, it has also been asserted that the means to which there are often strong temptations to resort, for obtaining nominations for offices so lucrative, and for securing success at the polls, have a corrupting effect upon elections. Before the adoption of the Constitutional amendments of 1881, the Legislature was deprived of the power of curing this supposed evil. In that year an amendment was passed which has removed the difficulty. This amendment was submitted to the electors of the State, and prevailed by a majority of more than 90,000 votes. A session of the Legislature has intervened since the amendment was adopted, but no act has been passed regulating the compensation of officers in the manner contemplated. Every officer should be adequately paid for his services, but it is due to the people that no greater sum shall be taken from them,in the way of fees and salaries, than is necessary to pay to the officer a fair compensation. Officers frequently, however, relinquish regular occupation to obtain these places, under an expectation that the rate of fees prevailing when they were elected will be substantially maintained. It might be just, therefore, to postpone the operation of the regulation act for a reasonable time after its passage. A bill property regulating fees and salaries will require much thoughtful consideration, and should engage your attention at a very early period of the session.
The first section of the sixteenth article of the State Constitution is in the following language: "Any amendment or amendments to this Constitution may be proposed in either branch of the General Assembly; and if the same shall be agreed to by a majority of the members elected to each of the two Houses, such proposed amendments shall, with the yeas and nays thereon, be entered on their journals and referred to the General Assembly to be chosen at the next general election; and if, in the General Assembly so next chosen, such proposed amendment or amendment shall be agreed to by a majority of all the members elected to each House, then it shall be the duty of the General Assembly to submit such amendment or amendments to the electors of the State; and if a majority of the said electors shall ratify the same, such amendment or amendments shall become a part of this Constitution."
At the special session of the General Assembly in 1881, several joint resolutions
were introduced, which were passed by a vote of a majority of the members elected to
each of the two Houses, proposing certain amendments to the Constitution. The titles
of the several resolutions, and their numbers, were entered on the journals of the two
Houses, together with the yeas and nays on the passage. An enrolled copy of each
resolution containing the amendment set out at full length, was signed by the
President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives, transmitted
to the Governor, and filed by him, in conformity to law, in the office of the
Secretary of State. In the canvass for the election of Senators and Representatives to
the present General Assembly, the point, it is believed, was not raised that proper
steps had not been taken in the last General Assembly to enable the present one to
consider the amendments. Since the election, however, the point has been raised
through the public press that the proposed amendments are not in a condition to be
considered by the present General Assembly, because it is said they were not entered
at length in the journals of the two Houses of the last General Assembly. Neither of
the points raised has been settled in this State by any judicial decision. An
executive construction was given, however, to one of them in a message of Governor
Baker, in the case of what is known as the Wabash and Erie Canal amendment. That
amendment was not entered at length upon the journal of either of the two Houses. The
resolution by which the amendment was proposed was referred to in the journal of each
House by its title merely, and the enrolled copy thereof was signed by the presiding
officer of each House, and was duly filed in the office of the Secretary of State.
Governor
The Constitution requires, in case of bills, that upon the passage thereof the vote shall be taken by yeas and nays and entered upon the journals of the two Houses. In a case where the point was urged that an act was not in force because no entry of the yeas and nays on its passage appeared in the journals, the Supreme Court held that the signatures of the presiding officers were conclusive evidence of its passage.
The Constitution is silent respecting the manner in which a proposed amendment shall be referred from the first to the second General Assembly. The main object, no doubt, is to get it before the Second Assembly. If the genuine resolution passed comes before the Second Assembly, and is acted upon, the object of a reference would seem to have been attained, and the purpose of the framers of that instrument to have been carried out. There was, I believe, no formal reference of the amendments adopted in 1881 by the First to the Second General Assembly.
In the canvass last autumn it is said that some of the Senators and Representatives who were chosen at the November election publicly pledged themselves that, if they were chosen, they would vote at the present session to submit the amendments to the el rotors at a special election. Without saying anything respecting the merits of the several amendments, I can frankly express a belief that pledges upon which electors were induced to vote for gentlemen holding seats in either of the two Houses of the Assembly, will not be disregarded except for overwhelming reasons.
The importance of the subjects which will engage your attention during the session, and the limited time allowed to you by the Constitution for their consideration, will require you to enter early and vigorously upon your work. It will give me pleasure to supply you with such facilities for the performance of your duties as can be furnished by the Executive Department. And I trust that, under the guidance of Divine Providence, error may be avoided and the best interests of the people subserved.
ALBERT G. PORTER.
Executive Department, Jan. 5,1883.
Then came a recess till 2 p.m.
Mr. WILEY offered the following:
Wheres s, By an act of the General Assembly of the State of Indiana, approved March 13,1875, the Governor, Auditor and Secretary of State were made ex-officio Board of Commissioners of the Public Printing and Building; therefore be it
Resolved, That the Principal and Assistant Clerk cf this House and all other employes who may act for the House, shall make requisitions upon the Commissioner of the Public Printing and Building for all stationery ordered or needed for the use of the House, and any stationery procured elsewhere is unauthorized and hereby forbidden.
Mr. HEFFREN desired to know the object of the resolution.
Mr. WILEY: The object of the resolution is to secure stationery for the House in the cheapest possible manner.
The resolution was rejected.
Mr. GIBSON moved that 1,000 copies of the Governor's message be printed and distributed among the members of the House.
Mr HEFFREN offered the following amendment: "Provided that the part of the said message delivered by the Governor orally shall be inserted in its proper place."
The amendment was agreed to.
On motion, the resolution was further amended by reducing the number of copies from 1,000 to 500.
The resolution as amended was adopted.
On motion by Mr. McMULLEN the Governor's message was referred to a Select Committee of Five, to be appointed by the Speaker, who made said Committee to consist of Messrs. McMullen, Gibson, Kester, Shockney and Copeland.
Mr. JEWETT moved that the House adjourn.
Mr. STERRITT moved to amend by adding till 10 o'clock Monday morning.
The amendment was agreed to.
The motion as amended was agreed to.
And so the House adjourned till Monday at 10 o'clock a. m.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR called the Senate to order, and directed the reading of the Secretary's minutes of yesterday's proceedings.
Mr. VOYLES moved to dispense with the readings thereof-.
After some Conversational debate across the Chamber the motion was agreed to by-yeas, 29; nays, 10.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR stated that he had received a writ ten request signed by thirty-two Senators, to appoint Harry Richards as an additional page. He thought; he should not disregard the request, and in accordance therewith made the appointment indicated.
Mr. SPANN, on "behalf of a majority of the Special
Mr. BROWN presented a minority report signed by himself and Mr. Bell recommending the adoption of a resolution, that the rules of the last regular and special sessions of the Indiana Senate be adopted as the rules for the present session of the Senate, except that the words "President of the," in line 2 of rule 8 be stricken out; and tha.t rule 1 be so amended that the Senate will convene ac 10 o'clock in the forenoon and 2 o'clock in the afternoon unless the Senate shall by motion have adjourned to some other hour ap- pointed by such motion.
This minority report was substituted for the majority report.
Mr. FOULKE moved to amend the report of the
Mr. BROWN: It seems to me it is not necessary to adopt this amendment. I am quite willing to agree with the Senator over the way [Mr. Foulke] to strike out this rule 28. His proposition is simply to assert what is part of the lex Parliamentary everywhere, and I don't think it ought to be adopted.
The amendment [Mr. Foulke's} was rejected.
{ The report of the Committee as amended, by substituting the minority for the majority, was adopted.
Mr. BROWN offered a resolution, which was adopted, for the appointment of a Committee of two on the part of the Senate, with a like Committee on the part of the House of Representatives, to serve as a Joint Committee on Rules.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR appointed Messrs. Brown and Foulke such Committee on the part of the Senate.
Mr. COMPTON moved to constitute the Standing Committees of the Senate as follows:
The motion [Mr. Compton's] was agreed to.
Mr. COMPTON" moved to reconsider the vote adopting the Standing Committees, and to lay that motion on the table.
The latter motion was agreed to.
On motion of Mr. BELL it was ordered that the rules as adopted, and the standing Committees as reported, be spread at length on the Secretary's journal of to-day.
Mr. WHITE offered a resolution for the printing of 250 copies of tue Governor's Message for the use of the Senate.
Mr. BUNDY moved to amend by increasing the number to 1,000.
The amendment was agreed to.
The resolution as amended was adopted.
Mr. BELL moved that the President nt the Senate be authorized to refer the different sections of the Governor's Message to appropriate Standing Committees of the Senate.
The motion was agreed to.
The Senate then resumed the consideration of the resolution pending at the adjournment last night, the question being on Mr. Brown's motion to reconsider the vote adopting Mr. White's resolution directing the State Librarian to furnish stationery for the use of the Senate.
Mr. BUNDY declared the State Librarian to be the person authorized by law to furnish stationery for the use of the General Assembly, and read Section 5,628 and other sections of the statutes of 1881, contending that the Bureau of Printing was required to attend to the printing, binding, etc. It has been the custom for the State Librarian to furnish the stationery for the General Assembly-last session on a resolution offered by the Senator from Allen [Mr. Bell]. The law and the precedent are both in favor of this resolution, and it ought to pass. He opposed the motion to reconsider.
Mr. BELL said it did not make a snap's difference with him who furnished the stationery, but the State has an outstanding contract made by Republican State officers, in which is included all sorts of paper, as well as engrossing paper such as is used here, inks, mucilage, etc., etc. This contract was awarded to the lowest bidder, and no doubt is at a price lower than the small quantity desired by the Senate can be now purchased. No person should be authorized to go outside and purchase for us in the face of this contract made with sworn officers of the State. The resolution should be framed so as to come under this contract in the proper and regular way.
The motion to reconsider was agreed by-yeas 25; nays 20.
Mr. BROWN moved to amend the resolution by striking out and inserting new matter requiring persons acting for the Senate to make requisitions on the Public Bureau of Printing, and all others will be unauthorized. He said he had not lost all confidence in some of the acts of the Republican party, and when it was in its full bloom and grandeur the popular representative branch of the Republican party adopted this very resolution. He proposed to accept this wise act sanctified by the act of the Republican party.
Mr. BUNDY moved, ineffectually-yeas, 20; nays 26-to lay this substitute on the table.
The substitute was agreed to and the resolution as amended, being read, was adopted without division.
And then the Senate adjourned till Monday at 10 o'clock a. m.
The Secretary's minutes of yesterday's proceedings were being read, when, on motion of
Mr. BUNDAY, the further reading thereof was dispensed with.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR laid before the Senate a communication from the Auditor of State transmitting that officer's biennial report.
Mr. HUTCH IN ON offered a resolution authorizing the appointment by the Doorkeeper of five additional assistants.
The resolution was adopted.
Mr. SPANN offered a resolution relating to the contract for the new State House, and authorizing a Committee of Seven to proceed to fully and completely inquire into the condition of said estate House the wants of the Commissioners, the demands of the contractors and probability of the early completion of said House, and make & full report to the Senate, empowered to send for the necessary persons and papers, etc.
Mr. W1LLARD regarded the
It was rejected by yeas, 12; nays, 22.
Mr. VOYLES offered a resolution, which was adopted, for the appointment of a Committee of Three to contract for Committee Rooms, said contract to be ratified by the Senate.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR appointed Messrs. Voyles, Johnson and Yancy said Committee.
Mr. DUNCAN offered a resolution directing the Doorkeeper to report at once his appointees.
It was adopted.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time, and severally referred to appropriate Committees, unless otherwise stated;
By Mr. ADKINSON [S. 4] to amend Section 7 of the County Commissioners' plank-road-on
petition-construction bill, of March 3, 1877, authorizing $200,000 bonds to be issued
instead of $100,000 as now. Referred to the
By Mr. BELL, by request, [S. 5] supplemental
to an act concerning the publication of the Revised Statutes of 1881, approved April
18,1881, [authorizinig the State Auditor to draw his warrant for pay of said
commissioners till the 15th day of June, 1881, and also for office rent]. Referred to
By Mr. BENZ [S. 6] for the election and
appointment of Supervisors of Railways-to be elected next April, prescribing their
duties, etc. Making ten hours a day's work, road tax not less than 25c on the $100
valuation. Referred to the
By Mr. BISCHOWSCKY [S. 7] to provide for a uniform series of text books that shall be
cheaper than those now in use. Referred to the
By Mr BROWN [S. 8] to amend Section 10 the act of April 5, 1881, concerning drainage.
Referred to the
By Mr. BUNDY [S. 9] to amend Section 8,693 and repealing certain other sections of
the act of April 14, 1881, concerning decedents" estates. Amends the Decedents' Estate
Act in reference to the filing of claims, and provides that Executors and
Administrators may allow claims without their being filed in the Clerk's Office;
repeals that part of the act providing tor Master Commissioners, and cuts off a large
portion of the costs and expenses incident to the settlement of estates. Referred to
the
By Mr, CAMPBELL [S. 10] to provide for the regulation of freight and passenger
railroad traffic in this State; authorizing the appointment of three Railroad
Commissioners, to be appointed by the Governor, one to be experienced in the law and
the others in railroad business. Referred to the
By Mr, DUNCAN [S. 11] to amend Sections 79 and 92 of the act of April 19, 1881,
concerning the oath of the Grand Jury. Referred to the
Br. Mr, ERNEST [S. 12] to define the crime of
By Mr. FAULKNER [S. 15] to repeal certain sections from 4986 to 5,000, inclusive of
the Revised Statutes of 1881. Referred to the
Mr. WILLARD, by leave, presented a petition from 32 State Senators requesting the appointment of Clarence Ellis as an additional page.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR-By unanimous consent the appointment will be made.
By Mr. FOULKE [S. 14] to amend the act of April 1, 1881 (255-412 Revised Statutes),
covering proceedings in civil cases by providing that the am davit for change of venue
on account of the bias of the Judge shall show that such bias has a reasonable ground
for belief. Referred to the
By Mr. HENRY [S.15] to repeal the act establishing a State Board of Health. Referred
to the
By Mr. HILLIGAS [S. 16] to amend Sections 1,781 and 1,782 of the act concerning
proceedings in criminal cases, approved April 19, 1881. Referred to the
By Mr. HUTCHINSON [S. 17] for making a
contract with the city of Michigan City for the construction of a sewer from the
Northern State Prison to Fish Lake Creek:, which flows into Lake Michigan,
appropriating $33,000. Referred to the
By Mr. MACARTNEY [S 18] to discourage the keeping of useless and sheep-killing dogs.
Referred to the
By Mr. McCOLLOUGH [S. 19] defining unjust discriminations on the part of owners of
railroads in rates or charges for transportation of freight and passengers. Referred
to the
By Mr. OVERSTREET [S. 20] relating to the
qualification of petit Jurors. Referred to the
And then came a recess until 2 o'clock.
By Mr. RAHM [S. 21] for an act in relation to the lighting of cities with electric
light. Referred to the
By Mr. RISTINE [S. 22] to amend Section 5,097 of the Revised Statutes of i 881, concerning the construction of McAdam and other roads. Approved March 3 1877, amending Section lot said act, so that Counties may issue bonds for the construction of free gravel roads as heretofore;
"Provided that the amount of such bonds cut- standing at any one time shall not
exceed one and one half per centum on the value of the taxable property within the
County." Referred to the
By Mr. SMITH, of Jay, [S. 23] to amend Section 220 of the act of April 16, 1881,
concerning criminal procedure. [Cause for challenge of Jurors.] Referred to the
By Mr. VAN VORHIS [S. 24] to prevent the erection or maintenance over the rails or
roadbed of any railroad in this State of anything dangerous to human life. Referred to
By Mr. VOYLES [S 25.] to amend Sections 1 and 2 of the act appropriating money to pay minute and other men of the Indiana Legion. He said it was to supply an omission by which the Seventh Regiment of the Indiana Legion was omitted in the bill. The money is m the State Treasury for the purpose of supplying the omission and there should be no opposition to it. He moved that the Constitutional rule requiring a bill to be read by sections on three several days be dispensed with, so the bill may be read the second time by title, considered as engrossed, read the third time and put upon its final passage in the Senate to-day. The first motion was agreed to-yeas, 44; nays, 0and the bill was passed by yeas, 46; nays, 0.
By Mr. WHITE [S. 26] to amend Sections 8 and 9 of the act to establish a State Board
of Health, by adding Township Trustees to the Board of Health. Referred to the
By Mr. YANCEY [S. 27] to regulate and improve the practice of medicine m the State of
Indiana. Referred to the
By Mr. YOUCHE [S. 28] to regulate the interest upon school and other trust funds,
after the 10th of March next, not less than 6 nor more than 10 per cent. per annum.
Referred to the
By Mr. GRAHAM [S. 29] to legalize the act of the Board or Trustees and other offices of the town of Westfield, Hamilton County, and their records since the organization of said town. He said it was of a purely local nature, and there Is an emergency for the immediate passage of the bill, which he explained. He moved for a dispensation of the Constitutional restriction, that the bill may be pressed to the final reading BOW. The motion was agreed to-yeas, 42; nays, O-the bill read the second time by title only, the third time by sections and finally parsed the Senate by yeas 43; nays, 0.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR laid before the Senate a communication from the State
Librarian that she has invited and received propositions for stationery for the
General Assembly at 10 per cent;, less prices than the contract with the State Bureau
of Printing. It was referred to the
By Mr. FLETCHER [S. 30] requiring notice to municipal corporations for injury done to persons on account of an alleged negligence of sued corporations within thirty days.
By Mr. FOULKE [S. 31] to amend Section 1 of the act supplementnal to the act
establishing Public Libraries approved February 16, 1852, and No. 3,805, of the
Revised Statutes of 1881. In towns having libraries of the value of $1,000 and over,
the Trustees may assess a tax of one mill to the $lOO valuation for the maintenance,
and five mills for the purpose of building repairs. Re- ferred to the
By Mr. GRAHAM [S. 32] to punish persons who
disclose the contents of messages sent over telephone message or conversation.
Referred to the
By Mr. HUTCHINSON [S. 33] relating to Telephone Companies to regulate the use and
rental of telephones in the State. Referred to the
Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Indiana: Section 1. I;; shall
be the duty of every Telephone Company or person, firm or corporation engaged in the
business of leading telephones to tue public or supplying the public with telephones
and telephonic service or operating a telephone exchange, to receive and transmit
without discrimination messages from and for any other Company, person or persons upon
tender or payment of the usual or customy charges therefor, and upon payment or tender
of the usual or customary charge therefor or usual or customary rental sum, it shall
be the duty of every Telephone Company, or person or persons, firm or corporation
engaged in the business of leasing telephones to the public or supplying the public
with telephones and telephone service or operating a telephone exchange, to furnish
without unreasonable delay without discrimination and without any further or
additional charges to the person, firm or corporation applying for the same, including
all Telegraph Companies, a telephone or telephones with all the proper or necessary
wires and fixtures and the use of such telephone's wires and fixtures as well as
connection with the central office or telephone exchange if desired, and shall connect
the telephone of such
Sec. 2. This ace shall take effect and be in force from and after the date of its passage.
By Mr. MACARTNEY [S. 34] to legalize the
corporation of the town of Angola, Steuben County; each and every act of her officers,
etc., etc. Referred to the
By Mr. OVERSTREET [S. 35] to amend Section 1 of the act of August 16, 1881,
concerning the taxation of certain towns within the limits of towns and cities.
Referred to the
By Mr. RAHM [S. 36] supplemental to the act concerning the incorporation of Street
Railroad Companies-cities may tax street cars. Referred to the
By Mr. RISTINE [S. 37] to amend Section 67 of the criminal proceedings, approved April, 1881. amending Section 1,640 of the R. S. of 1881, so that it will read:
"Whenever any act is made a public offence against the State by statute, and the punishment therefor is provided thereby, or any such act is made a public offence by the provisions of any ordinance of any incorporated city or town in this State, which was in force at the date of the taking effect of this act of which this is an amendment, and which has not been repealed by ordinance, and the punishment therefor is provided thereby, such act may be punished by either said statute or such ordinance, but not by both."
Referred to the
By Mr. SAYRE [S. 38] to amend Section 1 of an act to amend Section 58 of the general
city repeal incorporation act of March 7, 1873. Referred to the
By Mr. VAN VORHIS [S. 39] to amend Section 7 of the act in relation to the laying out
of streets, alleys, etc., of cities in this State of March 17, 1875, so as to provide
for the collection of benefits. Referred to the
By Mr. VOYLES [S. 40] to amend Sections 24 and 27 of the act of April 15, 1881,
concerning roads and highways. Referred to the
By Mr. YANCEY [S. 41] to amend Section 3 of the act to regulate the indebtedness of
cities having a population of 16,000 and over. Referred to the
And then the Senate adjourned till 10 o'clock a. m, to-morrow under the rule,
Mr. Speaker Bynum called the House to order and announced prayer by Representative Frazee, of Rush County.
Mr. GIBSON moved that the reading of the journal be dispensed with. Which was agreed to.
The SPEAKER announced the following Standing Committees of the House:
Mr. SHOCKNEY offered a resolution that a Committee of Seven, to be composed of members of all political parties, be appointed by the Speaker, who shall be charged with the duty of inquiring into the differences of prices of materials used and the labor employed by the contractors of the new State House at the time the contract was awarded and nt the present time and to inquire into the responsibility of the contractors who have undertaken to build said house and the sufficiency of the hands, and to ascertain whether, under said contract, in view of the present prices of labor and material said State House can be built within the amount provided by law for the erection of said building, with power to send for persons and papers, to examine witnesses under oath, publish depositions, etc. The resolution was laid on the table and 2CO copies ordered printed.
A resolution passed that all stationery for the House be drawn from the Bureau of Public Printing.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time and referred to appropriate Committees, unless otherwise stated:
By Mr. GIBSON [H R 2] legalizing the acknowledgement and recording of certain
instruments of writing. Referred to the
By Mr. McMULLEN [H R 3] to amend Section 461 of an act concerning proceeding in civil
cases Referred to
By Mr. McMULLEN [H. R. 4] to amend Sections 695, 696 and 697 of an act entitled an
ant in civil proceedings. Referred to the
By Mr. DEEM [H. R. 5] concerning town
elections and repealing all laws in conflict therewith, and declaring an emergency.
Referred to
By Mr. BARR [H. R. 6] to amend Section 1 of an act authorizing County Commissioners
to issue bonds for the construction of gravel, macadamized or paved roads. Referred to
By Mr. GILMAN [H. R. 7] concerning railroads and other corporations. Referred to
By Mr. GILMAN [H. R. 8] to amend an act entitled an act to provide for the
settlements and distributions of decedents' estates. Referred to
By Mr. GILMAN [H. R. 9] forbidding Commissioners of Counties and Judges of Courts to
hear petition for drainage, unless the same be signed by a majority of the land owners
to be affected thereby. Referred to the
By Mr. WILLIAMS cf Knox, [H. R. 10] to amend Section 196 of an. act concerning
proceeding in criminal cases. Referred to
By Mr. SHARPER [H. R. 11] concerning State Boards of Health. Referred to
By Mr. SHAFFER [H. R. 12] concerning roads and highways. Referred to
By Mr. WHITSIT [H. R. 13] concerning the use of firearms Passed a second reading.
By Mr. ANTRIM [H. R. 14] an act requiring all companies and corporations to make
settlement and payment to their employees at least once every thirty days. Referred to
By Mr. ANTRIM [H. R. 15] in relation to fencing of railroads.
By Mr. ANTRIM [H. R. 16] act regulating interest on school funds. Referred to the
By Mr. ANTRIM [H. R. 17] for the protection of game. Referred to
By Mr. GILMAN [H. R. 18] declaring it unlawful for Counties and Townships to aid in
the construction of railways; repealing all laws in conflict, and declaring an
emergency. Referred to
By Mr. GILMAN [H R. 19] declaring agreement to pay costs of collection or attorneys
fee contained in any bill of exchange, acceptances, drafts, promissory notes, or other
written evidences of indebtedness, illegal and void, and making it the duty of the
owner when suit is brought for collection to reader judgment accordingly. Referred to
By Mr. MONTGOMERY [H. R. 20] concerning roads, highways and other matters:. connected
therewitn. Referred to
By Mr SMITH. of Perry, [H R. 21] to repeal an act authorizing aliens to hold titles
to real estate, convey the same, etc. Referred to
By Mr. SHOCKNEY [H. R. 22] to equalize the
assessment of taxes made by the Board of Trustees of the incorporated town of
Winchester, in the County of Randolph. Referred to
The House now took a recess until 2 o'clock.
By Mr STEWART [H. R 23] to amend Section 27 of an act concerning roads and highways.
Referred to
By Mr. HAN80N [H. R. 24] a bill to amend Section 2 of an act entitled au act
providing for a general system of Common Schools, and matters properly connected
therewith. Referred to
By Mr. STERRIT [H. R. 25] to strike out Section 268 and to amend Section 269 of an
act concerning public offenses and their punishment. Referred to
By Mr. JEWETT [H. R. 26] to repeal Section 6 of an act entitled an act concerning
promissory notes, bills of exchange, bonds or other instruments in writing signed by
any person who promises to pay money, etc. Referred to
By Mr. JEWETT [H. R. 27] for making
appropriation for the completion of the construction and furnishing of the Department
for Women of the Indiana Hospital for the Insane, and for the construction of a ware
housse and two coal houses for said Institution, and declaring an emergency. Referred
to
By Mr. SUTTON [H.R. 28] providing for the bet er government and management of the
Hospital for the Insane, the Asylum for the Blind and the Institution of the Deaf and
Dumb, and repealing all laws in conflict therewith. Referred to
By Mr. HENDERSON [H. R. 29] to enable the
several Counties in the State to sell and dispose of land for the benefit of the
school fund. Referred to
By Mr. BEST [H. R. 30] to amend Section 3 of
an act entitled an act regulating the descent of heirs, approved March 2, 1855.
Referred to the
By Mr. HOLLEY [H. R. 31] Authorizing Boards of County Commissioners to grant bounties for the destruction of woodchucks, owls and hawks.
By Mr. PATTON [H. R. 32] providing for the creation of the Fortieth Judicial Circuit and providing for the appointment of a Judge for said Circuit.
By Mr. AIKEN' [H. R. 33] to amend Section 1 of an act entitled an act providing for a
homestead and exempting it from sale on execution, and exempting certain personal
property, etc. Referred to the
By Mr. AIKEN [H. R 34] to provide for the
legalising of the election of the Board of Trustees of town of Sullivan, Sullivan
County. Referred to the
By Mr. AIKEN [H. R. 35] to amend Section 16 of an act incorporating the town of
Sullivan. Referred to the
By Mr. AIKEN [H. R. 36] to amend certain sections of an act concerning public
offences. Referred to the
By Mr, FRAZIER [H. R. 37] to create an Appellate Court. Referred to the
By Mr. FRAZIER [H. R. 38] for taxing the ownership of property for school purposes.
Referred to the
By Mr. WILEY [H. R. 39] to provide for the election of a Reporter for the Supreme
Court. Referred to the
By Mr CABBAGE [H. R 40] to regulate coal screens and defining the size thereof
Referred to the
By Mr. HEFFREN [H. R, 41] concerning the duties of the Reporter of the Supreme Court.
By Mr. WILSON, of Marion, [H R. 42] to amend Sections 1 and 2 of an act providing for
the appointment of the Benevolent Institutions of the State. Referred to the
By Mr. HEFFREN [H. R. 43] to amend Section 89 of an act concerning proceedings in
civil eases. Referred to the
By Mr. HEFFREN [H. R. 44] to repeal the act protecting sheep husbandry. Referred to
the
By Mr. BEES0N [H. R. 45] to amend Sections 95 and 157 and repeal Section 106 of the
act concerning the settlement of decedents' estates. Referred to the
By Mr. MOCK [H. R 46] to amend Section 8 of the act concerning drainage. Referred to
the
By Mr. MOCK [H. R 47], to amend sundry Sections of the act providing for the
settlement of decedents' estates. Referred to the
By Mr, MOCK [H. R. 48] to provide for the election of Supervisors of Highways.
Referred to the
Mr. HEFFREN, from the Special Committee on Rules, reported the rules of last session, with amendments, fixing the hours of the daily sessions at 9 a. m. and 2 p. m. And then the House adjourned under the rules till 9 a. m. to morrow.
The session was opened with prayer by Rev. F. M. S. Taylor, Dean of Eat. Paul's Cathedral.
Mr. BROWN presented a memorial from Hon. John H. Winterbotham, late a candidate for Congress in the Thirteenth Congressional District, protesting against the manner in which the employes of certain large manufacturing establishments in said District were marched to the polls and voted at the late election, and praying that the Statutes of the State may be amended so as to prevent such oppressive action on the part of owners of large establishments over their employes. Mr. W. practically gives up the contest, saying he is too old and too much engrossed in cares to do more than call the attention of the Legislature to the Intimidations practiced by employers on election day.
It was referred to the
Mr. VOYLES announced the selection of Horatio Fullenlove, of New Albany, as a Clerk to a group of Committees.
Mr. BENZ announced the appointment of Edward Harbison as Clerk of another group of Committees.
Mr. BELL, from the group of Committees, announced the appointment of R L Depuy as the Clerk thereof.
M. VOYLES reported that the
Mr. SPANN moved to recommit the report, with instructions to report all propositions to let Committee Rooms.
Messrs. Yancey, Voyles, Brown and Willard spoke in favor of the report of the Committee, and Messrs. Spann, Van Vorhis, Foulke, Bell and White spoke in opposition, and in favor of the motion to recommit, which was agreed to by yeas, 26; nays, 16.
Mr. FOULKE, from the
The report was concurred in.
On motion of Mr. BROWN, 250 copies of the rules, joint rules and Standing Committees of the Senate, were ordered printed.
On motion by Mr. COMPTON, the following Joint Committees on the part of the Senate were appointed by resolution:
Mr. BUNDY offered the following resolution:
Whereas, The Senate and House of Representatives of the United States have recently passed the measure for civil service reform known as the Pendleton bill; therefore
Resolved, That the Senate of Indiana hereby indorse the action of the Senators and Representatives in Congress who voted for said bill, and commend their action thereon as eminently wise, proper and just.
On motion of Mr. WILLARD it was referred to the
Several communications from the Governor were transmitted to the Senate by his
executive messenger, Mr. Frank L. Blackledge, among which were his appointments of or
nominations for, positions on the Benevolent Boards, to-wit: For Superintendent of the
Board of Benevolent Institutions, John Coburn, of Marion County; Trustee for the
Insane Hospital, George W. Burke, of Henry County; Trustee for the Blind, J. H.
Rerick, of Lagrange; Trustee for the Deaf and Dumb, James H. Jordan, of Morgan. These
Mr. MARVIN offered a resolution requesting the
Mr. WILLARD offered the following: Resolved, that the
On motion by Mr. Brown, it was postponed till to-morrow.
Mr. DUNCAN offered a resolution reflecting upon the Doorkeeper for not posting up a
list or employees appointed by him, and for discharging the several appointees without
cause, etc., and requesting the
Mr. SAYRE offered a resolution authorizing the Senate
Mr. VOYLES was against the resolution because it looks too much like proposition to send for the County officers of this State. The people who are not County officers are also interested in this matter.
Mr. BUNDY hoped this resolution would be adopted. If there is one subject more than another in which the people of this State are interested, it is the fee and salary question. County officers are getting rich in one term by reason of their charging constructive fees. Nothing can be done intelligently to remedy this evil till a Committee has heard evidence.
Mr. WILLARD saw necessity for information, but it will be time enough to grant this power when they ask for it.
Mr. FOULKE could see but one purpose in opposing a motion of this kind. No one can tell without experience what these officers can perform their services for. Whether or not there is cause for complaint, the people demand that something shall be done with the fee and salary bill. Unless it is desired to suppress all action on this subject, he hoped the resolution would pass.
Mr. VOYLES opposed the resolution, because of the construction put upon it that it would be a call for County officers to come up here. He saw no necessity for the resolution at this stage. stage.
Mr. BROWN moved to refer the resolution to the
The motion was rejected by yeas, 23; nays, 24.
Mr. CAMPBELL desired to see the resolution passed. He believed some offices supposed to be very rumenerative were not, while others not supposed to be lucrative were indeed so. There is a great difference. He was sorry to notice a somewhat partisan division in this matter.
Mr. MARVIN was surprised at the introduction of this resolution by the author. For 100 days the present law was before the Senate, and it was passed by a Republican body and signed by Republican officers. He was willing to try the present law two years longer.
Mr. HILLIGASS deprecated making this a party measure, but regarded the resolution" as unnecessary. He thought an equitable adjustment can be made by calculating upon a basis of population. He hoped this Legislature will adopt an equitable fee and salary bill. He also opposed the resolution because it proposes to give into the hands of this Committee power unlimited.
Mr. WILLARD made an ineffectual motion-yeas, 11; nays, 35-to lay the resolution on the table.
Mr. BELL now hoped to see the resolution passed. He believed in getting competent men and paying fair price for services. He hoped the unlimited power conferred by the resolution will not be abused With a little discretion not much mileage will have to be paid to County officers [Laugnter.]
Mr. WHITE hoped the resolution will pass.
Mr WILLARD hoped the resolution will not pass, because it gives the Committee unlimited power to summons any person from any point of the State to whom mileage and per diem will have to be paid. It may be productive of great expense, which the Committee has not asked for. After consultation if the Committee ask for this power it might then be granted.
Mr. ADKISON asked who was responsible for the political aspect in which this resolution was receiver. One County in his District is largely Democratic, the other is Republican, and there is no objection there to a project of this kind. There is a necessity for it. We do not want the kind of evidence that will come up here for the purpose of influencing legislation. He favored the resolution.
Mr. BROWN also favored the resolution.
Mr McCULLOUGH understood the feeling to be universally in favor of a law under which there can be no constructive fees. There are too many County officers about the Legislature when the question of fees and salaries is considered. As a rule the more that is heard about fees and salaries from County officers, the less is known about that subject. Men interested directly in the deliberations of this body will color their statements. The resolution would probably be too expensive at this time; and it will bring here a class of men that will not enlighten the legislators on that subject Some members on this Committee have had experience, and if the Committee shall ask for further power in the premises he would be willing to giant it.
Mr. HENRY regarded the resolution as a proper one-the Committee will not send for persons and papers unnecessarily. All are satisfied there should be action by this Legislature on this question. We want an investigation, and evidence on the subject brought before the Senate. This is not apolitical question. The present incumbents of County offices are not The only men in the State who can give desirable information concerning fees and salaries. He deprecated the laws now on the statute books that almost drive litigants out of the Court.
Mr. WILLARD moved to refer the resolution to the
There came a recess till 2 o'clock.
The motion to refer with instructions was rejected by yeas, 18; nays, 29.
The resolution was adopted without a division.
Mr. BELL offered a resolution, which was adopted, that the message of the Governor
concerning the jurisdiction of certain lands in Fort Wayne and Terre Haute be referred
to the
Mr. FOULKE offered a resolution empowering the
Mr. BROWN moved to lay the resolution on the table. The motion was agreed to by yeas, 31; nays, 17.
Mr. DUNCAN moved to reconsider the vote of yesterday, authorizing the Doorkeeper to appoint four additional Doorkeepers.
On motion by Mr. BROWN-yeas, 36; nays, 16-the motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
The House joint resolution [H. R. 1], concerning the pensioning of soldiers and widows of soldiers of the Mexican War, was read.
Also, the House joint resolution [H. R. 2] favoring Changes in the pension laws so
as to raise the rate on disabilities and not on rank, received in service, were
severally read the first time and referred to the
Mr VOYLES, from the Special Committee thereon, reported again in favor of the Bates House proposition of $900 for six rooms.
Mr. SPANN moved 10 recommit the report of the Committee in order to give the Committee further time and report as to separate rooms for the Senate. He also read several propositions from the Grand Hotel offering more rooms and at a cheaper price.
Mr, BUNDY favored the motion.
Mr. BELL could not understand the haste in this matter when the Committee saw so much dissatisfaction expressed this morning. There seems to be a disposition on the part of two or three members of this Committee to take the bit in their months and rush this thing through before all propositions are examined.
The discussion was continued at some length, Messrs. Spann. Bell, Van Vorhis and Campbell speaking in favor and Messrs. Brown and Voyles opposed to the motion to recommit.
Mr. FOULKE demanded the previous question, which was seconded by the Senate, and under the operations thereof-
The motion to recommit was agreed to by yeas, 84: nays, 16.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time and severally referred to appropriate Committees.
By Mr. ADKINSON [S. 42.] requiring Railroad Companies to fence and maintain fences
on their lines. It was referred to the
By Mr. BROWN [S. 43] to amend Section 30 of
the fee and salary act. The Coroner's fees for The first day increased from $5 to
$10; also increasing the clerks' fees from $2 to $3. It was referred to the
By Mr. BUNDY [S. 44] to provide for the organization and government of the State's
Prison. [The same as Senate bill No 4 of last session.] It was referred to the
By Mr. COMPTON [S. 45] supplemental io the
act to incorporate the Ohio Insurance Company, or Commercial Beard. It was referred
to the
By Mr. FLETCHER [S. 46] to provide for the construction of a sewer from the Indiana
Reformatory Institution to one of the principal sewers in Indianapolis. It was
referred to the
By Mr. FOULKE [S. 47] to amend an act to
establish public libraries in all cities of 10,000 inhabitants and over. so as to
extend its provisions to all the cities and towns in the State. It was referred to
the
By Mr. HILLIGASS [S. 48] providing for the
purchase and conversion of toll roads into free roads. It was referred to the
And then the Senate adjourned.
The Speaker called the House to order and announced prayer by Rev. F. M. S. Taylor, Dean of St. Paul's Cathedral.
It was reported that George H. Brownly had been appointed Clerk of the
The
The
Mr. SCHLOSS offered a resolution, which was adopted, that 300 copies of the rules of the House and the rules be printed for the use of the members, with an amend that 100 copies be filed with the State Librarian.
Mr. MOODY, from the Committee to Secure Committee Rooms, made their report, and recommended that the offer made by the proprietor of the Bates House, to furnish six rooms for $900, be accepted.
Mr. GIBSON reported that the Committee to whom was referred the Governor's message had apportioned the several propositions of the same to the proper standing Committees of the House, which was concurred in.
Mr. PATTEN, from the Special Committee to which was referred the resolution instructing our Senators and requesting our Representatives in Congress to aid in securing petitions for the survivors of the Mexican War, etc., reported a substitute to the original resolution, which report was concurred in, with an amendment so as to read "All soldiers of the Mexican War excent Jefferson Davis and other persons now not loyal to the United States."
Mr. DAVIS presented a memorial from the late candidate for Congress in the Thirteenth
District similar in form to one submitted to the Senate this morning. It was referred
to the
The Doorkeeper was ordered to report to the House the names of his employes.
Mr. MONTGOMERY offered a resolution for the appointment of a Special Committee of Five to report a bill for the government of the settlement of estates.
Mr MELLETT offered a resolution indorsing the civil service reform bill recently
passed by the Federal Congress, and commending the same to the President for his
approval It was referred to the
Bills for acts wore introduced and read the first time and severally referred to the appropriate Committees as follows:
By Mr. SH1VELY [H. R. 49] i to amend Section 1 of an act to amend Sections 6 and 7 of
an act authorizing County Commission era to construct roads and highways. It was
referred to the
By Mr. MOCK [H. R. 50] providing for the appointment of a Reporter of the Supreme
Court. It was referred to the
By Mr. MOCK [H. R. 51] providing for the taxing of dogs.
On motion by Mr. HEFFREN the bill [ S
By Mr. WILSON [H. R. 52] to construct a sewer
from the Female Reformator to connect with a sewer in the city of Indianapolis. It was
referred to the
Then came the recess until 2 p. m.
On motion the House took up the bill [S. 29]
to legalize the acts and proceedings of the Trustees and other officers of the town of
Westfield, in Hamilton, Indiana. which was read the first time and referred to
A message from the Senate announced the appointment on the part of the Senate of the Joint Standing Committees of the two Houses.
Mr. MONTGOMERY offered a resolution, which was rejected, to the effect that the different Committees on the part of the House be instructed to strike out the emergency clause of all bills referred to them.
Mr. McMULLEN offered an amendment to the rules of the House to the effect that the House meet at 10 o'clock a. m. and 2 o'clock p. m.. instead of 9 o'clock a. m. and 2 o'clock p. m., each day. which lies over under the rules of the House for one day.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time and severally referred to appropriate Committees.
By Mr. KIRKPATRICK [H. R. 53] to legalize the town of Burnettsville. White co.
By Mr. SMITH of Blackford [H. R. 54] to amend section 2 of the County Commissioners special session act of March 7, 1863.
By Mr. WEAVER [H. R. 55] to prevent the sale
of impure butter. Referred to
By Mr. GORDON [H. R. 56] authorizing Board of County Commissioners, upon petition
of person living adjacent thereto, to construct gravel and other roads. Referred to
By Mr. MOSIER [H. R. 57] to prevent the
adulteration of articles of food, drink, drugs and medicines. Referred to
[ A message was received from the Governor announcing that he had approved and signed the bill [H. R. 1] appropriating $125,000 to defray the expenses of the regular session of the General Assembly for 1883].
By Mr. NAVE [H. R. 58] to amend Section 3 of an act for the regulation of weights
and measures. Referred to
By Mr. NAVE [H. R. 59] in relation to trimming and cutting hedge fences. Referred
to
By Mr. BOWERS [
By Mr. HELMS [H. R. 61] in relation to
Township Trustees and legalizing certain acts performed by them. Referred to
By Mr BARR [H. R. 62] compelling railroads to construct convenient side-tracks for
the security of persons loading and unloading corn. Referred to the
By Mr. COPELAND [H R. 63] to amend Section 57 of the Revised Statutes, and 4,735 of
an act concerning elections and the contesting thereof. Referred to
By Mr. COPELAND [H. R. 64] providing punishment for the payment of employes in
goods or supplies at a higher rate than the customary one. Referred to
By Mr. WILLIAMS (H. R. 65] concerning drainage. Referred to
By Mr. WILSON [H. R. 66] to legalize the
incorporation of the town of Syracuse, in Kosciusko County, and to legalize the acts
of the Boards of Trustees of said town. Referred to
By Mr. WILSON, of Kosciusko, [H. R. 67] to
legalize the incorporation of the town ot Silver Lake, Kosciusko County, Ind,
Referred to
By Mr. FRAZIER [H. R. 68] to amend Section 97 of an act providing for a general
system of common schools, and for establishing Township Libraries. Referred to
By Mr. FRAZIER [H. R. 69] to legalize the sale of certain lands. Referred to the
By Mr. SMITH [H. R. 70] to amend Section 6 of the act to encourage the destruction
of wolves and foxes. It was referred to the
By Mr. WILSON, of Marion, [H. R. 71] to amend Section 1,040 of the civil procedure
act approved April 7, 1881. Referred to the
By Mr. WILSON, of Marion, [H. R. 72] to amend Section 71 of an act concerning
taxation. Referred to the
By Mr. WILSON [H. R. 73] to amend Section 58 of the general city incorporation act.
Referred to the
By Mr. ADAMS [H. R. 74] to amend Section 372 of the civil procedure act approved
April 7, 1881, or Section 409 of the Revised Statutes of 1881. Referred to the
By Mr. GERBER [H.R.75] to establish the thirty- fourth and thirty-fifth judicial
circuit. Referred to the
By Mr. MONTGOMERY, by request, [H. R. 76] to repeal the act relative to the duties
of Justices of the Peace. Referred to the
By Mr. FRAZER [H. R. 77] to amend Section 1 of an act to amend Sections 13 and 14
of an act prescribing the qualification of Justices of the Peace. Referred to the
By Mr. MUTZ [H. R. 78] to legalize the loan of school funds of the several Counties
of this State. Referred to the
By Mr. HEFFREN [H. R. 79] to amend Sections 8 and 9 of an act concerning elections and the contest thereof.
And then the House adjourned.
Mr. JEWETT opposed the adoption of the resolution, declaring that it was evidently introduced for the purpose of testing the sense of this House on the subject of civil service reform. This House has nothing to do with the bill referred to.
The session was opened with prayer by Rev. W. A. Patton of the Sixth Presbyterian Church.
On motion by Mr. VOYLES the reading of the Secretary's minutes of yesterday was dispensed with.
Mr. RAHM by consent introduced a bill [S. 49] to fix the times for holding Courts in the County of Posy and Vanderburgh. On his motion, under a dispensation of the Constitutional restriction-yeas, 48; nays, 0-the bill was passed to the final reading and passed the Senate by yeas, 47; nays, 0.
The House message announcing that the House of Representatives has confirmed a
contract with the Bates House for six Committee Rooms at a rental of $900 for the
session-that the
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR submitted a petition from twenty-seven Senators requesting the appointment of Arthur Moody as an additional page; signed by twenty-seven Senators, several of whom asked that their names be stricken from the petition, inasmuch as one or two pages have been appointed since. In response to an inquiry, the Lieutenant Governor stated that the same number of pages as last session have already been appointed, viz.; five.
Mr. YANCEY moved that Arthur Moody be appointed an additional page to serve under the Secretary of the Senate.
This motion was rejected by yeas, 21; nays, 25i
Mr. WILLARD presented a petition from the Mitchell Medical Society, which was
referred without reading, to the
Mr. FAULKNER presented a petition recommending Oliver P. McCullough for Doorkeeper of
the Senate, from the County of Ripley. It was referred to the
Mr. BROWN presented a claim in favor of David. R. Munson, which was referred to the
On motion by, Mr. SPANN the papers in the contested case of Johnson vs. Overstreet
were referred to the
Mr. COMPTON offered a resolution authorizing the Principal and Assistant Secretary to furnish stationery to Chairmen of Committees.
On motion by Mr. BUNDY it was referred to the
Mr. SAYRE offered a resolution authorizing the Chairmen of Committees and the Secretary of the Senate to draw on the State Librarian for stationery for the use of Standing Committees, said requisitions to be indorsed by the Assistant Secretary and entered on the journal of the Senate on the day issued.
Mr. SAYRE moved to refer it to the
Mr. BUNDY and Mr. GRAHAM insisted the law made it the duty of the State Librarian to furnish stationery for the use of the General Assembly.
Mr. BROWN insisted that the law referred to was by implication repealed, and the Senate has already acted upon this subject definitely. He made the point of order that the resolution is out of order.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR decided the point well taken. If the law is as stated by the Senators from Henry and Hamilton then there ia no need of action by this body; if not, as stated by the Senator from Jackson, the Senate has already acted on this subject.
Mr. GRAHAM saw a tendency in this matter to override the law, which may go so far as to try and take away the power vested in the Executive of the State and place it in other hands.
Mr. VOYLES did not consider that the section referred to authorizes the Librarian to purchase supplies, but only sets out the manner of paying therefor. The senate may direct any one to purchase supplies elsewhere, without conflict with the Section 5,698 of the Revised Statutes of 1881. Mr. FOULKE knew of no repeal of the Section 5,698 and believed it proper for the Senate to direct how much stationery is needed, etc.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR decided there is nothing before the Senate.
Mr. RISTINE offered a concurrent resolution concerning the survey of the Kankakee River region, authorizing the printing of 500 copies of the report of Engineer Campbell, under whom the survey was made. He stated that the number printed had been exhausted, and a number of persons are requesting extra copies.
Mr. VAN VORHIS understood there is over $1,000 unexpended of the appropriation made for that purpose.
Mr. HILLIGASS believed the Survey Commission has authority to expend moneys from that fund for the printing of this report. Till that fund is exhausted he should oppose the printing by the Senate-if the resolution directed pay to be made out of that fund he would favor it.
Mr. YANCEY moved inaffectually to lay the resolution on the table.
Mr. YOUCH moved to increase the number to 1,000, which amendment was accepted by Mr. Ristine.
Mr. WHITE desired to see the resolution passed.
Mr. SPANN also favored the resolution.
Mr. YOUCH said this was a matter of great interest to the people in his part of the
State. He moved to refer the resolution to the
Mr. GRAHAM deprecated any delay in this matter, and favored the adoption of the resolution at once.
Mr. RISTINE understood the report is now in type, and the cost of printing will be small.
The motion to refer was agreed to.
Mr. SPANN offered a joint resolution [S. -], as follows:
Whereas, It is the pride of the American people that the American laborer is more intelligent and better paid than his foreign competitor: and
Whereas, Congress has recently appointed a Commission for the revision of the tariff, and that said Committee has made a report in favor of the modification of our present tariff laws; and, being of the opinion that the American people should devote themselves to the welfare of America, therefore, be it
Resolved by the Senate, the House of Representatives concurring therein, That we are not in favor of a tariff for revenue only, but are in favor of such a tariff as shall in all things discriminate in favor of the American workingman and laborer. And we request Senators and Congressmen from the State of Indiana to vote and work for the passege of such an act as will test secure such protection to the working classes of the United States.
Mr. WILLARD moved to refer it to the
Mr. VAN VORHIS made an ineffectual motion-yeas, 18; nays, 26-to instruct the Committee to report by Tuesday next.
The motion to refer was agreed to.
Mr. GRAHAM offered a concurrent resolution congratulating the soldier;, of Indiana on the election of Major Charles T. Doxey as a Representative in Congress from the Ninth Congressional District.
Mr. HILLIGASS was sure no member would, personally, more willingly congratulate a soldier on success than he, but it is apparent the object of the resolution and other similar acts of gentlemen on the other side are for a dilatory purpose. While wounded as often as Major Doxey, he was not willing to see the time of in this body consumed in such manner.
Mr. HENRY could not see why the Senator who has just taken his seat could not vote for this resolution as he has announced his willingness to congratulate so idlers on their success.
Mr BROWN offered an amendment deploring the defeat of Hon. Thomas B Ward [Laughter]. On motion by Mr. Marvin, the resolution and the substitute were laid on the table-yeas, 24.; nays, 37.
Mr. VOYLES offered a joint resolution concerning
[S. No. -] requesting our Representatives and instructing our Senators in Congress to vote and use their influence in favor of a tariff law that will give no further protection than may arise legitimately, incidentally, out of that which will operate to raise the necessary revenue for the Government, and we further recommend said Senators and Representatives to vote to remove all duty, as far as expedient, from salt and clothing and other articles so indispensably necessary among all classes of our people.
Mr. FOULKE moved to lay it on the table, pending -which
The Senate took a recess till 2 o'clock. ^
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to by yeas, 19; nays, 17. :
Mr. VOYLES, from the Special Committee appointed to secure rooms for the use of the Standing Committees of the Senate, recommended the acceptance of the Bates House proposition of five rooms for $450 for this session.
The report was concurred in.
Mr. BROWN moved to reconsider the vote by which this report was concurred in, and to lay that motion on'the table.
The latter motion was agreed to.
Mr BISCHOUSKY announced that the Superintendent of Public Instruction has tendered
the use of two of his rooms to the
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time, and severally referred to appropriate Committees.
By Mr HUTCHINSON [S. 50] concerning the
official terms of the Directors of the Northern Slate Prison of the persons elected
at the present session two shall hold for four years each and one for two years.
Referred to the
By Mr. KEISER. by request. [S. 51] supplemental to the act approved March 17, 1875,
relating to the opening/widening and laying out of streets, highway, etc. Referred
to the
By Mr. MACARTNEY [S. 52] to amend Sections
218, 227 and 228 of the act of March 29, 1881, concerning taxation. Providing for an
increase of penalty on taxes attaching real estate sold for taxes after expiration
of the time for redemption and where the sale has been declared illegal. It was
referred to the
By Mr, MAGEE [S. 53] to provide for the uniform assessment of Telephone
Companies-$2 for each instrument. Referred to the
By Mr. MARVlN [S. 54] to license and regulate the traffic in intoxicating liquors
and for the suppression of tippling houses. [All who sell spiritu
By Mr. MAY [S. 55] to amend Section 3,224 of the Revised Statues concerning
elections and the contest thereof-city election Precincts. Referred to the
By Mr. RISTINE [S. 56] to amend Sections 86, 95, 97, 158, 159, 160, 164, 165, 176,
207 and 215, and to repeal Sections 106, 157, 162, and 169 of the act for settlement
of decedent estates approved April 14, 1881. [It provides that administrators may
waive the filing of all claims of $20 and under-does away with Probate Court
Docket-requires notice to be given only in final settlements, and the administrator
may pay into Court or distribute balance in his hands as the Court may direct.] It
was referred to the
By Mr. SAYRE [S. 57] to amend Section 280 of
the act concerning civil case proceedings. Approved April 7, 1881-relating to
administrators', heirs', etc., testimony. Referred to the
By Mr. SMITH, of Delaware, [S. 58] to amend Section 1 of an act for the regulation
of weights and measures, approved April 15, 1881. [It changes the standard weight of
ear corn from sixty-eight to seventy pounds (avordupois) to make the Indiana law
conform to those of adjoining States. It also restores the standard weight of oats,
which was omitted in the publication of the code.] It was referred to the
By Mr. VAN VORHIS [S. 59] to amend Section 1 of the act to amend Section 53 of the
general city incorporation act, approved May 14, 1867, approved May 10, 1873. [To
enable cities to tax vehicles] Referred to the
By Mr. WHITE [S. 60] concerning proceedings in criminal cases-Section 10,640,
approved April 19, 1881. Referred to the
By Mr. WILLARD [S. 61] to amend Section 23 1/2-being Section 5,866 of the Revised
Statues of 1881, of the fee and salary act-increasing Prosecuting Attorney's fee in
felony cases from $7 to $10; not guilty in misdemeanors $7 and other cases mentioned
$10. Referred to the
By Mr. YANCEY [S. 62] prohibiting certain animals from running at large. Referred
to the
By Mr. YOUCHE [S. 63] to amend Section 15 of the railroad corporation act. Approved
March 11, 1852. Referred to the
By Mr. MAGEE [S. 64] authorizing Board of County Commissioners to purchase real
estate for the use of agricultural or horticultural fairs on petition of five or
more persons; cost not to exceed $8,000. Referred to the
By Mr. BUNDY [S.65] to amend certain sections of the act authorizing the employment
of short hand reporters-no person ineligible on account of sex. Referred to the
By Mr. DUNCAN [S. 66] to amend Section 2 of the amended Common School act of March
6, 1865, and March 8, 1873-concerning Township Trustees. Referred to the
By Mr. FLETCHER [S. 67] authorizing
municipal corporations to invest their sinking funds temporarily in the bonds of the
United States Government, Indiana State or County. Referred to the
By Mr. FOULKE [S. 68] to abolish disabilities of coverture-giving married women all
rights of single women. Referred to the
By Mr. GRAHAM [S. 69] to amend Section 1 of the act concerning drainage. [It
provides that the County Surveyor shall be ex-officio a Commissioner of Drainage,
with two others to be appointed by the Court, to assess each ditch; pays said
Commissioners $1.50 a day, and makes all expenses for ditch payable out of the
assessment instead of out of the County Treasury.] It was referred to the
By Mr. HILLIGASS [S. 70] to amend Sections 268 and 269 of the act concerning public
offenses, approved April 14, 1881, relating to bribery at elections by manufacturers
or others, by intimidation or otherwise. Referred to the
By Mr. JOHNSON [S. 71] providing for the canceling of debts secured by mortgage by
the sale of the mortgaged property and for the repeal of all laws in conflict, etc.
Referred to the
By Mr. MAY [S. 72] to fix the time of holding Courts in the Second Judicial
Circuit. Referred to the
By Mr. VAN VORHIS [S. 73] to amend Section 9 of the act relating to the opening,
widening, etc, of streets, etc., approved March 17, 1876. Referred to the
By Mr. WHITE [S. 74] to authorize any
hydraulic or manufacturing Company to erect a dam across the St. Joseph River, in
Elkhart County. It was referred to the
By Mr. YANCEY [S. 75] to amend Section 71 of the act approved March 29, 1881,
concerning taxation. Referred to the
Mr. FOULKE offered a concurrent resolution requesting the
Mr. VOYLES could see no necessity for this resolution.
Mr. SAYRE also opposed the resolution.
Mr. FOULKE: As to the connection of the bills proposed last session with the acts passed, it is certainly proper to have a consultation between the Committee and the Commissioners.
The resolution was rejected.
And then the Senate adjourned.
The session was opened with prayer by Rev. Mr. Marks.
The reading of yesterday's journal was dispensed with.
The following described bills were introduced, read first time and severally referred to appropriate committees:
By Mr. MUTZ [H. R. 80] to prohibit the killing of quails in Indiana. Referred to the
By Mr. HEFFREN [H. R. 81] to protect the elections of voluntary political
associations. Referred to the
By Mr. MERING [H. R. 82] to amend Section 1 of an act concerning the application of
certain fines, penalties and forfeitures. Referred to
By Mr. MOCK [H. R. 83] to amend Section 56 of an act, the same being Section 1,629 of
the Revised Statutes, concerning proceedings in criminal cases. Referred to
By Mr. WILEY [H. R. 84] to amend Section 355, to simplify and abridge proceedings in
civil cases. Referred to
By Mr. GRAHAM [H. R. 85] to legalize the plats of towns and town plats additional to
towns. Referred to the
By Mr. GRAHAM [H. R. 86] to amend Section 52 of an act concerning elections and the
con
By Mr. STUCKER [H. R. 87] to amend Sections 268 and 269 of an act, being Sections
2,184 and 2,175 of the Revised Statutes, concerning proceeding in criminal cases.
Referred to
By Mr. HUSTON [H. R. 88] requiring joint stock Telephone Companies, organized under
the laws of any other State, to pay a certain tax on their gross receipts and to make
a statement showing their gross receipts each year. Referred to the
By Mr. JEWETT [H. R. 89] to amend Section 346 of an act concerning proceedings in
civil cases. Referred to
By Mr. NAVE [H. R. 90] to amend Section 86 of an act providing for the settlement and
distribution of decedents' estates. Referred to the
Mr. BRAZELTON [H. R. 91] concerning the relocation ot County seats. Referred to the
By Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, [H. R. 92] to repeal Section 200 of an act for the settlement and distribution of decedents' estates. Referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
By Mr. FRAZIER [H. R. 93] concerning the copyright of the electrotype plates sand the sale of copies of the Revised Statutes.
By Mr. FRAZIER [H. R. 94] providing for the sale of lands purchased on the part of
the State at judicial sales. Referred to
By Mr. ADAMS [H. R. 95] concerning taxation. Referred to the
By Mr. ADAMS [H. R. 96] to repeal Section 4 of an act regulating the presenting of
claims against County Commissioners. Referred to the
Br Mr. MONTGOMERY, by request, [H. R. 97] to regulate the jurisdiction of Justices of the Peace.
By Mr. KENNEDY [H. R. 98] to amend Section 74, the same being Section 459 of the
Revised Statutes of the Common School act. Referred to the
[Mr. SUTTON from the
By Mr SUTTON [H. R. 99] to amend Section 80 of the act fixing the fees, salaries and
duties of Coroners. Referred to the
By Mr. BEST [H. R. 100] to amend Section 25 of the decedents' estates act. Referred
to the
By Mr. SMITH, of Tippecanoe [H. R. 101] to amend Section 628 of the act concerning
civil cases, approved April 7, 1881, relating to appeals to the Supreme Court.
Referred to the
By Mr WESTFALL [H. R. 102] to legalize the acts ot the Board of Trustees of the town of Chancey,, Tippecanoe County.
By Mr SH1VELY [H. R. 103] concerning liens of
mechanics, laboring men and others. Referred to the
By Mr GIBSON [H. R. 104] to amend Section 23 1/2. being Section 5,866 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, concerning fees and salaries of Prosecuting Attorneys.
On motion of Mr. HEFFREN, the house resolution in relation to the completion of the State House was taken up, and he offered an amendment making the Special Committee to consist of five instead of seven, etc.
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, made an ineffectual motion to postpone the further consideration of this matter until Monday.
The amendments were agreed to and the resolution as adopted was agreed to.
The amendment to the rules submitted yesterday, making the hour of meeting in the forenoon 10 o'clock, was taken up and agreed to.
On motion of Mr. ANTRIM, the bill [H. R. 15], in relation to the fencing of railroads
was taken up, read second time, and it was referred to
Then came a recess until 2 o'clock.
The bill [S. 49] fixing the times for holding Court in the Counties of Posey and Vanderburgh was read the first time and passed to the second reading.
Mr. MOSIER offered the following:
Resolved, By the House of Representatives of the General Assembly of the State of Indiana, that as an act of justice to the soldiers of the late War the bill commonly known as the Equalization of Bounties bill should be passed by Congress of the United States, and our Senators are instructed and our Representatives in Congress requested to favor the passage at an early day of a jaw which will give to each soldier of the late War,; who has not already received the same, a bounty equal to $8 33 1/8 for each and every month served in the late War. It was adopted.
Mr. SHIVELEY offered a resolution that the Doorkeeper of the House be instructed to furnish the Committee Rooms used by the members of the House with one volume of the Revised Statutes of 1876, and one volume of the Revised Statutes of l88l.
Mr. HEFFREN offered an amendment, which was taken by consent, that the Doorkeeper be instructed to secure the volumes of the Statutes, provided for in this resolution, from the State Librarian.
The resolution as amended was adopted.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time and severally referred to appropriate Committees:
By Mr. HEFFREN [H. R. 105] concerning changes of venue from Justices of the Peace to the Superior Court.
By Mr. MOCK [H. R. 106] concernining certain criminal cases before Justices of
Peace. Referred to the
By Mr. CARR [H. R. 107] for the relief of John C. Cheyney for money paid out by him
while School Trustee of the town of Columbia City, Ind.
By Mr. SMITH, of Blackford [H. R. 108] to amend Section 2 of a act to amend an act
providing for a general system of common schools. Referred to the
By Mr. WEAVER [H. R. 109] to amend Section 21, being Section 4,305 of the Revised
Statute, enabling owners of land to drain the same.
By Mr. GREEN [H. R 110] concerning proceedings in civil cases. Referred to the
By Mr. COPELAND [H. R. 111] making it murder in the first degree for any one to
wantonly place any obstruction on a railroad or displace anything whereby the death
of another may occur. It was referred to the
By Mr. COPELAND [H. R. 112] providing for the punishment for putting up false
lights or doing anything whereby a vessel is lost or de
By Mr. FRAZER [H. R. 113] concerning trusts for charitable uses. Referred to the
By Mr. FRAZER [H. R. 114] to amend Sections 86, 95, 97, 158, 159, 160, 164, 165,
176, 207, 215, and repeal Sections 106, 157, 162 find 169 of an act providing for
the setilement aud di-tributlon of deccdent estates. It was referred to the
By Mr. WILSON, of Marion, [H. R. 115] forbidding the location of highways through
any lawfully established cemetery. Referred to the
By Mr. Spaid, of Vanderburgh, [H. R, 116] to amend Sections 216 and 217 of an act
concerning public offenses. Referred to the
By Mr. GIBSON [H. R. 117] to amend Sections
255, 256 and 257 of an act concerning taxation. It was referred to the
By Mr. GIBSON [H.
Mr. Moody explaining that this bill did not propose to create any new office, but simply authorized the paying of this clerk.
Pending the call of Counties for the introduction of bills, the following resolutions were offered:
Mr. BRAZELTON offered a resolution requesting the
It was referred to the
Mr. MONTGOMERY offered a resolution instructing the
It was adopted.
Mr. KNOWLES offered a resolution declaring that
Whereas, The question of fees and salaries is one of importance which the General Assembly will be called upon to consider; therefore
Resolved, That a Committee of five members shall be appointed to inquire into the salaries of County officers and report thereon at an early day.
It was referred to the
Mr. PETERS offered a concurrrent resolution instructing Senators and requesting Indiana Representatives in Congress to use their influence to procure honorable discharges for certain soldiers and sailors who served faithfully during that portion of their enlistment preceding the surrender of Generals Lee and Johnson, and thinking the the War at an end and their services required no longer, and desirous of being at home with their families, left their respective commands without having been properly discharged, and are standing on the Army rolls of the United States as deserters.
It was referred to the
Mr. WILEY offered a preamble and resolution declaring that
whereas the present system of fees and salaries of the various County officers are unjust, resolved that it is the sense of the House of Representatives of the Fifty-third General Assembly that the fees and salaries of County officers should be so regulated as to provide a fair compensation for their duties, and at the same time protect taxpayers.
It was referred to the
Mr. BOWERS offered a resolution for the appointment of a Special Committee of Five, to which shall be referred all matters concerning State sanitary affairs.
It was adopted, and the Speaker makes the Committee to consist of Messrs. Bowers, Thomas, Price, Strong and Genning.
The House adjourned till 10 o'clock to-morrow under the amendment to the rules adopted to-day.
The Lieutenant Governor called the Senate to order.
Mr. SAYRE presented a petition from the School Commissioners of Wabash County, praying
for an increase in the Teachers' Institute fund to encourage the attendance of teachers
at such institute, which was referred to the
Mr. HILLIGASS submitted a report from a majority of the
Mr. HENRY presented a minority report from the same Committee, reporting that the State Librarian is authorized by law to furnish such stationery, and recommending the adoption of a resolution authorizing the Principal and Assistant, Secretary to insert, all necessary stationary, from the State Librarian, except legislative bills and lane-heads.
Mr. BROWN demanded the previous question, and the demand being seconded by the Senate, under its operations the minority report was rejected by yeas, 17; nays, 26.
Pending roll call-
Mr. BUNDY, in explanation of his vote, said: As the report of the Minority Committee shows that this stationery and other articles necessary for the transaction of the business of the Senate at 10 per cent. cheaper if the minority report is adopted than otherwise, and for the purpose of economizing to that extent and saving that amount of money, as far as my vote will go in that direction, and thus contributing my vote to stem the tide of extravagance which seems to have taken possession of the Democratic side of the Senate. I vote "aye."
Mr. BROWN (sotto voce) moved that the Senator have the right to print his speech.
Mr. VOYLES, in explanation of his vote, said inasmuch as the minority report does not show how what quality of paper will be furnished by the Librarian, he would vote "no."
The majority report was concurred in.
Mr. BROWN moved to reconsider the vote adopting the report, and to lay that motion on the table. The latter motion was agreed to.
Mr RISTINE offered a resolution directing the State Librarian to furnish each Committee Room with copies of both editions of the statutes, with acts, etc.
It was adopted.
Mr. BROWN announced the appointment of Harry B. Raum as a Committee Clerk for one group of committees.
Mr. BENZ offered a resolution deducting pay from members, officers and employes when absent, except on sickness.
The resolution was rejected.
Mr. BROWN offered a resolution allowing the pages $2 a day.
It was adopted.
Mr. KEISER offered a resolution, which was adopted, authorizing the transmission to the Senate of House joint resolution No. 7, introduced in the last House of Representatives March 15, 1881, prohibiting the manufacture, sale, or keeping for sale, of spirituous, vinous, malt or other liquors, except for medical purposes; and that the General Assembly shall provide by law in what manner and what place such liquor shall be sold for such purposes.
On motion by Mr. WILLARD the vote adopting this resolution was reconsidered-yeas, 26; nay, 20.
Mr. HENRY favored the adoption of the resolution as offered, which calls for the transmission of the original resolution to the Senate. He desired, when action is taken on this question, all the papers should be here, so the Senate can act intelligently on the question. He desired to see all the phases connected with this question fully and fairly discussed.
On motion by Mr. MARVIN, the resolution was laid on the table-yeas, 25; nays, 19.
Pending the roll call-
Mr. MARVIN, when his name was called, said
Mr. SPANN, when his name was called, said: As I regard everything introduced upon this floor which looks toward the adoption or non-adoption of these proposed constitutional amendments as partaking of a political character, I regard it as extremely political, and therefore decline to vote on this roll call, because I am paired with the Senator from Allen and Whitley [Mr. Bell]
The result was announced as above recorded.
So the resolution was laid on the table.
Mr. MAGEE offered a joint resolution [S. -] favoring the improvement of the harbor at Michigan City, Laporte County, requesting Representatives and instructing Senators in Congress from Indiana to favor such an appropriation.
Mr. YANCEY hoped the resolution would not be adopted. He was satisfied the Secretary of War would recommend such work if he were not convinced t was in the nature of a grab. Mr. Y desired to join the other side of the Chamber in economical measures, not only in State, but elsewhere.
Mr. BUNDY moved to refer the resolution to the
Mr. MAGEE interposed to objection, thinking it a matter of great importance. He introduced the resolution in good faith. The money has been appropriated, but the Secretary of War refuses to allow its expenditure on the only port in the State of Indiana.
The motion to refer was agreed to.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time and severally referred to appropriate Committees unless otherwise stated:
By Mr. BENZ [S. 76] to amend Section 6 of the homestead law of March 29, 1879,
exempting from sale and execution, and exempting certain personal property. It was
referred to the
By Mr. FOULKE [S.
By Mr. MAGEE [S. 78] to amend Section 2 of
the act to establish a State Bureau of Statistics, approved March 29, 1879. It was
referred to the
By Mr. RISTINE [S. 79] to amend Section 4 of the act establishing a Bureau of Statistics so as to extend the power of the Chief to call for facts. It amends Section 7 by fixing a penalty, as to foreign corporations doing business in the State, for refusal to furnish facts when applied for.
It was referred to the
By Mr. SPANN [S.
By Mr. VAN VORHIS [S. 81] to amend Section 30 of the general city incorporation law,
approved March 14, 18
By Mr. FOULKE [S. 82] to amend the act approved April 2, 1881, being Section 4,688
of the Revised Statutes of 1881, concerning Boards of Election, so as to conform to
his bill for the registration of voters. It was referred to the
By Mr. FLETCHER [S. 84] defining cruelty to animals, describing it a misdemeanor,
and for the destruction of certain animals. It was referred to the
Mr. FLETCHER presented a petition from K. J. Bright, E. S. Neal, John McKinney and J.
W, Dodd, concerning their claim for supplies furnished the Indiana Hospital for the
Insane, under the firm name of Neal & Co,, which was referred to the
The Senate look a recess till 2 o'clock.
Mr. SPANN offered a preamble and resolution as follows:
Whereas, There is now pending in the Senate of the United States a bill known as the bill for the relief of General Fitz John Porter from the finding of a Court Martial properly organized, which found him guilty of disobedience of orders to his superior officers, thereby brining great disaster to the cause of the Union Army and causing a great loss of life, and brining shame and disgrace to the brave and loyal men who were standing in defense of the Union;
Resolved, That our Senators and Representatives in both Houses of Congress are hereby asked and urged to use their influence of voice and vote to defeat said measure, and the Secretary of the Senate is directed to transmit a copy of this resolution to each Congressman and Senator from Indiana.
Mr. VOYLES moved to lay it on the table.
This motion was agreed to by yeas, 23; nays, 17.
Pending the roll call-
Mr. BROWN, in explanation of his vote, said he thought our Senators and Representatives in Congress are quite as competent to discharge their duties with instructions from this Senate as they would be with them. In the next place, General Grant, who is the King of all the Kings in the Republican party, has declared his belief in the complete innocence of General Porter, and denounced the conviction as wrong, and many other members of the Republican party equally as able as the Senator from Rush [Mr. Spann] have likewise spoken in Porter's behalf. For that reason he should vote to lay the motion on the table.
Mr. CAMPBELL, when his name was called, was understood to say he had not examined into the Fitz John Porter case, but believed there are two sides to the question as to reinstatement. He had confidence in those who have the decision of that question and was willing to allow them to act without direction from this body, and had no desire to give instructions to them on that question. He voted "aye."
Mr. GRAHAM, when his named was called, said for years this question had been reposing and the country has been satisfied. Though the question has been brought forward from the time General Porter has never been restored. General Logan, who has knowledge of the merits of the case, still adheres to the wisdom of the verdict of the Court Martial. He was satisfied that officer's failure to do his duty caused thousands of soldiers to sleep the long sleep of death, and now he can afford to sleep in abeyance. He voted "no."
Mr. HOWARD, understanding this to be a political question being paired declined to vote.
Mr. McINTOSH, when his name was called, said he could not regard this as a political question, and as he was perfectly willing to vote upon the merits of the question he voted "no."
Mr. SPANN, when his name was called, said he was sorry, exceedingly sorry, that some Senators on the other side of the Chamber shield themselves from voting on this resolution behind what is commonly known as a pair. He did not regard this as a political question in any sense, however, as some think so, and, intending to observe his pair with a fellow Senator [Mr. Bell], he should not vote.
Mr. WILLARD, when his name was called, said he did not regard this as a political question, nor did he desire this vote to reveal a partisan vote. For that reason and being willing to vote upon the question directly, he would not vote with a majority of his own party, but voted "no."
Mr. YANCEY considered this a strictly political question. He believed that if justice had been dealt out to Fitz John Porter fifteen years ago he would not be now knocking at the door for back pay and reinstatement. He thought it outrageous that any man who had pursued such a traitorous course should seek to be restored to an equal footing with honest men. He voted "no."
Mr. BENZ desired his name to be called again, and said he did not consider this a political question and voted "no," but he would change his vote now and vote "aye." [Laughter].
Mr. KEISER desired his name to be called again, saying, without regarding this as a political question at all, and as one who served with his fellow-members on this floor now opposed to him in politics, he voted "no."
Mr. HILLIGASS had not regarded this as a political question, but as it is put in that light he desired to have his named called again so as to change his vote. He was following one of the grandest and noblest leaders of the Union Army when standing before this body he said a great injustice has been done General Fitz John Porter. Being a soldier in the Army, with General Grant as a leader-after elevated to the Chief Magistracy of the United States by the soldiers of this country, who very recently said he was satisfied, upon an investigation of the testimony and evidence in the case, that a great injustice had been done a worthy comrade-in-arms-he though he could afford as a soldier in the Union Army to vote "aye."
Mr. SMITH, of Jay demanding that his name be called again, also changed his vote from "no" to "aye.".
The vote was then announced as above.
So the resolution lies on the table.
On motion the Senate took a recess till 3 o'clock.
At the hour of 3 the LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR resumed the Chair, and announced the order to be memorial service in honor of General George Chapman, late a member of this body.
Mr. SPANN moved that the courtesies of the floor be extended to Mayor Grubbs, who was a fellow Senator with General Chapman, and that he be allowed to make such remarks as he may see fit.
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. VAN VORHIS offered the following:
Resolved, That in the death of Senator George H. Chapman, this Senate has lost an able officer and valuable member, the people of the State a conscientious Representative, the State a most useful citizen, and the Nation a patriot and one of its bravest defenders.
Mr. VAN VORHIS read a sketch of the life of his late colleague [General George H. Chapman] and though not feeling qualified to be his eulogist-not being intimately acquainted previous to the election of 1880-his paper was more largely a memorial tribute than biographical.
Messrs. Willard, Spann, Fletcher, [General Chapman's successor] ex-Senator Grubbs, [by courtesy of the Senate], Henry, Ristine, Bundy, Graham, [who sat at the same desk with General Chapman last session] and Brown, following in remarks suited to the occasion.
In support of this resolution, Mr. Van Vorhis said:
Mr. President-Senator George H. Chapman was born in Holland, Mass., November 1832. His father was Jacob P. Chapman, who was for several years prominently identified with the press of Indiana.
The late Senator received most of his early education in Indianapolis, in the Marion County Seminary. At the age of fifteen he entered the United States Navy as a midshipman, where he remained three years. In 1853, he was connected with his father in the publication of a paper known as "The Chanticleer." afterward as the Indiana Republican. He studied law and was admitted to the bar in 1857. In the same year he was Assistant Clerk of the House of Representatives. In 1859 and 1860 he was Assistant Clerk of the Lower House of the Thirty-sixth and Thirty-seventh Congresses. On October 21, 1861, after the beginning of the War of Rebellion, he was appointed Major of the Third Indiana Cavalry. One year after he was commissioned Lieutenant Colonel, and in less than five months more Colonel. On July 21, 1864, he was promoted to be Brigadier General of volunteers. On Mary 13, 1865, for meritorious conduct at the battle of Winchester, he was breveted Major General of volunteers. After the close of the War he was first appointed and afterward elected Judge of the Marion Criminal Court. After the close of his term of office as Judge he engaged in the practice of his profession in this city. In the fall of 1880 he was elected as a member of the State Senate for the term ending in 1884.
He died at his residence in this city on the evening of the 16th day of June, 1882. Such, in brief, is the history of the public life of a man of whom it may be truthfully said he won every distinction almost alone. He was without influence, except what he gathered about him by a recognition of merits, and this recognition his own conduct compelled. I do not feel that I am in any sense qualified to be his eulogist. Though representing the same County in the last Senate, I had from the election in 1880 not a very intimate personal acquaintance with General Chapman. I knew him as you and many others knew him, by the reputation that he had made for himself. I knew him by the way in which he impressed himself upon those who were more intimately acquainted with him than I. General Chapman can not be said to have been prepossessing in appearance. Socially, he was retiring in manner. To a stranger he did not always represent himself well. But the warmth and strength of the friendship entertained for him by those who were his most intimate acquaintances and had opportunity to know him best, was an index to the intensity of his intellect and the force of his character. He not only compelled recognition, but he attaached to him with warmth that was unusual even hearts as well as intellects. It is only by the words of such to whom in social life he had more fully revealed himself that I was able to judge with any degree of fullness of those traits of character so admirable in a friend. Never in his sociely much until the meeting of the last Senate. I was just beginning, through the associations there begun, to feel and appreciate his generous and kindly nature when he died.
General Chapman was so constituted that it was impossible to know him quickly. Association with him, however, never caused any man to esteem him less; acquaintance with him always increased respect for him.
His public life gave evidence of his superior ability. His knowledge of questions
of public interest was comprehensive and thorough. Wherever he served he served
well, and whether as a citizen, a soldier, a lawyer, a Judge, or a Senator on this
floor, his right to a place in the front rank was recognized. He was dignified, but
was without ostentation. In his opinions he was independent, but was never
intolerant of the opinions of others. Distinguished for his bravery in military
life, he was no less distinguished for his moral courage in civil life. That which
he believed to be right he advocated with the full strength of his clear intellect,
never
He never prevaricated with his own under standing. He was frank, and at times outspoken almost to offensiveness, but it was in the spirit of candor, and without a touch of malice. He was just in bis judgments, and was not much influenced by prejudices, and his estimates of others were colored by a spirit of true charity, but insincerity he could not and would not overlook, He was especially severe in his condemnation of anyone who occupied a position of insincerity before the public. His attitude was never uncertain, and his position on any question never remained long in doubt. He was true to his own highest conceptions of right in all his public life. With him policy was but another I name for the right, and expediency but another name for duty The slightest sacrifice of principle was a price he never paid for preferment.
If he had follies-and who in all the earth has not-the remembrance of them is made bright by the memory of his victory over them. If he had faults they were never wilful, and his splendid virtues cover them as with a mantle. He has left us the legacy of a true life, and has gone on before us; passed out of sight beyond the vail that marks the limit of human knowledge, into the illimitable future. And the portals through which he disappeared are radiant with the hope of the Father's house, of the resplendent glories of which it has not "entered into the heart of man to conceive."
Senator Fletcher spoke as follows :
Sitting at this desk, decorated with these emblems of sorrow occupying this chair, made vacant by the hand of death, and representing the same constituency, it seems fitting that the first time I address this Senate it should be in acknowledging the worth and honoring the memory of Senator Chapman.
Upon the sudden death of a friend, the first outburst of grief is like molten iron-it burns, seethes and hisses in our hearts; but when the mass is cooled by time. we may inspect it, or shape it at our pleasure and test its true value as a metal. A summer's gun has warmed his grave: a winter's snow now covers it; the first hot grief xs cooled, and this memory of his clear, bright character remains with us, an imperishable monument. In touching upon his character I would adopt the plan of plain perspiecuity of truth.
Senator Chapman was a type of highly nervous organization; his mental seemed to. feed inordinately upon his physical. His mind was in- tensity itself. and subjects examined by him had to yield up their facts.
I had known Senator Chapman nearly thirty years-as a youthful journalist, as a citizen, a soldier, a jurist and legislator. I met him frequently, not as an intimate friend, but neighborly acquaintance. He was a man who would attract attention by his quiet demeanor, unless he was aroused to action by a just cause; then he would equally attract by his persistent, terse, sharp, incisive method of dealing with and pursuing his subject. He took life seriously, and circumstances with the last two years had laid upon him a twofold burden of sorrow in the : death of two bright boys. About a year ago, just as twilight was fading into darkness, I met him in a remote part of the city alone. He did not recognize, me, but passed with measured tread-eyes peering into the gloaming, as vainly looking for a lost hope. As he disappeared into the darkness he reminded me of a walking monument of grief.
I saw him no more until we met, one beautiful afternoon in March last, in the delightful Park of San Pedro Springs, at San Antonia, Texas. His changed look then betokened that his life's sun was going down. He talked, however, more freely than usual, and more kindly of the world than I had ever known. Particularly did he dwell upon his work in this body, which he regarded as a laborious and thankless task, wherein he used his best abilities and diligence to act wisely upon all questions-freeing them from partisan qualities. But his humble efforts, he thought, had frequently been misconstrued by many whom he regarded as friends. I saw him but once after his return home; then came the startling news that be was dead.
Examine the life and character of Senator Chapman as closely as we may and all will conclude that he was a good citizen, a brave and skillful soldier, a wise jurist, an able statesman and an honest man. Than this no higher eulogy can be spoken.
On motion by Mr. BUNDY the resolution was adopted by a rising vote, and the Secretary of the Senate was directed to transmit a copy of the resolutions to the family of the deceased.
The Senate then adjourned till 10 o'clock to-morrow.
The SPEAKER announced prayer by Rev. Dr. Pierson, of the Second Presbyterian Church, of Indianapolis.
A call of the House was then taken, ninety-five members answering to their names.
Mr. ADAMS, of Morgan County, made an ineffectual motion to dispense with the reading of the journal of yesterday.
The Clerk's minutes of yesterday's proceedings were being read, when
Mr. PATTEN made an ineffectual motion to dispense with the further reading of the journal.
The journal was read and corrected and approved.
The SPEAKER announced the following Special Commitee on the State House Affairs: Heffren, Moody, McCormick, Shockney and Histon.
Mr Mock's bill [H. R. 106] concerning certain criminal cases before Justices of the
Peace, was returned from the
Mr. Montgomery's bill [H. R. 76] relative to the duties of Justices of the Peace, was
reported back from the
These reports were severally concurred in.
The following bills were introduced, read the first time, and severally referred to the appropriate Committees unless otherwise stated:
By Mr. McHENRY [H. R. 119] providing for the election of Directors in School
Districts outside of towns and cities. It was referred to
By Mr. WILEY [H. R. 120] to repeal an act enabling owners of wet lands to drain and
reclaim the same. It was referred to the
By Mr. SMITH, of Blackford, [H R. 121] to amend Section 11 of an act providing for the mode of doing Township Dimness, being Section 5,598 of the Revised Statutes.
By Mr. SMITH, of Blackford, [H. R. 122] to amend Section 22 of an action for the
relief of the poor, being Section 6,087 of the Revised Statutes. It was reported to
the
By Mr. ROBINSON [H, R. 123] to amend Section 1 of an act authorizing aliens to hold
title to real estate, etc. It was referred to the
By Mr. GREEN [H R. 124] to amend Section 97 of the General Common School act, being
Section 4,393 of the Revised Statutes of 1881. It was referred to the
By Mr HELMS [H. R. 125] to amend Section 33 of the County Superintendent act, being
Section 4,424 of the Revised Statutes of 1881. It was referred to the
By Mr. MOSIER [H. R. 126] to amend Section 14, being 2,675 of the Revised Statutes
concerning signees and trustees. It was referred to the
By Mr. MAUCK [H. R. 127] to amend Section 21 of an act concerning the prosecution of
criminal cases. It was referred to the
By Mr. MAUCK [H. R. 128] to amend Section 412 of the act concerning proceedings in
civil cases. It was referred to the
By Mr. FLEECE [H. R. 129] to amend Sections 1, 2 and 3 of an act providing for the
organization of County Boards and presenting some of the duties thereof, being
Sections 5,731, 5,732 and 5,733 of the Revised Statutes of 188l. It was referred to
the
Mr. COPELAND [H R. 130] to amend Section 151 of an act, it being Section 2,331 of
the Revised Statutes, providing for the settlement and distribution of decedents'
estate^. It was referred to the
By Mr COPELAND[H. R. 131] to provide punishment for knowingly selling real estate or
any interest therein not having title for the same; shall be deemed guilty of felony.
It was referred to the
By Mr Davis [H. R. 132] to amend Section 243, being Section 2,145 of the Revised Statutes, relating to out-swinging doors.
Pending the introduction of the above the described bills-
Mr. PRICE offered a resolution, which was adopted,authorizing especial Committee of Three to arrange for better ventilation of this hall.
The SPEAKER made this Committee, viz: Messrs. Price, Peters and Genung.
Mr. THOMPSON offered a preamble and resolution reciting that
Whereas, Colonel Elijah H. Penny, of Kokomo, was the only officer from this State who remained at his post of duly until the close of the War, notwithstanding having been twice severely wounded, and suffering the lose of his right arm, besides a painful wound in the side; therefore
Resolved, That the House of Representatives testifies its appreciation or his services by spreading this resolution on the records thereof.
On motion by Mr HEFFREN the resolution amended by adding the words "and we also extend the same feelings of respect to all soldiers and officers who performed their duties "
The resolution as amended was adopted.
The House took a recess till 3 o'clock.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time and severally passed to the second reading:
By Mr. FERRITER [H. R. 133] providing tor Board of Metropolitan Police Commissioners
in all cities of 25,000 or more inhabitants. It provides for the appointment of three
Commissioners, who shall receive $400 salary each. It was referred to the
The following is the full text of the bill:
An act providing for a metropolitan police in all cities of 25,000 or more inhabitants, and for the appointment of a Board of Metropolitan Police Commissioners for such cities, and denning their duties and prescribing their power, providing for the appointment of officers, patrolmen and other members of the metropolitan police force of such cities, by such Board and the manner of paying them for their services, and providing tor the abolition of existing Boards of Police and police forces in such cities, and for the abolition of the office of City Marshal in such cities and declaring an emergency.
Section 1. Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Indiana, that in all cities of this State of 25,000 or more inhabitants, according to the United States census when last taken, there shall be established within and for such cities a Board of Metropolitan Police to consist of three Commissioners to be appointed by the Governor, Secretary, Auditor and Treasurer of the State; the said Commissioners to be so appointed shall be of good moral character, sober and discreet, who are citizens of the State of Indiana and shall have resided in such city for at least three years next preceding their appointment. One of the said Commissioners to serve until the first day of January, 1884; one to serve until the first day of January, 1885; and one to serve until the first day of January, 1886, and for the term of three years each, as their successors are appointed and qualified. Said Commissioners shall be subject to removal by the Governor, Secretary, Auditor and Treasurer of the State, or a majority of them. Before entering upon their duties they shall each take and subscribe before such Clerk the further oath or affirmation that in any and every appointment or removal to be by them made to form the police force created and to be organized by them under this act, they will in no case and under no pretext appoint any policeman, officer, or other person or for any other cause or reason than fitness or unfitness of such person, in the best judgment of said Commissioners, for the place to which he shall be appointed, or from which he shall be removed, and the said oath shall be recorded and placed among the records of said Court. The said Commissioners shall each give bond in the final sum of $5,000, payable to the State of Indiana, conditional for the faithful and honest discharge of their duties, subject to the approval of the Governor, Secretary, Auditor and Treasurer of the State, or a majority of them. The salary of the Board of Metropolitan Police Commissioners of such cities shall be fixed by the Governor, Secretary, Auditor and Treasurer of State, which salary shall not exceed $400 each per annum, payable quarterly out of the treasury of such city.
Sec. 2. The said Board of Metropolitan Police Commissioners shall have power to
appoint a Superintendent of Police. Captains, Sergeants, Detectives and such other
officers and patrolmen as they may deem advisable; said Commissioners shall not have
the power to appoint more than one patrolman for each 750 inhabitants in such city.
Such Superintendent, Captain, officers and patrolmen shall receive such compensation
as the Commissioners shall determine, provided that the compensation for
Superintendent shall not be less than $1,000 nor more than $1,800 per annum; that the
compensation for Captain shall not be less than $700 nor more than $1,000 per annum;
that the compensation for a
Sec. 3. The said Commissioners shall appoint one of their number to act as President, who shall be ex officio a member of the Board of Health of such city, and they shall apoint some person not a member of the Board to act as Secretary and Property Clerk, who shall give bond to said Commissioners in any amount and with sureties to be approved by said Commissioners conditioned for the safe keeping by and his rendition upon the order of the Commissioners of all money and other property which shall come into his hands by virtue of his office, and he shall receive such compensation annually as may be determined by such Commissioners, and hold his office at the pleasure of the Commissioners.
Sec. 4. The qualifications enumeration and distribution of cities and mode of trial and removal from office of each officer and member of said police force, shall be defined and prescribed by rules and regulations of the Commissioners of Police.
Sec. 5. Said Commissioners shall, as soon as they shall have been appointed and qualified, assume and exercise the entire control of the police force of each city, and shall possess full an d exclusive power and authority over the police organization, government, appointment and discipline within such city. It shall have custody and control of all public property, including Station Houses and City Prisons, patrol wagons, books, records and equipments belonging to the Police Department. All existing Police Boards, police officers, police forces, created and maintained by the ordinance or resolutions of the Board of Aldermen or Common Council of such city are hereby abolished, to take effect upon the organization of the Board of Metropolitan Police Commissioners of such city.
Sec. 6. The officers and members of such Metropolitan police forces shall possess all the common law ans statutory powers of Constables, except for the service of civil process.
Sec. 7. It shall be the duty of the Board of Aldermen and Board of Common Council of such city, as shall have two such Boards, and of the Common Council of such city where but one of such Boards exists, to provide at the expense of such city all necessary accammodations within such city limits for Station Houses to furnish the same, to warm and light the same by day and night, and to provide food for person or persons detained in any of said Station Houses, when such food is deemed necessary for such person or persons by the officers in charge; also to provide for the payment monthly of the pay-rolls of the officers, members and employes of such Board of Metropolitan Police Commissioners upon the certificate of the President and Secretary of each Board as to the correctness of the same; also, for such necessary office expenses, record books, stationery, printing, telegraphing, badges, clubs, furniture for rooms, and for the preservation, repair and cleaning of the buildings and rooms used by the Commissioners, for advertising fund, light, board of the prisoners, and for the arrest, conveyance and custody of prisoners, it being the intention and meaning of this section that the necessary expenses incurred in the execution of criminal process for offenses charged to have been committed in such city by the Board of Metropolitan Police Commissioners and the maintenance of the Police Department hereby created within such city shall be a charge to such city.
Sec. 8. The members of the metropolitan, police force shall have the exclusive power, and it shall be their duty, to serve all process within such city issuing from the Mayor or City Judge's ; Court of such city, and all the duties now performed by the City Marshal or his Deputy in serving writs, executing orders of said Court, attending said Court, conveying persons to and from the County Jail or Station Houses of such, city, arraignment or trial before said Court, or conveying prisoners to the House of Correction or Work House, Reform School or County Jail, or ; other place of punishment or imprisonment under the judgment, sentence or order of process of said County shall be performed by members of said metropolitan police force, and the office of City Marshal of such city is hereby abolished, and the duties of such office shall hereafter be performed by the Superintendent of the Metropolitan Police Force of such city, or by the Captain or Sergeants of Police under his direction. i
Sec. 9. No officer or member of such metropolitan police force shall receive for any service rendered by him in discharge of any police duty, or as a witness in any case before the Mayor or City Judge for any duty performed as baliff of such Court any fee or compensation whatever except the regular fixed per diem or yearly allowance made for his services as an officer or member of such police force.
Sec. 10. An person or persons, or corporation or Common Council, or other municipal, Township, County or State officer or officers who shall in any manner interfere or interrupt the Board of Metropolitan Police Commissioners of such city in any act of theirs, or of the police force herein authorized to be created, or shall prevent such Board or force from discharging their duties as defined in this act, shall, upon conviction before the Mayor or City Judge, or before the Circuit Court of said County, be fined not less than $100 nor more than $1,000 and imprisoned for not less than thirty nor more than ninety days for each separate offense.
Sec. 11. The Commissioners whenever it shall seem to them discreet may, upon the
application of any person or persons, showing the necessity thereof, appoint and swear
in any number of additional patrolmen to do duty at any place within said city, at the
charge and expense of the person or persons by whom the application shall be made, and
the patrolmen so appointed shall perform duty only at the place designated by said
Commissioners. They shall continue in office at the pleasure of said Commissioners for
a term not exceeding one year, shall be subject to and obey the orders, rules and
regulations of said Commissioners and conform to the general discipline of the police
force of such city, and to such special regulations as may be made by such
Commissioners for their government; and the persons so appointed may be removed at any
time by the Commissioners. The Commissioners may, upon emergency, with the written
consent of the Governor of the State and Mayor of such city, appoint such number of
special patrolmen as they may deem advisable, but such special patrolmen shall serve
for not exceeding seven consecutive days, unless their employment for a longer period
shall be ap
Sec. 12. It shall be unlawful for any patrolman or other member of said force while on duty to solicit any person to vote at any general or special election for any candidate or candidates for office, or to challenge any voter, or in any manner attempt to influence any elector at such election, and any patrolman or other member of said force shall be fined in any sum not less than $10 nor more than $50, and be dismissed from service.
Sec. 13 The Superintendent, Captains and other officers of said force shall each give bond in <he final sum of from $1,000 to $3,000, to be determined by the Commissioners, conditioned for the faithful discharge of their several duties.
Sec. 14. All laws and parts of laws coming in conflict with this act be and the same are hereby repealed.
Sec. 15. Whereas an emergency exists for the Immediate taking effect of this act, therefore the same shall be enforced from and after its passage.
By Mr. HOWLAND [H. R 134] to amend Section 1 of an act providing for the regulation
of stock running at large. It was referred to the
By Mr. WILSON, of Marion, [H. R. 135] requiring notice to municipal corporations by
persons receiving injury on account of any neglect by officers of corporations within
thirty days It was referred to
By Mr. WILSON, of Marion, by request [H. R. 136] providing for the sale and exchange
of unserviceable military stores. It was referred to the
By Mr. ANTRIM [H. R. 137) to amend Section 5 of an act to amend an act providing for
a general system of Common Schools. It was referred to the
Mr. STEWART, by request, presented certain claims, which were referred to the
By Mr. SHOCKNEY [H. R 138] to amend Section 1 of an act to amend Section 8 of an act
providing for a general system of Common Schools. It was referred to the
By Mr JEWETT [H. R. 139] to amend Sections 75, 79 and 93. the same being Sections
1,648, l,652 and 1,666 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, of an act concerning
proceeding in criminal cases. It was referred to the
Mr. SUTTON presented a claim from Neal & Co., contractors, for iron work on the
new Insane Asylum building, and asked that the Legislature provide for their relief.
It was referred to the
By Mr. MUTZ [H. R 140] to regulate the tariff for freight and passenger fare on the
railroads in Indiana. Referred to the
By Mr. BEST [H. R. 141] to amend Section 60 of an act concerning elections and the
contesting thereof, the same being: Section 322 of the Revised Statues of 1881. It was
referred to the
By Mr. SENDERSON [H. R 142] to amend Section 142 of an act, the same being Section
2,105, Revised Statutes, concerning public offenses. It was referred to the
By Mr. HENDERSON [H.R. 143]to amend Section 7 of an act supplemented by an act, being
Section 3,441 of the Revised Statutes of 1881. changing time of settlement of School
Trustees with the County Commissioners. Referred to the
By Mr. HUSTON [H. R. 144] prohibiting Railroads and Transportation Companies from
giving or offering to certain public officers reduced rates. It was referred to
Mr. McMULLEN offered a resolution Allowing the Assistant Doorkeeper and other employes $5 per day, and the pages $2 per day.
The resolution, on motion of Mr FRAZIER. was referred to a Special Committee of Three, which Committee subsequently reported in favor of adopting the resolution.
The report of the Committee was concurred ini
Mr. GORDON offered a resolution, which was adopted, that the Clerk be instructed to have printed and lay upon the desk of members each Monday morning a complete calendar of bills.
Mr. McMULLEN offered a resolution that 500 copies of the report of the Kankakee River survey be laid on the desk of members.
Mr. HEFFREN moved an amendment by adding the words "Provided that the reports have been printed."
The resolution was adopted as amended, after an ineffectual motion to lay it on the table.
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Sullivan, offered a resolution which was adopted, that the
Mr. SMITH, of Tippecanoe, offered a resolution that it be the sense of this House that the rate of interest on school funds shall not be less than 7 per cent.
Mr. McMULLEN opposed the resolution and said that so far as bis County Is concerned school money has been lying in the office unused because the rate of interest was too high. The current rate of interest is only 6 per cent. He was opposed to that resolution.
Mr. MUTZ was willing that the resolution should be referred to the
Mr. HEFFREN was opposed to the resolution,, and said we have in Washington County $10,000 of school fund lying unused because; it has to be loaned at 8 per cent. He moved to lay the motion on the table.
The motion was agreed to.
The House adjourned till 10 o'clock a. m. to-morrow.
The reading of the Secretary's minutes of yesterday's proceedings was dispensed with.
Mr. W1LLARD announced the appointment of W. J. Turpen as clerk of the third group of Committees.
Mr. FAULKNER, from the
Also the House concurrent resolution requesting Indiana Congressmen to favor the pensioning of Mexican soldiers and sailors and their widows.
These reports were placed upon the Calendar of the Senate under a role of last session.
Mr. VAN VORHIS offered the following:
Whereas, The Constitution provides that any amendments may be proposed in either House of the General Assembly; and,
Whereas, The Constitution further provides that any proposed amendment or amendments, when agreed to by a majority of the members elected to each of the two Houses, "shall, together with the yeas and nays thereon, be entered on the journals and referred to the General Assembly chosen at the next election; and,
Whereas, It is known that certain amendments were under consideration in the last General Assembly; and,
Whereas, If any proposed amendment or amendments were agreed to by a majority of the members elected to each House, such proposed amendment or amendments should be found on the journals; therefore
Resolved, That the Judiciary be instructed to examine the journals of the House of Representatives and Senate of the last General Assembly and report at an early day what, if any, amendment or amendments to the Constitution were proposed by that Assembly and referred to this, and are now on said journals awaiting the action of the Senate.
Mr. VAN VORHIS read from manuscript a care fully prepared argument in support of his resolution, citing various authorities and decisions tending to prove that the absence of the proposed Constitutional amendments from the pages of the Clerk' journal of the last General Assembly prevents action on those amendments by this General Assembly except as a new proposition.
Mr. SPANN, not desiring to enter upon this discussion from a legal standpoint at this
time, indicated his opposition to the resolution, especially the latter part.
Instructing the
Mr. BROWN hoped the Senate would adopt the resolution. He did not understand that a
report from a Committee would bind the conscience cut any Senator. No one is expected
to answer the able and conclusive argument of the Senator from Marion [Mr. Van
Vorhis], if indeed it can be answered at all, without a faithful and careful
investigation ot the question. The Senator from Rush [Mr. Spann] may make the roads
fork if he chooses between the entire Republican party and the Senator from Marion
[Mr. Van Vorhis] if he chooses, but it will take a much more able man than the Senator
from Rush or any member of his party to overturn the sound reasons the Senator from
Marion has given. This is not a question that dips its wing into the dirty pool of
politics, but it is a question that appeals to the judgment and conscience of every
individual Senator. No party this side of hell and the grave, or hell itself, could
bind him to vote according to the dictates of its caucus upon a question of such high
importance aa this. The Wabash and Erie Canal resolution is a pre
Mr. BELL did not propose at this litre to enter into a discussion of the question involved. It is one of the highest intent si to ail. Neither did he regard it as a political question. When he learns where the right and truth lie, it is beyond the power of any body of men belonging to any party to control or direct his actions. This is a question of jurisdiction. We have no jurisdiction in any amendment not properly passed a preceding General Assembly in accordance with the Constitution. Our action and our judgment is final and no Court in the land can review or go behind it. Every member is called upon to exercise his highest skill in the determination of this question. The principal point about it he was not well satisfied is what is meant by the words in the Constitution, "to be entered on the journals,". If the Constitution had said "to be spread at length upon the journals of the House." then there would be no doubt about the meaning whatever. Do those words in the Constitution mean that a minute shall be entered, or do they mean the resolution itself shall be entered? Do they mean it shall be spread hic verba, to use the language of the law? There are peculiar reasons why that should be so. The strong reason is there seems to be no other method of authentication provided. It need not be by joint resolution that amendments may be proposed. They may originate in either House and agreed to by members of both Houses. Another reason in support of this view is that the framers of the Constitution were contemplating a safe preservation of the exact language of the proposed amendment, so that it might be out of the power of anybody to change it. A paper to be found only among the mass of matter in the Secretary of State's Office containing so importatn a matter as an amendment to the Constitution-the attempt to preserve such a paper in that manner would be unwise, and that may have been the view the framers of the Constitution took of it. It is altogether probably the framers of the Constitution meant to provide a method of preservation beyond the possibility of mistake, and to put it beyond the power of change or loss. He hoped the resolution would be passed; hoped the Committee would investigate and report all the light that can be had on the subject, and then hoped to hear not only from those who agreed with him, but just as freely from those who disagreed.
The resolution was adopted-yeas, 27; nays,21-as follows:
Yeas-Messrs. Bell, Benz, Bischowsky, Brown, Compton, Davidson, Duncan, Faulkner, Fletcher, McClure, McCulloch, Null, Rahm, Richardson, Smith of Jay, Van Vorhis, Voyles, Willard, Youch-26.
Nays-Messers. Adkison, Bundy, Campbell, Ernst, Fleming, Foulk, Graham, Henry, Keiser, Lockridge, Lindley, McCartney, Marvin, McIntosh, Overstreet, Ristine, Sayre, Smith of Delaware, Spann, White, Yancey-21.
Pending the roll call-
Mr. BISCHOWSKY, in explanation of his vote, when his name was called, said as the
resolution of the Senator from Marion only peeks to have the facts reported by the
Mr. HOWARD, when his name was called stated his pair with the Senator from Noble [Mr. Hostetter], and as this has the aspect of a political question, preferred not to vote.
Mr. WILLARD, in explanation of his vote, said as he understood it this resolution
merely calla upon the
Mr. YANCEY, when his name was called, said as he believed these amendments pending and these sort of measures simply a hood-winking, a quibble, and a legerdamain practice to fool the people of the State, he should vote "no."
The vote was then announced as above recorded, and so the resolution was adopted.
The PRESIDENT pro. tem. (Mr. Henry in the Chair) presented additional papers in the
case of Johnston vs. Overstreet, which was referred to the
Mr. SPANN subsequently gave notice that he would file a protest against the reference of the additional papers in the Johnston-Overstreet contest.
Mr. McCULLOCH offered a concurrent resolution requesting and instructing Indiana's representatives in Congress to oppose the adoption of any bankrupt law.
Mr. BUNDY made an ineffectual motion to refer the resolution to the
Mr. FAULKNER, in explanation of his vote, stated that he thought our Senators and Representatives in Congress capable of attending to their own business without instruction from the Indiana Legislature.
The resolution was adopted by yeas, 26; nays, 21.
The Senate took a recess till 2 o'clock.
Petitions praying for the submission to the qualified voters of Indiana at a special
election an amendment to the Constitution prohibiting the manufacture and sale of
alcoholic beverage, were presented by Messrs. Henry, Lockridge and Bundy. They were
referred to the
Mr. CAMPBELL offered the following (by request of the Democratic Senator from Laport):
Whereas, John H. Winterbotham, late defeated candidate for Congress in the Thirteenth District of this State, has memorialized this Senate, making certain suggestions in regard to legislation and asking for consideration thereof; and,
Whereas, Upon dates concurrent or nearly so with the transmission of said
memorial, the said Winterbotham sent in writing to a majority of the members
of this Senate language highly insulting to one of its esteemed members, the
Senator from Laporte, and not stopping at that, sent to the member himself a
copy of the said scandalous letter which he had sent to a majority of the
members of this Senate, and together with such letter, sent one to the Senator
himself couched in the most ungentlemanly and insult
Whereas, We desire to express confidence in our brother Senator from Laporte, and to have it known that this body construes this insult to one of its members in his official capacity as an insult to the Senate itself; therefore
Resolved, That the
Mr. CAMPBELL read several pages of manuscript, in which he held that as ex-Senator Winterbotham shown disrespect to one Senator he had shown it to the entire Senate, and was therefore not entitled to any consideration by the Senate.
Several Senators, soon after he commenced, insisted that, the resolution was out of order.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: He disliked to decide the point of order, and would let the discussion go on. The majority can control the matter in some other way than to require the Chair to cut off discussion.
Mr BROWN said he bad the honor and the pleasure to present the memorial referred to, and in it there is not a word of reproach for any person in the Senate, or for any Senator. He spoke sarcastically for some time, and in conclusion moved to lay the resolution on the table.
The motion was agreed to by yeas, 24; nays, 20.
Mr. Brown moved to reconsider this vote by which his motion was agreed to and to lay that motion on the table.
The latter motion was agreed to by yeas, 24; nays, 20.
The House concurrent resolution requesting Indiana Congressmen to use their influence to make provision for pensioning soldiers and widows of deceased soldiers of the Mexican War, with a favorable Committee report thereon, being read, the report was concurred in and the resolution adopted.
The following described bills were introduced read the first time, and severally referred to appropriate committees unless otherwise stated:
By Mr. DUNCAN [S. 85] to amend Section 243 of the act of April 14, 1881, being
Section 2,155 of Revised Statutes, concerning out-swinging doors. It was referred to
the
By Mr. FLEMING [S.86] to amend Section 2 of the plank and gravel road act of
March, 1877. It was referred to the
By Mr. MAY [S. 87] by request of Senator Rahm, providing for the location and
erection of an additional asylum for the insane, the governor to appoint four
Building Commissioners of diverse politics to superintend such a building near
Evansville at $5 per day. It was referred to the
By Mr. RISTINE [S. 88] to amend Section 4 of the Senate act authorizing the
formation of Companies for the apprehension of horse thieves, etc., et., of December
21, 1865. It was referred to the
By Mr. SMITH, of Jay [S. 89] to amend
Section 28 of the general Common School law, approved March 6, 1855, being Section
456 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, relating to teachers' license. It was referred
to the
By Mr. SPANN [S. 90] by request of the Adjutant General of the State for the sale
or exchange of military stores, ordinance stores, etc. It was referred to the
By Mr. VOYLES [S. 91] designating a means by which the House of Refuge for the correction of juvenile offenders shall be known, etc., etc., etc. (Shall be known as the Indiana Reform School for Boys.)
By Mr. WHITE [S. 92] to amend Section 8 of the act concerning elections, approved
April 21, 1881. It was referred to the
By Mr YOUCHE [S. 93] to repeal the railroad aid act of May 12, 1869. It was referred.
By Mr. BELL [S. 94] to enable the owners of land subject to overflow, etc, to drain
and reclaim the same. It passed both Houses last term.. It was referred to the
By Mr. DAVIDSON [S. 95] to prohibit the sale of intoxicating liquors in certain
cases. It was referred to the
By Mr. BROWN [S. 96] to legalize the contracts and proceedings of County Courts in
the purchase and sale of property in certain cases. It was referred to the
Mr. McINTOSH offered a resolution authorizing pay for extra Doorkeepers appointed beyond what the law provides for and directing their discharge.
Mr. BELL raised a point of order that this question had been decided Friday.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR decided if there was no power to appoint, all action in that direction was void.
The motion to refer was agreed to.
On motion of Mr. SAYRE, it was ordered that when the Senate adjourns it be till Monday at 2 y'clock p. m.
The bill [H. R. ll8] authorizing pay for File Clerks, coming up in regular order, was read for the first time.
On motion by Mr. MAY. the Constitutional rule was dispensed with-yeas, 40; nays, 1-the bill read the second time by title only, amended by adding an emergency clause, and finally passed-yeas 33; nays, 4.
announced his appointment of Peter E. Hoss, of Howard County, a Trustee of the Asylum for the Feeble-minded Children, subject to the consent of the Senate.
The message was referred to the
Mr. BELL: I desire to announce formally the death of Hon, Thomas J. Foster, who was my colleague in former sessions of this General Assembly. He was not, at the date of his death, a member of this General Assembly, but he had served in the Lower House and was a member of the Senate of the last General Assembly. I ask leave at this time to offer the following resolution, and will call it up on Tuesday next, at 3 o'clock p. m.:
Resolved, That this Senate has heard with profound regret of the death of Hon. Thomas J. Foster, a member of the last preceding Seante of this State; that by his death the State has lost an honorable and useful citizen, and one who was a faithful and efficient representative of the people in the General Assembly of which he was a member.
The Senate adjourned till Monday at 2 o'clock p. m., under the order adopted this afternoon.
The SPEAKER announced prayer by Rev. Mr. Wilkey of the German M. E. Church.
Mr JEWETT presented the credentials of Hon. W W. Tuley, the newly-elected member from
the County of Floyd, to fill the vacancy caused by the death of Henry S. Perrette, and
thereupon Mr.
The following described bills were returned to the House from the Standing Committees named, which reports were concurred in unless otherwise stated.
Mr. McMULLEN, from the
Mr. STEWART. from the
Mr. JEWETT, from the
Mr. PATTEN, from the
Mr. JEWETT, from the
Mr. JEWETT, from the
Mr. JEWETT, from the
Mr. McHENRY, from the
Mr. BRYANT from the
Mr. HEFFREN, from the
Mr. McMULLEN offered the following additional to the rules of the House. Rule No. - Every report of a Committee on a bill or resolution shall state the number of the bill or resolution, the name of the member who offered the bill or resolution. In accordance with the rules of the House amendments to the rules have to lie on the table for one day.
Mr. HUSTON offered a resolution that the Clerk of the House request the Secretary of State to furnish the House with certified copies of all proceedings in the last General Assembly concerning the proposed amendments to the Constitution.
Mr. HUSTON said: My reason for introducing that resolution is that it is the only proper course we can pursue to get before us the amendments that passed the last General Assembly. He then read from the statutes that portion which provides that the Secretary of State shall submit and lay before either House of the General Assembly all papers and acts concerning either House of the General Assembly.
Mr. JEWETT opposed the resolution and said: "This resolution ought not to prevail, it seeing to me. This resolution requires the Secretary of State to transmit certified copies of the acts of the last General Assembly to this House. This is already done in the statute books that are on the desks of every member. This statute provides that the acts of our General Assembly shall b entered upon the journal and submitted to the next General Assembly. There is no provision authorizing the Secretary of State to submit such acts."
Mr. GIBSON-I now insist upon the motion to lay upon the table.
The motion was agreed to by yeas, 60; nays, 89.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time and severally referred to appropriate Committees unless otherwise stated:
By Mr MOSIER [H. R. 145] to amend Section 159, the time being Section 4,529 of the Revised Statutes of 1881-the general Common School law, approved May 6,1855.
By Afr CAMPBELL [H. R. 146] to restrain certain animals from running at large.
By Mr. PRUITT [H. R. 147] to provide for the election of Supervisors of roads and highways.
By Mr. SCHLOSS [H. R. 148] ceding the jurisdiction of this State over certain lands owned by 1$: at Terre Haute and Fort Wayne to the United States. On his further motion the bill was passed to the first reading under the suspension of the rules-yeas 93, nays, 0-and passed the House of Representatives by yeas, 93: nays, 0.
By Mr. SHIVELY [H. R. 149] to amend Section 367 of an act, being Section 516 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, concerning procedure in civil cases, approved March 7, 1881.
By Mr. HEFFREN [H R. 150] to empower Judges pro tem. to hold Court.
Mr. WILSON, of Marion, moved for a suspension of the Constitutional rule, in order that the bill may now be read the second time by title only, considered as engrossed, read the third time by sections and put upon its passage.
The motion for a dispensation of the Constitutional restriction was agreed to by ayes, 88; nays, 5. The bill was read the second time by title only, considered engrossed, read the third tim.e by sections, and the question being "Shall the bill pass? "
The House took a recess till 2 o'clock.
The bill [H. R. 150] was passed by aye,. 96; nays, 1.
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, offered a resolution that the
Mr. FRAZIER moved ineffectually to lay the resolution on the table-ayes, 38; yeas, 56.
Mr. HUSTON moved a substitute to the original resolution, which substitute, on motion of Mr. HEFFREN, was laid upon the table-ayes, 56; noes, 39.
Mr. HEFFREN moved tho previous question upon the original resolution, which was seconded by the House-yeas, 59; nays, 38-and under its operations the resolution was adopted-yeas, 56; nays, 38.
Mr. WILSON, from the
The joint resolution [S. 4] instructing our Senator and requesting our Representative to oppose the general bankrupt law now pending in Congress was taken from the speaker's table and read, whereupon Mr. HEFFREN moved an amendment which was adopted, to strike out the word "prove" and insert the word "oppose."
Mr. JEWETT said: As a member of this House I think that resolution ought not to be adopted. I am certain that the commercial interest of this country has increased of late under a thorough bankrupt law, and such a law tends as much as anything else in my judgment, to bring about great commercial prosperity. Now, I will say to the gentlemen of this House who are not engaged in the practice of law that I have paid some little attention tot he law, and I find that the law now before Congress radically differs from the cumbrous laws formerly in force.
Mr. SMITH, of Tippecanoe, said we have thirteen Representatives and two Senators in Congress from this State. I think it is not wise in us to attempt to instruct our Representatives. I think we ought to waive this matter for the present and let this resolution go to the table.
Mr. FRAZIER: I can not add anything to what has been already said by the gentlemen from Washington [Mr. Heffren] and from Tippecanoe [Mr. Smith], but I give my hearty concurrence to what they have said on this subject.
Mr. ADAMS: I think that the commercial interests of our country demand, and always have demanded, some kind of bankrupt law, and I am opposed to the resolution. Because we have had some bankrupt laws that were ineffectual is no reason why we should not have a good bankrupt law.
Mr. PATTEN: I think a general bankrupt law will be proper and right. It protects the debtor class. I think we ought to have a bankrupt law that will protect the general interest of the country.
Mr. MONTGOMERY: My constituency are in favor of a bankrupt law, and I do hope this resolution will not be adopted.
Mr. MOCK: I am opposed to a bankrupt law and in favor of the resolution.
Mr. GORDON: In the history of the country we have had three bankrupt laws, and they have all been repealed because they have proved unprofitable experiments. The gentlemen on the other side of this question are not able to tell us that the law now before Congress is anything but an experiment. The sentiments of the people of the State of Indiana are overwhelmingly in favor of no bankrupt law, and I believe that the resolution ought to prevail.
Mr. WILSON, of Marion: I do not know of any law to-day under which an unfortunate debtor can be relieved from his embarrassments so as to start again in life. I am backed up by the best lawyers when I say that the bankrupt law is a humane law. It gives a man an opportunity to start anew. We know that the bills pending in Congress have been submitted to the best legal talent in the East and West, and if there is any thing in experience this bill ought to pass. I believe that the business men of New York and Boston and other Eastern cities have petitioned Congress for the passage of this law.
Mr. SHOCKNEY-I think the State of Indiana is as ably represented in Congress as any State in the Union, and I am in favor of letting our Representatives exercise their judgment in this matter.
Mr. DEEM said, I shall record my vote in favor of this resolution.
Pending the discussion on the resolution the House adjourned until 10 a.m. to-morrow.
The SPEAKER called the House to order and announced prayer by Rev. Mr. Hyatt.
The Clerk's minutes of yesterday's proceedings were being read, when
On motion by Mr. SCHLOSS, the further reading thereof was dispensed with.
Mr. MONTGOMERY, by special permission of the House, made, a personal explanation saying that he had been incorrectly represented by the Indianapolis papers as having nominated Mr. W H. Hay, of Marion County, for Principal Clerk of the House. In order to he set right before his constituents. he wished it to be understood that he was incorrectly reported.
A motion was adopted that when the House adjourned it be until 2 o'clock next Monday.
The SPEAKER announced the order of business to be the consideration of the joint resolution [S. 4] pending at the adjournment yesterday afternoon, for instruction to Indiana Senators and a request of Representatives in Congress from Indiana, to oppose the passage of a bankrupt law.
Mr. ROBINSON said: I am in favor of a well adjusted bankrupt law. It has been conceded by members opposed to this resolution that a good bankrupt law would be beneficial. I am therefore in favor of the law now pending before Congress.
Mr. BEST: I shall vote against this resolution, not because I am in favor of this law or against it, but because the people of Steuben County have as much confidence in our Representatives in Congress as they have in this body, and are willing to trust them to act without instructions.
Mr. ANTRIM said: I think it is our duty to express our views on this matter. I am decidedly opposed to a bankrupt law and shall favor the resolution.
Mr. CABBAGE was satisfied that the bankrupt system had been a failure, and for that reason was in favor of the resolution.
Mr. PATTEN demanded the previous question but the House refused to second the demand.
Mr COPELAND: I am opposed to this resolution for various reasons. I do not believe this House was sent here to instruct our Congressmen, and do not believe we ought to Instruct our Representatives in Congress to vote on the pending question-I for one am not in favor of sending Representatives to Congress who have not back bone enough to vote for what they think to be for the best interests of the country.
Mr. SMITH, in opposing the resolution/said the greatest commercial nation in the world has a bankrupt law. I hardly think that any class of men are competent to give instructions on this matter who have not given the question careful attention, therefore I shall vote "no" on the reso-
Mr. SHIVELY: I shall vote "no," believing that our Senators and Representatives from this State, who are on the ground and examining this law, can vote more wisely on this question than we can.
Mr. WILEY said: I am opposed to this resolution. I am in favor of a wise and just bankrupt law. I have examined into the merits of the law before Congress at the present day. I feel satisfied that if the members of this House would examine it for themselves the bankrupt law now before Congress, it would materially chang the sense of this House concerning this law. I am in favor of a wise bankrupt law, and I shall vote "no" on this resolution.
The joint resolution was adopted by yeas, 56; nays, 30.
Mr. JEWETT, from the
The report was concurred in.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time and separately referred to appropriate Committees unless otherwise stated:
By Mr. HEFFREN [H. R. 151] to repeal Sections 10 and 11 of an act concerning the
General Assembly, the business thereof, Committees and Clerk thereof, being Sections
4,967 and 4,970 of the
By Mr. BEESON [H. R. 152] to regulate the number of voting Precincts in town
elections. It was referred to the
By Mr. MOCK [H. R. 153] in relation to Notary Publics. It was referred to the
By Mr. ELY [H. R. 154] to amend Section 38 of the Justice's act, being 1,461 of the
Revised Statutes of 1881. It was referred to the
By Mr. SHOCKNEY [H. R. 155] authorizing providing for the construction of tire proof
vaults in County offices. It was referred to the
By Mr JEWETT[H. R. 156] to amend Section 183 of the act concerning taxation, being
Section 6,458 of the Revised Statutes of 1881. It was referred to the
By Mr. MELLETT [H. R. 157] to amend Section 82 of the act concerning public offenses
and their punishment, being Section 1,985 of the Revised Statutes of 1881. It was
referred to the
By Mr. BOSTON [H. R. 158] to amend Section 6 of an act authorizing cities and towns
to construct and maintain Water Works-being Section 3,270 of the Revised Statutes of
1881. It was referred to the
By Mr. CHITTENDEN [H. R. 159] to repeal the act concerning the taxation of land and
other property in the limits of cities and towns. Referred to the
The Special Committee thereon reported a resolution directing the Doorkeeper to purchase two thermometers, and to keep the temperature of the hall of the House of Representatives approximating 70 Fahrenheit, and authoring him to empower an assistant, whose duty it shall be to regulate the temperature of the room.
The report of the Committee was concurred in.
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, subsequently offered a resolution directing that the
Doorkeeper to have charge of the ventilation of the hall shall be allowed $3 a lay for
his services, and act under instruction;, from the
Mr. HEFFREN offered a resolution, which was adopted, requiring the Committee
heretofore appointed to contract for Committee rooms to secure a room or the use of
the
The Special Committee on Rooms for Standing Committees reported the assignment of
Room No. 58 in the Bates House to the second group of House Committees; Room No. 56 to
the third group, and Room No. 51 to the fourth and fifth groups, and the consultation
room of the Judge's of the Supreme Court for the use of the
The report was concurred In.
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Posey, by consent, called up the bill [S. 49] to fix the terms of holding Courts in the Counties of Posey and Vanderburg, and on his further motion the bill was read the second time and passed to the third reading.
The House then adjourned till 2 o'clock Monday afternoon, under an order adopted this morning.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR took the Chair at the hour to which the Senate adjourned, and commanding order announced prayer by Rev. Edward P. Rawls.
The Secretary's minutes of Friday's proceedings were being read, when-
On motion by Mr. SMITH, of Jay, the further reading was dispensed with.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR announced his reference of different pordons of the Governor's message to the several appropriate Standing Committees of the Senate.
Mr. SPANN, by consent, offered a resolution for the pay of several persons, who assisted in organizing the Senate. It was adopted.
Mr. BUNDY presented a petition from citizens of Middletown, Henry County, praying aganist the disfranchisement of any person on account of sex; also a petition from Henry County, asking that the prohibitory amendments to the Constitution be submitted to a vote of the people at a special election. Other like petitions were presented by Mr. Graham of several hundred voters from Tipton and Hamilton Counties; Mr. Van Vorhis from Center Township, Union County; Mr. Sayre from Noble Township, Wabash County; Mr. Smith, of Delaware, from Randolph County, nine petitions containing over 400 names; Mr. Magee from eighty-three voters of Cass County; Mr. Faulkner, from Franklin County, with seventy-six petitioners; Mr. Spann, from over 200 voters in Union County, Mr. Macartney from 380 citizens of DeKalb and several hundred from Steuben County; Mr. Yancey from Hancock and Shelby County; Mr. Adkison from 143 voters of Jackson Township, Miami County; Mr. Foulke of over 100 voters from Wayne County, and ninety from Wayne Township, and forty-four from Dalphin Township, also thirty-four from same Township; also from Franklin and Jackson Townships.
Mr. BUNDY presented a petition from Middletown, Henry County, against the disfranchisement of any person on account of sex.
Petitions praying this General Assembly to take such immediate action as will secure
the early repassage and submission of a prohibitory amendment tot he Constitution to a
vote of the people at a special election were presented by Messrs. Lindley, Bundy,
Graham, Van Vorhis, Smith of Delaware, Magee, Faulkner, Spann, Macartney, Yancey,
Adkison, Foulke, Hutchinson, Lockridge, Hostetter, Willard, Hoover, Compton, Johnson.
Bischowsky, Ristine, Duncan, Richardson, Marvin, Ernest, Overstreet, Howard,
Hilligass, May, Davidson, Youche, Benz, McClure, Mclntosh, Smith of Jay, Johnson, Hill
and Bell, which were severally referred to the
Mr. HOOVER, from the
Mr. HILLIGASS moved to increase the number to 3 000.
On motion of Mr. HOOVER it was recommitted to the
Mr WILLARD offered a resolution that the Chairman of the Democratic and Republican
Caucus Committee shall constitute a
Mr. YANCEY objected to appointing keepers of consciences for Senators. The opinion of no Chairman of any Committee would govern his action in such a matter.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR thought much time could be saved by the adoption of the resolution.
Mr. VAN VORHIS agreed with the remarks of the Senator from Hancock, Mr. Yancey.
Mr. WILLARD regarded the resolution as only calling from a statement on the question by authorized persons.
Mr. BELL could see no objection to the resolution, and was sure it may save time.
Mr. VAN VORHIS made the point of order that
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR suggested the names of the Senators be embraced in the resolution.
It was rejected upon a division-affirmative, 13; negative not counted,
Mr. JOHNSON offered the following:
Whereas, The present system of letting out the labor of the convicts of our Penitentiaries under a contract to the highest bidder has established in this State and under the authority of the State in the State and under the authority of the State a class of cheap labor;
Whereas, The employment of said convicts in various important manufacturies of this State at the nominal contract price paid by the highest bidder, establishes an unfair and injurious competition between the factories and workshops in which such convicts are employed and the factories and workshops in which free and respectable men are employed;
Whereas, The low and merely nominal prices paid by the contractors for the labor of said Penitentiary convicts materially influence and lower the wages ot the free laborers and workingmen employed in similar workshops and factories;
Whereas, The very fact that the labor of a convict criminal and felon should be permitted to enter into competition with the labor of a free and respectable citizen, and diminish his ability to provide for family and educate his children, is humiliating to the free laborer, and an injustice and a wrong to his family;
Whereas, It is the duty of the State to protect both the material interests and the dignity of the citizens; and
Whereas, The pretext of making our State Prisons self-sustaining by letting out the labor of is no excuse for injuring the private rights and lowering the wages of honest citizens;
Resolved, That the great wrong engendered by the present system of letting out the labor of the convicts in our Penitentiaries under contract to the highest bidder should be remedied as soon as possible;
Resolved, That a Special Committee of five members of the Senate be appointed by the President of the Senate to devise means and plans to have the present system of contract convict labor abolished; and at the same time to utilize the labor of the convicts in such work and employment as may contribute to the maintenance and pecuniary support of the Penitentiaries, but will not interfere with or enter into competition with the labor and compensation of free laborers and citizens.
Mr. JOHNSON said:
MR PRESIDENT-In offering these resolutions not only give
exoression to my own sentiments, but I voice the sentiments and opinions of a majority
of the people of Indiana, and especially of those who are most interested in their
adoption-the laborers and workingmen of the State.
The pernicious system of letting out to the highest bidder the convicts of our Penitentiaries to work in various important branches of industry has grown to be so obnoxious to a majority of the citizens, its obvious injustice to manufacturers employing and compensating only free men and honest laborers, and the cruel wrong thereby inflicted on the latter, whose wages it diminishes and whose families it robs of their comforts-all these evils resulting from the system have of late attracted such general attention, and so loudly call for redress, that I felt the duty incumbent upon me to offer these resolutions, and lay the matter before this honorable body.
This is not a party matter, it is a question in which the great mass of the people, the laboring and working classes, are interested, and which they want looked after and properly solved in this Legislature. All parties, indeed all fair minded and unprejudiced men who examine the question and the official reports concerning the workings and results of the system, come to the conclusion that it should be changed or entirely abolished. The contractor's price for coopers is forty-five cents per day for each man; chair makers and furniture makers are let out for from thirty cents to forty-five cents per day; shoe-makers for thirty-eight to fifty-three cents per day, while the contract price for cigarmakers is only thirty-five cents per day. At these figures contractors secure the services of many hundred able-bodied men, and make them work fully as hard and fully as long as the same class of free laboring men works In similar shops and factories. What is the result? The manufacturer employing convict labor can manufacture his furniture, his shoes, his cigars, and his barrels at from 30 to 60 per cent cheaper than his competitor who employs free and honest laborers whom he must pay $1.50 or $1.75 a day, and frequently by underselling him drives him entirely out of the market. And who is the main sufferer? It is not the wealthy manufacturer who sees his sales decreased and his fat income diminished by the contractor's competition, but it is the Poor and hard-working laborer who has to live and support his family, to educate and bring up his children, and whose wages are often without this unfair competition, already scanty enough and inadequate for the payment of rent, clothing, provisions and wood. No, no, Mr. President, the laborer's wages should not be cut down by a felon' cheap labor, and an honest man's wife and family should not be deprived of their little comforts, much less the necessaries of life, because a wealthy contractor is lucky enough to secure a hundred criminals' labor for a nominal and ridiculous price. I appeal to this Senate to seek the remedy and to apply it to this enormous wrong. And therefore, I now move the adoption of the resolutions which I have had the honor to offer.
Mr. SPANN heartily seconded the resolution.
Mr BELL hoped the resolution would be adopted on its merits, and would be satisfied with the selection of the proposed Committee by the Chair.
Mr. VAN VORHIS proposed to amend by inserting the words, "and inmates of Reformatory Schools and Benevolent Institutions," after the word "Penetentiaries" in the first resolution. The labor of pupils and inmates of these institutions is let out in this contract way, which is an outrage on the pupils as well as the laborers of the State.
Mr JOHNSON accepted the amendment.
Mr. YANCEY favored the resolution because it was pan of his platform. He favored the protection of honest labor, and insisted that labor institutions that employ labor should be protected.;
The resolution was adopted, and the Lieutenant Governor made the Committee to consist of Messrs. Johnson, Foulke, Faulkner, Lindley and Ernest.
On motion by Mr. MAGEE his concurrent resolution, offered on Friday, requesting the Secretary of War to order such an appropriation expended as will secure a commodious and safe harbor in Michigan City, was read, with a Committee report recommending its passage.
Mr. SPANN spoke in favor of the resolution. The Secretary of War has been guilty of an arbitrary decision in withholding an appropriation for the only harbor in Indiana, as he understood the matter. The river and harbor bill of the last Congress was in some degree a steal, but this resolution should be adopted.
Mr. WHITE also favored the passage of this resolution. The people of his section of the State desired very much to see something done to improve that harbor.
Mr FAULKNER could see no reason why the resolution should not pass.
The resolution was adopted.
On motion by Mr. BELL the bill [>H. R 148]
ceding the jurisdiction of this State over certain lands to the United States-all such
parcels of laud selected or hereafter to be selected, for the purpose of the erection
of Postoffices, Custom Houses or other houses used expressly by the general Government
was taken up, read the first time and referred to the
The House concurrent resolution tending sympathy to the French Republic in the loss of the eminent statesman. Mr. Leon Gambetta, coming up and being read-
Mr. SPANN explained that the resolution had been delayed by being lost or misplaced.
The resolution was adopted.
The House resolution requesting Representatives and instructing Senators in Congress from Indiana, to favor the passage of a law pensioning Mexican soldiers and sailors or the widows of such soldiers and sailors arming up-
It was adopted on motion by Mr. FOULKE.
The following described bills were introduced read the first time and severally referred to appropriate Committees, unless otherwise stated:
By Mr. ADKISON [S. 97] concerning roads and highways-to amend Section 27 of said
act-restating to working out road tax. It was referred to the
By Mr. BELL [S. 98] for the preservation of claims against Counties before the Board
of County Commissioners and the adjudication thereof. It was referred to the
By Mr. BENZ [S. 99] to make it a misdemeanor to defraud a hotel, inn-keeper or
boarding house, unless credit is given by express agreement. It was referred to the
[Mr. HOSTETTER, on account of ill health, asked and was excused from service on the
By Mr. DUNCAN [S. 100] for the relief of Joel S. Davis, and authorizing the repayment
to him of moneys ($989 02) from the Congressional Township fund, with interest at 8
per cent per annum. It was referred to the
By Mr. FLETCHER [S.101] to prevent fraud-in the adulteration of sugars. It was
referred to the
By Mr. JOHNSTON [S. 102] to amend the feeble
minded children incorporation act [For the re- organisation of said Institution-the
Board to hold, two for four years and one for one year from April next: to have
control also of the Soldiers' Orphans' Home.] It was referred to the
By Mr. JOHNSON [S. 103] to provide that laborers and mechanics snail be en tilled to
a fixed lien on property, both real and personal, of the employer. It was referred to
the
By Mr. MAY, by request, [S 104] to legalize the organization and acts of all macadamized or gravel road companies where they have carried on business in good faith before the act under which they organized went into force.
By Mr. RISTINE [S. 105] to legalize the
incorporation of the town of Waynetown in Montgomery County, Indiana, and all the acts
of said Town Trustees. It was referred to the
By Mr. SPANN [S. 106] requiring hotel propietors to provide fire escapes-where
bulling is of the height of two stories or over-for each room, and iron fire ladders
from the ground to the pavement to the right or left of each tier of windows, securely
fastened to the building. It was referred to the
By Mr. VAN VORHIS [S. 107] to define powers of
attorney and concerning the recording of the same. It was referred to the
By Mr YOUCHE [S. 108] to compel proprietors and keepers of hotels and lodging houses
to provide means of escape from fires-of over "two stories in height to provide above
the second story a rope or other ladder reaching to the ground, to he kept in good
repair and under the control or management of every lodger; notice in each room to be
posted explaining the manner of its use. It was referred to the
By Mr. VAN VORHIS [S. 109] to amend Section 123 of the act concerning public offense
and their punishment, approved April 14, 1881-relating to any place used or occupied
for gaming or any person found in such a place. It was referred to the
By Mr. COMPTON [S. 110] to amend Section 4 of the Gravel Road Company act-Section
3,679 of the Code of 1881-[relating to the Cumberland and another road]. It was
referred to the
By Mr. BELL [S. 111] to amend Section 618 of the act of April 19, 1881, concerning
criminal procedure. It was referred to the
By Mr. YOUCHE [S. 112] to amend Section 618-Section 1,403 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, relating to Master Commissioners.
By Mr. DUNCAN [S. 113] to amend Section 27 of
the Justices' act of June 9, 1882, being Section 1,407 of the Revised Statutes of
1881, as applying to changes of venue before Justices. It was referred to the
The Senate then adjourned till 10 a. m. to-morrow, under the rule.
The Speaker announced prayer by Representative Brazelton. A roll of the House being ordered and taken, eighty-five members responded to their names.
The Clerk's journal of Saturday's proceedings was being read, when-
Mr. McMULLEN made an ineffectual motion to dispense with the further reading of the Journal.
A message from the Senate announced that the Senate had passed the bill [H. R. 118] to amend Section 4,968 of the Revised Statutes ot 1881, concerning the General Assembly, the business Committees and clerks, authorizing a file clerk, with an amendment adding an emergency clause.
Mr. GIBBON moved to concur in the Senate amendment.
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. BRYANT, from the
Mr. BRYANT, from the
Also Mr. Henderson's bill [H. R. 29] to enable the several Counties of the State to sell and dispose of land for the benefit of the school fund, with a recommendation that the same do pass. The report was concurred in.
Also Mr. Mutz's bill [H. R. 78] to legalize the loan of school funds of the several Counties of this State, with a recommendation that the same be indefinitely postponed. The report was concurred in.
Also Mr. Fleece's bill [H. R. 129] to amend Sections 1, 2, and 3 of an act providing for the organization of County Boards, etc., with recommendation that it be indefinitely postponed. The report was concurred in.
Mr. McMULLEN made an ineffectual motion to suspend the rules of the House and take from the table a proposed amendment to the rules in relation to the report of the Committees.
Mr. BRYANT, from the
Mr. SMITH, on the question of concuring in the report, said: The question was of too great importance to be hurried through in so summary a manner. This effort to reduce the school fund interest to 6 per cent. per annum wrests at one fell swop one-fourth of the proceeds of the mangnificent vested fund of the Indiana schools from the children of the State. We here assert that every dollar of this fund may be loaned at a much higher rate than 6 per cent.; abundant evidence is at hand to prove this. By the last of the week we will have reports from all the Counties in the State giving full information and for this reason we desire the subject recommitted to the Committee for further consideration.
Mr. GORDON said: I hope gentlemen will not insist on concurring in the report of the Committee. Time out to be given to members to inform themselves as to the facts on this subject. It is one of the most important questions that will be before the House. I have been recently informed by the Auditor of my County that there are calls for the school funds at the present rate to take them out as fast as they are paid in, and I believe that when the facts are ascertained it will be found that largely more than half of the counties in the State will be found to have no funds unloaned.
A motion being made to recommit the bill-
Mr. JEWETT said: I hope the motion to recommit will be carried, and I will say to these gentlemen who desire the rate of interest in the school fund to be fixed at 6 per cent that I am of like opinion. But my belief that the rate of interest should be 6 per cent. rests upon the understanding I have up to this time had that the fund can not be loaned at a higher rate. I do not concur in this position of gentlemen that the rate of interest should be governed by the necessities of the borrow. It is our duty to so legislate as to make the school fund most productive. The State of Indiana does not propose to enter into competition with loan associations in the matter of cheap loans. Its whole concern is to preserve and make productive the Common School fund. If, therefore, by recommitting this bill we can be placed in possession of information that will lead to the conclusion that the money can be loaned at the present rate or at 7 per cent., I am ready to change my opinion, and have no doubt others will. We should proceed with deliberation.
Mr. CABBAGE: I think this question is a plain question, and that 6 per cent. is enough to compel our people to pay. I think the question we are called on to decide is what is a just interest, and not what we could compel the people to pay. We have the power to put the rate of interest at 15 or 20 per cent. I think it would be wrong to make the honest yeomanry of the country pay any more than would be just for the man that borrows pays more than his share of tax, and the man that gives a mortgage on his land pays the same tax as though he had no mortgage on his land. According to this law the man that borrows pays double tax. There is no reason to delay this bill. Six per cent., in my judgment, is enough to make the borrower pay. High interest is destructive to the success of enterprising citizens of the State, I hope this House will not hesitate to vote for 6 per cent. interest. I think it not good policy to make the poor working people of the country pay more than their share of tax to keep up the State schools. It is unjust, and will not be of interest to the welfare of the schools of the State. It is not good statesmanship in my judgment. A farmer that has a mortgage on his farm is less able to send his children to school, and they are the men who borrow most of the school money.
Mr. STERREIT said: I do hope that the motion to recommit will prevail. I do not believe that the members of this House are prepared to vote to lower the rate of interest on our school fund mortgages. At this time in my own County there is no money to be had on such loans at the present rate, and instead of lowering the rate some plain for the distribution of that fund from the Counties where it can not be loaned to places where the money on such loans are in excess of the supply. For that reason I shall favor recommitting the bill.
Mr. PETTIBONE opposed the motion to refer the bill back to the Committee. There is $18,000 of school funds lying idle in the Treasury of his County for the reason that it can not be loaned at 8 per cent., because abundance of money can be borrowed to meet the wants of the people at 6 per cent.
The bill and report was recommitted to the
Mr. BRYANT, from the
Also Mr. Frazer's bill [H. R. 38] for taxing the ownership of property for school purposes, with a recommendation that the same be indefinitely postponed.
On motion of Mr. FRAZER the bill and report were recommitted to the
Also Mr. Smith of Blackford's bill [H. R. 54] to amend Section 2 of an act providing for calling special sessions of Boards of County Commissioners, with the recommendation that it be indefinitely postponed.
The report was concurred in.
Also Mr. Smith's of Blackford, bill [H. R. 122] to amend Section 22 of an act for the relief of the poor, being Section 6,087 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, with the recommendation that the same be indefinitely postponed. The report was concurred in.
Also Mr. Wilson's, of Marion bill, [H. R. 73] to amend Section 58 of the general
city incorporation act, with the recommendation that the same be referred to the
Also Mr. Brazelton's bill [H. R. 91] concerning the relocation of County Seats, with a recommendation that the title be amended. The report was concurred in.
Mr. KESTER, from the
The report was concurred in.
Also Mr. Nave's bill [H. R. 59] in relation to trimming and cutting hedge fence, with a recommendation that the same be indefinitely postponed. On motion of Mr. FRAZER the report was laid on the table.
Also Mr. Holler's bill [H. R. 31] authorizing Boards of County Commissioners to grant bounties for the destruction of woodchucks, owls and hawks, with a recommendation that it do pass. The bill was recommitted.
Also Mr. Weaver's bill [H. R 55] to prevent the Bale of impure butter, with a recommendation that the same do pass. The report was concurred in.
Mr. MUTZ, from the
The following described bills were introduced read the first time and severally referred to appropriate Committees unless otherwise stated:
By Mr. TULEY [H. R. 160] prohibiting the
selling, bartering or giving away the questions provided by the State Board of
Education. It was referred to the
By Mr. TULEY [H. R. 161] an act to amend
Sections 219 and 222, the same being Sections 6,488 and 6,491 of the Revised Statutes
of 1881, concerning taxation. It was referred to the
By Mr. JEWETT [H. R. 162] to amend Section 68 of an act repealing all several laws in
force for the incorporation of cities. It was referred to the
By Mr. BOWERS [H. R. 163] to legalize the acts of Notaries Public whose commissions
have expired. It was referred to the
By Mr. HELMS [H R. 164] to amend Section 243 of an act concerning public houses,
being Section 2,155 of the code of 1881. It was referred to the
By Mr. PATTON [S. 165] concerning legal enclosures repealing Sections 1 and 15 of an
act, the same being Sections 4,834 and 4,838 of the code of 1881. It was referred to
the
Mr. PETERS offered a resolution that 100 copies of the rules of the House be distributed to the members.
It was adopted.
The House adjourned till 10 o'clock to-morrow under the rules.
By Mr. YOUCHE for an additional appropriation for the support of Teachers' Institutes.
By Mr. YANCEY against disfranchisement on account of sex.
By Messrs. Henry, Benz, Fleming, Keiser, McCulloch, Brown and Rahm praying tor the submission to a vote of the people of a prohibition Constitutional amendment at a specia1 election-these addition to the petitions of 9,957 voters submitted in the Senate yesterday.
By Mr. FLETCHER that women may have control of the Female Departments of the Insane Hospital. These petitions were severally referred to appropriate Committees
Numerous reports from Standing Committees were submitted and placed on the Calendar under the rule.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time and severally referred to appropriate Committees unless otherwise stated:
By Mr. ATKIS0N [S. 114] to amend the act approved March, 1881, being Section 6,454 of the code of 1881, concerning taxation-the publication of the delinquent list. He said the bill simply changes the time of sale from the first to the third Monday in March. It will give taxpayers two weeks longer in which to pay taxes without being charged with the expense of sale for delinquency. He moved that the bill be pressed to the final reading now.
Mr. VOYLES considered this bill of such considerable importance that it should by
examined by a Committee. On his motion the bill was referred to the
By Mr COMPTON [S. 115] authorizing Street Railway Companies to occupy the highways in any County, and declaring an emergency.
By Mr. FLETCHER [S. 116] to amend Section 4 of the act relating to Common Schools [concerning cities having 16,000] approved March 3, 1871.
By Mr LOCKRIDGE [S. 117] fixing the fees of Prosecuting Attorneys-docket fee for felony, guilty, $10; misdemeanor, guilty, $7; cases before Justices, $5: bastardy cases, $10; not guilty, misdemeanor, $10, etc., etc.,: cases not fixed by law, $10; each day's attendance before Grand Jury, $5.
By Mr. MACARTNEY [S. 118] to amend Sections 181, 186, and 237 of act of March 29, 1881, concerning taxation being Sections 6,650, 6,455, 6,501, and 6,506 of the Code of 1881. [It changes the form of County Treasurers' cash books, and provides for the disbursing of certain funds to Townships.]
By Mr. MAY [S. 119] to amend Section 1 of an amended act authorizing cities and towns to issue bonds to reduce indebtedness, etc. Approved March 24, 1879: approved March, 1881.
By Mr. McCLURE [S. 120] to amend Section 8 of the act amendatory of the charterof Clarksville, in Clark County. He said: As it is a matter peculiarly local-only affecting the Counties of Clark and Floyd-he moved it be referred to a Special Committee of Three. The motion was agreed to and the Lieutenant Governor made the Committee to consist of Messrs. McClure, Voyles and Spann.
By Mr. McCULLOCH [S. 121] to legalize the act of certain Voluntary Associations in Vanderburgh County.
By Mr. RAHM [S. 122] to amend Section 19 of the Savings Bank act approved May 12, 1869 [concerning investments-not more than 60 per cent. to be in vested.]
By Mr. SMITH, of Jay [S. 123] to provide for the settlement of decedents' estates [to re-enact the decedents' law of 1852.]
By Mr. SPANN [S. 124] concerning insurance. Was referred to the
By Mr. WILLARD [S. 125] to repeal the act to protect sheep husbandry of April 13, 1881.
By Mr. YOUCHE [S. 126] to amend Section 219 of the act of March 29, 1881, concerning taxation [so as to require a suit to set aside a tax title to be commenced within five years after the date of the tax sale ]
By Mr. FOULKE [S. 127] to amend Section 34 of the Gener&l Common School act of March 6, 1865, being Section 4,425 of the code of 1881relating to teachers' license.
By Mr. SPANN [S. 128] creating a Commissioner of Railroads, Telegraph and
Transportation Com
By Mr. COMPTON [S. 129] to allow Horse and Street Railway Companies to propel cars in any way such Companies may adopt.
By Mr. COMPTON [S. 130] to amend Section 16 of the act of March, 1869 regulating coal mines, being Sections 5,472 and 5,480 of the Code of 1881.
By Mr. YOUCHE [S. 131] to amend Section 5 of an act authorizing the appointment of short-hand reporters.
By Mr. ADKISON [S. 132] to establish rates of charges by railroads for the transportation of freight and passengers.
By Mr. FOULKE [S. 133] to require Railroad Companies to fence their tracks in certain cases-when one half is built by owner or occupant of adjoining railroad tracks on railroads.
By Mr. HILLIGASS [S. 134] authorizing cities to permit municipal taxes to be paid in installments-the first Mondays in April and November.
Mr. BELL from the
The resolution was referred to the
The bill [H. R 150] in relation to the appointment of Judges of Criminal Courts, pro tempore, was read the second time.
Mr VOYLES explained that it gives Judges of Criminal Courts authority to appoiut Judges pro tem., which they have no right to do under the present law. In the event of the judge becoming sick his Court would have to stop. He moved that the Constitutional rule be dispensed with that the bill may be pressed to the final vote today.
Mr. VAN VORHIS hoped the bill would pass, it being a very necessary measure in his (Marion) County, inasmuch as the Criminal Court continues in session almost the entire year.
The motion to suspend the Constitutional restriction was agreed to-yeas, 44; nays, 0-and the bill was read the second time by title only and the third time by sections.
Mr. HENRY thought the bill was too broad in that it authorizes the Judge to call a pro tem. at any time, and it might allow of the paying of two Judges at one time in the same circuit.
Mr. VOYLES suggested that point could be examined into during the dinner hour, and on his motion, it being about noon, the Senate took a recess till 2 o'clock.
Mr. VAN VORHIS moved to amend the bill providing that the allowance to the Judge pro tem. shall be deducted from the salary of the Judge, except in cases of relationship, change of venue, sickness of himself or family, or when the Judge was counsel on either side.
The amendment was agreed to without objection. The bill then finally passed the Senate by yeas, 33; nays, 33, with an amendment of title.
Mr. DUNCAN's bill [S. 11] concerning the oath of Grand Juries coming up was read the second time with a Committee recommendation that it lie on the table. The report of the Committee was concurred in.
Mr. Ernest's bill [S. 12] to define the
crime of false pretense-imprisonment from one to seven years; with a recommendation
by a majority of the
Mr. BELL stand the purpose ot the bill is to supply an omission in the law by which verbal false pretenses are not punishable ai.d as the law now exists the punishment is from two to ten years.
The Committee report was concurred in and the bill was ordered engrossed for the third reading.
Mr. Faulkner's bill [S. 13] to repeal Sections 4,986 to 5,000 of the Code of 1881, being read, with a Committee recommendation that it lie on the table. The report was concurred in.
Mr. Hilligass' bill [S. 16] to amend Sections 1,781 and 1,782 of the criminal case act of April 19, 1881, being read the second time, with a Committee recommendation that it do lie on the table. The report was concurred in.
Mr. Overstreet's bill [S. 20] relating to qualifications of petit jurors, was read the second time, with a Committee report that it do pass. The report was concurred in and the bill ordered engrossed.
Mr. Ristine's bill [S. 22] described on page 29 of the Brevier Reports, concerning outstanding bonds of Counties for construction of gravel roads, being read the second time with a Committee amendment striking out "1 1/2" and inserting "2" per centum. The report was concurred in and the bill ordered engrossed for the third reading.
Mr. Graham's bill [S. 32] to punish the disclosing of messages over telephone wires-fine from $10 to $25 with a Committee amendment, was read the second time and ordered engrossed.
Mr. Fletcher's bill for a sewer from the Indiana Reformatory to connect with a principal sewer in the city of Indianapolis (same as the bill [H. R 54]) being read the second time, with a Committee report favorable to its passage.
Mr. VOYLES moved to recommit the bill with instructions to fix definitely the proportion of the cost to be paid by the State.
Mr. VAN VORHIS moved to amend the amendment by providing that ht eroute shall be reported.
I Mr, VOYLES accepted the amendment.
Mr. WILLARD moved to refer the bill to the
Mr. BELL reminded Senators that for a number of years, there have been attempts made to secure a sewer from this institution. The sewage now flows by the United States Arsenal and through the city of Indianapolis. This bill may be faulty, is informed that this bill has been carefully framed, has the indorsements of the State and city authorities and some legal minds that have examined it. The State should bear a portion of the expense and so should the city. The power of determining the route is placed largely in the hands of the Governor. The merits of the bill can not but be acknowledged. The amendment for the location of the route is impracticable. It is apparent the State must abandon this institution or a bill of this kind must be enacted into a law.
Mr. WILLARD agreed with all said as to the necessity of legislation on this subject, but would not consent to the passage of a bill of this kind without a limit as to the amount. The proposition is, to lay a foundation for a lawsuit. The expenditure should be approximately estimated and desired the Committee, partially responsible for expenditures should consider this bill.
Mi. VAN VORHIS did not desire to be understood as opposing the building of this
sewer. This bill needs an appropriation of not less than $100,000. A route has
already been surveyed and estimated to cost $80,000. There is now an increase in
prices which will probably bring it up to $100,000. He did not believe the city
wants to pay $50,000, as much as the institution is worth, probably. If the
institution is maintained the sewer ought to be built. The bill passed in 1880
Mr. MARVIN saw no reason for sending this bill to the
Mr. VOYLES hoped the bill would be recommitted to the Committee which has already considered it. There ought to be an amendment as to the amount to be expended.
Mr. BELL moved that this bill be made the special order for Monday at 2 o'clock, and 150 copies ordered printed.
The motion was agreed to by consent.
Mr. McCULLOCH offered a resolution authorizing the
Mr. SPANN moved to strike out the word "witnesses" and insert words authorizing the taking of depositions an additional charge having been filed of bribery, and believing, under the protest filed against it, the Committee should not consider that charge. There is a remedy under the statute, and that not having been chosen, witnesses should not be sent for. That expense should not be allowed and can be avoided by the taking of depositions before the proper tribunals pointed out by law.
Mr. BELL thought this matter of disqualification may be one of contest or otherwise. The matter has been considered by the Committee, which have concluded the contestee can file additional charges. There was a showing made excusing the not filing of this ground of contest earlier. The statute relative to contest of elections of this kind furnishes means by which testimony can be taken in advance of the meeting of the Legislature. Upon the filing of such a charge the Senate could by a resolution authorize the sending for persons and papers, in compliance with the provisions of the Constitution and one of the statutory grounds of contest. He would not agree that it is best to take depositions-to do that means a continuance and no determination of the question this session. He had no doubt of the regularity of the proceedings in this case thus far.
Mr. SPANN spoke further in favor of his amendment, insisting it is better to comply wit the statutes in such cases mad and provided, which he read. The purpose of that l aw was to allow evidence to be taken at their own homes to save expense to the State. The resolution means to give unlimited power to bring every creditable witness in Johnson and Morgan Counties up here, which expense should be avoided.
Mr. McCULLOCH stated, in response to an inquiry, that there are already probably over 100 depositions before the Committee.
Mr. BROWN, understanding the charge to be that the sitting Senator offered, and gave bribes to secure his election, contended that was not a ground for contest-if that charge be true the Senator is removed and there becomes a vacancy, but the contestor could not be seated. If it is found that the charge is true the seat is vacated. The Senate has already found there is sufficient to put the Senate on an inquiry as to whether the sitting Senator did offer or give bribes to secure his election. The Senate ought to go on and hear the proof, and this investigation should only o this charge. Having the witnesses brought face to face is certainly the best way, and is likely the most expedient. Every vote cast by a disqualified member is a factor that should be eliminated as speedily as possible if such is found to be the case.
Mr. SAYRE did not understand any charge has been made authorizing any investigation as to the qualification of the sitting member; and he maintained until some charge is made that a Senator is here unfit to occupy his place. There is nothing before the Senate authorizing the sending for persons and paper.
Mr. FOULKE contended that the proceedings indicated by the amendment of the Senator from Rush (Mr. Spann) is the only course pointed out by law. t is not the question whether the contestor shall be seated or not only, but whether the contestee is qualified to fill the seat. The question of this contest is the only one before the Committee, and they are bound by the statute in the mode of taking testimony.
Mr. McCULLOCH considered there is no question, but the Senate has the right to send for witnesses in such a case and defied any Senator to show a word in the statue undertaking to prescribe how the Senate shall be governed as to the manner in which it shall obtain information in relation to a question in which it is to be the exclusive judge. The statute is not exclusive upon anything relating to this question nor to contests in cases of County officers. While the statute provides depositions may be taken it does not undertake to say that the better testimony shall be excluded for witnesses to be brought face to face before the accused and the tribunal. The resolution will tend to economy. If this evidence has to be taken by deposition, then days time and ten days notice will be necessary; justices will have to be recommissioned, and every one having experience knows the difficulty in having papers corrected by deposition. The Committee and Senate will be able to pass more justly upon testimony obtained from witnesses than otherwise. And whether expensive or not the Senate should adopt the rule that will tend to the most fair and just investigation. He moved a substitute for the whole matter, that the Committee be empowered to send for persons and papers to the end that the charge of bribery may be supported or negatived.
On motion by Mr. SPANN, this matter was postponed till to-morrow at 10 o'clock a. m.
Mr. BELL called up the special order, being his resolution concerning the death of
ex-Senator Foster, offered Friday afternoon. After the resolution was read he said:
My purpose in offering the resolution which has just been read is to place in a
substantial manner upon the records of this Senate a tribute to the worth and
character of my deceased colleague, Hon. Thomas J. Foster. it is not my purpose at
this time to offer any extended eulogium upon the character or services of the
deceased, but to pay my simple tribute of respect and esteem as a colleague and as a
friend. Senator Foster was personally known to many members of the Senate, as he
served with the min a preceding one, and I know they will agree with me that it is
proper that such action as is proposed by this resolution should be taken on this
occasion. Senator Foster died in early manhood. He had not the advantages of early
education, nor the advantages that wealth brings. He was emphatically a self-made
man. Born upon a farm, reared in comparative poverty, without the advantages to
which I have referred, by his own energy, industry and ability, he attained a
position which was an honorable one, indeed-a standing and influence in the
community and in the State of which his family and friends may well fell proud. His
character was such an one as finds opportunity for development and growth only under
and surrounded by the benign influence of our free institutions and republican form
of government. Under no other circum
Mr. SPANN, lest it be said there came from their side of the Chamber on this occasion no expression of respect, said a few words. He became acquainted with Senator Foster at the last session, who bad his likes and dislikes, was a man of large heart, generous, impulsive, a man of ability, and no man is equal in not yielding when in the right, but ready to acknowledge error when in the wrong. He was his own worst enemy; let us throw the mantle of charity over his faults and strive to shun them.
The resolution was adopted by a rising vote.
On motion by Mr. BUNDY, the Secretary was directed to send a copy of the resolutions to the family of ex-Senator Foster.
As a further mark of respect the Senate adjourned:
Mr. HUSTON made inquiry concerning the proper entry on the journal of the House of the petitions presented yesterday from 14,798 voters praying for the submission of a prohibitory amendment to the Constitution to a vote of the people at a special election, which was satisfactorily answered.
were submitted and concurred in recommending the indefinite postponement of the following described bills:
Mr Mock's [H. R. 127] to amend Section 21 of an net concerning the prosecution of criminal cases.
Mr. Mauck's [H. R. 128] to amend Section 412 of the act concerning proceedings in civil cases.
Mr. Copeland'y [H. R. 131] providing punishment for knowingly selling real estate or any interest therein, not having title for the same, shall be deemed guilty of felony.
Mr. Mesier's [H. R. 126] to amend Section 1,675 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, concerning assignees and trustees.
Mr. Frazier's [H. R. 77] to amend the justices' act.
Mr. Montgomery's [H. R. 97] to regulate and increase the jurisdiction of Justices of the Peace, being reported back with a Committee recommendation that it be indefinitely postponed.
Mr. JEWETT said: This report of the Committee was made because the Committee was unanimously of the opinion that any increase of the jurisdiction of Justifies would be unwise. My own opinion i that the jurisdiction should be curtailed rather than extended. In the first place those who are elected to the office of Justice of the Peace, while very excellent citizens, are as a rule without any considerable legal knowledge, and for that reason liable to err in judgment. These errors are harmful in proportion to the amount for which the wrong judgment Is rendered. But the strongest reason why the jurisdiction should not be increased arises from the fact that the records are so imperfectly made up and so exposed to loss or destruction.
Mr. SHOCKNEY: The people of my County are anxious to extend the jurisdiction of Justices of the Peace, under proper restrictions. They feel that if there is any claps in the State that needs relief, is the debtor class, and that this bill will lessen the costs of proceedings in civil cases can not be doubted. If It will, it is certainly in the interest of the common people of the State, and ought to be adopted.
Mr. WILSON, of Marion, said, the report of the Committee should be sustained; the jurisdiction of Justices should not be increased from $200 to $500. There are strong reasons against enlarging the present jurisdiction.
Mr. DEEM said: I am decidedly in favor of increasing the jurisdiction of Justices of the Peace, in civil cases. Such a measure would tend to give the people cheaper litigation, and at the same time expedite the collection of just claims.
Mr. MOCK thought the jurisdiction of Justices of the Peace is already too great.
Mr. SMITH, of Tippecanoe, said: Being in favor of the stability of the laws and opposed to the obliteration of the established landmarks, and not knowing the full sweep of this amendment, I feel that I ought not to support the bill.
Mr HEFFREN: I am opposed to the recommitment of this bill for several reasons, and am in favor of its indefinite postponement. I believe that Justices of the Peace have now a sufficient jurisdiction in civil cases. But one of my principal objections is that it is a bill to prevent appeals by poor men. A rich man can select his @wn Justice of the Peace, obtain a judgment against a poorman and however unjust, unless the poor man can give a bond of appeal, he is at the mercy of his creditor.
Mr. MONTGOMERY said: I do hope the members will not concur in the report of the Committee. This bill, as you are aware, proposes to give Justices of the Peace jurisdiction in civil cases to the amount of $300 in litigation, and may confess judgment o the amount of $500. In my judgment this would greatly reduce the costs of litigation, and would greatly reduce the inconveniences of attending Court, where the same might be settled in our own Townships.
Mr. WRIGHT said: There is no crying need er demand for enlarging the jurisdiction of Justices. The people of the State are not in favor of building a Court House in every Township in a County.
The report was concurred in-yeas, 58; nays, 60.
A Committe reported back Mr. Gilman's bill [H. R. 19] declaring agreement to pay costs of collection or attorneys' fees contained in any bill of exchange, acceptances, drafts, promissory notes or other written evidence of indebtedness, illegal and void and making it the duty of the owner when suit is brought for collection to render judgment accordingly, with recommendation that the same be indefinitely postponed.
Mr. GILMAN said: My objection to the report of the Committee to postpone indefinitely is that the interest of the people, both creditor and debtor, and the attorneys themselves demand reform in the attorneys' fee law as at present administered.
Mr. WILEY said: The principle of the bill under consideration is, in my naiad, manifestly unjust, and should not become a law.
Mr. JEWETT said: If the gentlemen will move to recommit this bill to our Committee, with instructions to amend the bill so as to make all agreements to pay more than 5 per cent illegal, and that no amount shall be allowed unless the amount has been actually paid to the attorney, I will vote for his motion, and gladly assist in obtaining the proper action in Committee.
The report was not concurred in.
On motion of Mr. GILMAN", the bill was recommitted to the
The following bills were introduced, read the first lime, and refered to appropriate Committees, unless otherwise stated:
By Mr. HANSON [H. R. 166] to amend Section 51 of an act concerning public offenses and their punishment.
By Mr. MAUCK [H. R. 167] an act to amend Section 1,942 of an act concerning public offenses, being Section 2,101 Revised Statutes. The bill was passed to the second reading.
By Mr. HAMILTON [H. R. 168] a bill establishing County Courts, denning their power, prescribing compensation of Judges, etc. The bill was passed to the second reading.
By Mr. ROBINSON, of Jackson. [H. R. 169] to amend Section 28 of an act providing for a general system of Common Schools. The bill was passed to a second reading.
By Mr. GILLMAN [H. R. 170] an act providing for the sale of escheated estates and the disposal of the proceeds, etc. The bill passed to a second reading.
By Mr. FRAZER [H. R. 171] a bill to amend Sections 3, 4, 10, 12, being Sections 4,275, 4,276, 4,288, 4,283 of the Revised Statutes of 1881. The bill passed to a second reading.
By Mr. WILSON,of Kosciusko, [H. R. 172] an act to provide that all notes obtained by fraud or under false pretense should not be collectible.
Mr. COPELAND offered a resolution that a Special Committee be appointed to ascertain and report to this House the number of disabled Union soldiers, if any, who have been given appointments at the hands of the officers of this House.
On motion by Mr. HAM the resolution was laid on the table-yeas, 56; nays, 38.
The House adjourned till 10 a m.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR stated this question to be on the substitute pending at the
adjournment last evening authorizing the
Mr. SPANN insisted the Committee had no need of the power sought for in this resolution. A party charged with disqualification should be brought before the Bar of the Senate. Under the statute the issue is on ineligibility. The Committee ought to hear nothing in this case except as to the contest. If Senator Overstreet is arraigned before the Bar of the Senate, he is ready to meet the charge. If the Committee should find the Senator guilty of bribery, although unseating him, it would not seat Mr. Johnson. It looks like the purpose is, under cover, to gather evidence to bolster up the contest for the seat. The law says the contestor and contestee shall bear the expense of the contest themselves. The law evidently intended that evidence should be taken entirely before the Commission provided by law, and should there be closed to all intents and purposes, and the Commission of Justices for the purposes of taking the deposition has expired. He spoke further against the adoption of the substitute.
Mr. WILLARD considered this a purely legal question, and could see no reason for excitement in its discussion. He regarded the question to go as far as to ineligibility, The statute distinctly provides for cases like this. It is clearly within the province of the Committee to inquire into the eligibility of the sitting member. The Senate is a Court having exclusive jurisdiction as to the qualifications of its own members. The English rule has been well settled, and there is no variance from that rule where the majority candidate is ineligibile, the candidate receiving the next highest number of votes is entitled to the seat. He read from XIV Ind , page 93, where there was ineligibility on account of holding a judicial office. The question narrows down to this: Did a sufficient number of the voters in this contest have knowledge of the charge of of bribery? It is the purpose of the resolution I(P i quire into that matter. If there be no notice then there is no cause of removal on that charge. Will you deny the right of having evidence on this subject? It can not be told how long it will take to obtain necessary depositions, and the Senate or the House has power at all times to send for persons and papers He could not, understand why Senators on the other side are unwilling to have the matter thoroughly investigated.
Mr. VOYLES thought the discussion had taken a wider range than is proper at this stage of the proceeding. The inquiry is narrowed down to the one question of bribery. He favored, if evidence is heard at all, that witnesses should be sent for. Their bearing and consistency upon the stand should be observed. The taking of depositions might be made almost interminable. All material evidence can soon be obtained by sending for witnesses, and the losing party having to pay the cost. No more witnesses would be sent for than are necessary. After grounds have been filed in s contest under the statute, the contestor has the right to present supplemental ground where he shows a good excuse for not filing the same in the proper time No respectable authority will deny the right to amend or supplement such complaint. If it be true a bribe was given by the sitting member and known to a number of voters sufficient to change the result, the contestor would be entitled to a seat. This is a question of fact.
Mr. BUNDY insisted the argument of the Senator from Rush [Mr Spann] has not and can
not be answered. The question pending "before the Committee is in the nature of a
contest. That is the matter referred to the Committee, and not a question of
bribery-that has not been referred to the Committee. The pending resolution asks
authority to send for persons and papers, that evidence may be taken to support and
negative a charge of bribery. A Committee has no power except to answer questions
referred to it, and that question was not referred as a charge of bribery, but as an
additional ground of con lest. Bribery Is not a cause of contest under the statute in
an election to the General Assembly. There is a difference between the question of
ineligibility and the question of qualification. The object of the
Mr. BROWN sent to the Clerk's desk and had read the supplemental cause of contest discovering a new cause, viz: the second statutory cause-said contestee did offer and give a bribe of money to secure his election. He said: That paper shows it was intended to be regarded as additional ground; and it is double-to much as recites the fact as to the majority of votes cast is in the nature of a contest; but so much as refers to the bribe, that act has placed a bar of disqualification as to holding office. If the sitting Senator is proved to have given a bribe to secure the position, that does not seat the contestor. This has been settled after discussion ten years ago in this Senate, and the person asking for the seat then did not claim it. There can not be a single case shown in the annals of legislative bodies where a man has been turned out and the man who ran against him the one turned out seated. This discussion ought not to have come at this early time. It has been brought to the notice of the Senate, by the solemn oath of a citizen, that a sitting member is disqualified by giving a bribe or offering a bribe-that we take notice of it on our own account entirely. If that be proved true the seat becomes vacant. That is the universal rule everywhere. The question of disqualification can be heard at the same time with the questions of contest, and therefore it is proper to adopt the resolution. In the case before the Senate ten or twelve years ago, not a single deposition was taken. Those friendly to the sitting member should not seek to stop the most full and fair investigation.
Mr. GRAHAM said the Senator from Johnson [Mr. Overstreet] cares nothing, personally, whether he retains the seat or not, though honestly and fairly elected to this body; but he cares for his reputatation, which is attacked in a manner not warranted by law and the facts in the case. The Committee can not find any ground for contest under the statute the specifications can not be sustained by evidence, even in the hands of a Democratic majority. It is attempted to bring in this case a charge of bribery, which is not a ground for contest. The arguments of Senators on the other side can not be understood until the vote shall be taken. The law making power ought to be as fair in dealing with citizens as the Courts of the land are. How long would this charge stand under a motion to quash? Not a Justice of the Peace in the land would allow a case to go to trial under a charge of this kind. If there is a charge of bribery in the paper referred to, it could have been made specifically. The charge is too indefinite, and for many reasons the resolution should not be adopted. Let this case be fairly tried, and tried only upon the questions in issue. Let not anything be irregularly tacked on a proceeding in a case of contest.
Mr. McCULLOCH. in reply to a question, stated the papers came regularly in the hands of the Committee, and whether the additional paper be considered as a memorial or an additional cause of contest, it is the duty of the Committee to ascertain the facts in the case. The question as to whether the contestor is entitled to a seat or not does not first arise; the first question is, can the grounds of contest be sustained? The subsequent paper came to the Committee in the regular way, and no resolution or request has been made for its return to the Senate. The two questions may be tried together. The matter is before the Committee. It is the duty of the Committee to investigate and report it, and then the Senate can act as it deems fit. The pending resolution goes to the charge of bribery. It won't do for the Senate to say when a charge is made that a member has been guilty of bribery that the Senate must not take action, nor should we simply convict the member on depositions; but rather we should send for witnesses and weigh testimony. It is due to the member against whom the charge is made that the Committee should have the witnessees meet the Senator face to face. We would favor brining the witnesses before the whole Senate that each member may weigh the testimony for himself.
Mr. SAYRE thought under the view presented by the Senator from Gibson [Mr. McColloch] the resolution should not be adopted. The supplemental charge is not a ground for contest. The investigation should not be had on the grounds before the Senate as no time, person or place is set forth. The forms of law should be observed here as well as in the Courts of Justice. The meanest tramp should not beheld on such a charge before the most incompetent Justice of the Peace in the State.
Mr. McCOLLOCH and Mr. BELL demanded the previous question, which was seconded by the Senate-yeas, 27; nays, 20-and under its operations the substitute was adopted by yeas, 26; nays, 20, and the resolution as amended was adopted without a division.
Mr. HENRY, when his name was called, saying he concurred in the position taken by the Senator from Jackson [Mr. Brown] that the charge of bribery ought to be investigated when properly presented, but considering that this charge ought not to go to the Committee on the original ground of contest, he should vote "no."
Mr. HOOVER, when his name was called, declined to vote because of his pair with the Senator from St. Joseph [Mr. Campbell, absent on account of sickness] on all political questions.
[On motion of Mr. MAGEE the courtesies of the Senate were extended to Hons. William McKee Dunn and John M. Foster.]
Mr. SPANN offered a resolution to instruct the
Pending which, came the recess for dinner.
Mr. SPANN offered the pending resolution with a desire to divide the question and place it in a position that will be fair to the Senator from Johnson, Mr. Overstreet.
Mr. BELL thought this will be in advance attempting to determine a legal proposition which may prove embarrassing. If knowledge is brought home to enough of the voters to determine the result, the contestor would be entitled to the seat. So he oppossen the attempt to circumscribe the action of the Committee as proposed in the pending resolution. The inquiry will necessarily have to be taken separately, the testimony being oral. He knew nothing of the merits in this controversy, not having even talked about it with contestor or contestee, or either of their attorneys. The resolution already adopted is the only one that should go before the Committee to which the question may be safely left.
Mr. FOULKE moved to amend by instructing the Committee to require the contestant to
specify the persons to whom and the things offered as a bribe in each case, etc., etc.
Senators on the other side have spoken about this not being a political matter, yet it
seems a curious thing that even in preliminary matters we divide exactly at the party
line. In this matter it may be well for them not to go too far. The Democratic
Senators voted to a man this morning in favor of the demand for the previous question,
thus stopping further debate. It is not enough to show that one or two or three voters
had notice of a bribe. He desired a full and fair investigation, and by his vote no
man shall retain a seat here who has blistered a hand with giving a bribe to secure an
election. We must be governed by ordinary rules of legal procedure. Witnesses may be
obtained
Mr. BROWN: The statement that the sitting member has been guilty of offering and giving bribes is in exact accord with the precedents in this State. To the end that we may make some honest effort tot do something in this case before being called from time to eternity, he moved to lay the resolution on the table.
The motion was agreed to by yeas, 24; nays 19.
Mr. SPANN offered a preamble and resolution requiring the informer to make specific
terms as to the charge of bribery; requiring a return of the paper making a charge of
bribery from the Committee, and that this inquiry be before the entire Senate in
Mr. BROWN liked the old way the best. There never was a time in the history of Indiana when the action proposed by this resolution has been resorted to. He moved to lay the motion on the table.
This motion was agreed to by yeas, 26; nays, 19.
Mr. Ernest's bill [S. 12] to define the crime of false pretense coming up in regular order, it was read the third time.
On motion of Mr. BROWN the emergency clause was stricken out.
Mr. HENRY opposed the passage of the bill, stating the proposed change is to allow any person to be convicted by making any false pretense, even under a verbal presentation, the law being now that it must be under a written pretense. He opposed allowing the criminal law to be used by persons to force the collection of a debt; as would be the case under an act such as proposed by this bill.
Mr. BELL favored the bill. It simply places the law back to where it was previous to 1881, and he regarded it as an omission by mistake. He saw no reason why the getting of money or goods by verbal false pretense should not be punishable. Another change proposed is imprisonment from one to seven instead of from two to ten, as now.
Mr FOULKE joined in the desire that the bill may pass. Under the present law a party can be punished only where the false pretense is written, while in the bill the punishment is also for oral false pretense. The fact a law may be abused is no reason why a good and salutary law should not be enacted. There is a hiatus in the present law that ought to be filled, and this will fill it.
Mr. GRAHAM has noticed that under the law of 1881 the people are left without remedy from a class of swindlers. He could conceive of no case where this bill would interfere with the rights of an honest man.
Mr. HENRY remembered this clause was left out of the code at the last session on purpose, and it ought to remain out. It persons would ask for the representation to be put in writing they can be protected under the law as it now is. The law is right as it stands, because the question of conviction is in writing and does not depend upon the testimony of persons who may be angry.
The bill finally passed the Senate by yeas, 33; nays, 13.
[Messrs. Spann and Voyles were appointed a Committee to invite Mexican soldiers to visit the Senate Chamber on motion of the former. ]
Mr. Graham's bill [S. 32] to punish persons who disclose messages or conversation passing over telephone wires, being read the third time-
Mr. GRAHAM said bill was very nearly the law governing the transmission of telegraph messages.
The bill passed the Senate-yeas, 41; nays, 2.
Mr. RISTINE'S bill [S. 22] to amend Section 5,097 of the Code of 1881 concerning the construction of McAdam and other roads (see page 29 of the Brevier Reports), with an amendment adopted heretofore allowing 2 percentum of each $100 valuation, being read the third time-
Mr. SAYRE objected to the 2 percentum tax-the entire legal limit-being permitted for the buildup of gravel roads
Mr. WILLARD made the point of order that the bill does not refer to the section of the Revised Statute proposed to be amended.
The PRESIDENT pro tem. directed the Secretary to have the section of the Revised Statute replaced.
Mr FOULKE intended the rule which he drew up to be for the convenience of the public more than for the Senate.
Mr. Overstreet's bill [S. 20] relating to the qualification of Petit Jurors was read the third time.
Mr. HENRY said the bill was the re-enactment of a law of 1875 or 1877. There is a question whether it is in force or not. This law is held to be repealed by implication.
Mr. FOULKE objected to the emergency clause.
Mr. BELL thought the provisions of this bill commends itself to everybody. It strikes at the professional Juror, who, under this bill can only get one strike a year at you anyhow.
Mr. OVERSTREET spoke a few words in favor of his bill, inaudible at the reporter's table.
The bill passed the Senate-yeas, 39; nays, 3.
The Senate Committee on Invitation appeared with the Mexican veterans, who were received by Senators standing. General Mahlon D. Manson, the Preside of the Association, responded to the welcome address of the Lieutenant Governor. Speeches were also made by Major Jonathan W. Gordon and Governor Porter. On Major James B. Mulkey's motion, and by a vote of the veterans present, Governor Porter and Lieutenant Governor Hanna were made honorary members of the Association, and invested with badges.
Mr. SPANN offered a resolution, which was adopted, recognizing the grand achievements of Mexican soldiers, and pledging the Senate's aid in obtaining from the General Government recognition for their services.
The Senate took a recess for interchange of courtesies-
And them came the adjournment.
Mr. HEFFREN said: Mr. Speaker, I rise to a question of personal privilege. I hold in
my hands a copy of this morning's Journal in which is an article entitled "After Many
Years," purporting to come from the pen of General Reub Williams, in the Warsaw Times.
All I have to say at present is that most of the article is a tissue of falsehoods, as
the public record will show. It is true that I wis arrested and confined in a
Government Prison for thirty four days; that I was put upon trial and discharged. It
is further true, but not stated in said article, that afterward the Supreme Court of
the United States decided that the trial was illegal and that the Military Commission
had no jurisdiction nor right to try me. It is also true that a majority of the
Justices of the Supreme
Mr, PETTIBONE presented, a petition requesting the repeal of certain sections of the school law, and further requesting that the law be so changed that the pay for attending County Institutes shall be in regular gradation with the number in attendance.
Mr. GREEN presented a similar petition from Dubois County.
They were referred to appropriate Committees.
A resolution was offered and adopted that the courtesies ot the House be extended to the alumni of the State University, who are now in the city.
Mr. McMULLEN offered the following resolution, which was adopted:
Whereas, The surviving soldiers of the Mexican War resident in the Stale of Indiana are now in the city of Indianapolis, in attendance upon the union of such soldiers; therefore
Resolved, That this House most cordially extend them an invitation to visit us at all times, and that the privilege of this floor of the House be extended io them.
Mr. HAM offered a resolution, which was adopted, for a Special Committee to invite a number of veterans of the Mexican War, now in the city, to visit the House of Representatives in a body.
Mr. SCHLOSS offered a concurrent resolution that the Senate and House meet in Joint Convention next Tuesday, January 23, for the purpose of electing a State Librarian, two Prison Directors South and three Prison Directors North.
It was adopted.
On motion by Mr. WILLIAMS the bill [S. 49] to change the time of holding Court in Posey and Vanderburg Counties way taken up, read the third time, and passed by yeas, 23; nays, 0.
On motion by Mr. WRIGHT, the Senate amendment to the bill [H. R. 151] authorizing pay to file clerks, was concurred in.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time, and severally passed, to the second reading, unless otherwise stated:
By Mr. WILSON [H. R. 172] to provide that no note or notes where the signature or signatures have been obtained by fraud or under false pretense, shall not be collectable by law.
By Mr. DAVIS [H. R. 173] to authorize the Township Trustee of the Township of Cool Spring, Laporte County, to enter satisfaction of judgment against Robert Keifer and Henry Curran.
By Mr. McCLELLAND [H. R. 174] to amend Sections 289, 284, and repeal Section 268 of an act concerning public officials, being numbers 2,181, 2,185 and 2,200 of the code of 1881.
By Mr. McCLELLAND [H. R. 175] to repeal Section 1, being Section 2,967 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, authorizing aliens to hold title to real estate.
By Mr. W1LSON, of Marion, [H. N. 176] to amend Section 108, being 6,376 of the Code of 1881, of an act concerning taxation.
By Mr. W1LSON, of Marion, [H. R. 177] for the relief of John Martin contractor for brick work on the Hospital for the Insane, Women's Department.
By Mr. HOWLAND [H. R, 178] concerning the powers and duties of County Commissioners and requiring them to give bonds.
By Mr. HOWLAND [H. R. 179] to encourage the formation of voluntary Associations for the encouragement of agriculture in all its forms.
By Mr. WHITSETT [H. R. 180] to abolish city assessors.
By Mr. WHITSETT [H. R. 181] to provide for the election and qualification of Justices of the Peace.
By Mr. FERRITER [H. R. 182] to create the office of Supervising inspector of Steam Boilers.
By Mr. FERRITER [H. R. 183] to abolish Boards of Aldermen in incorporated cities.
By Mr. SUTTON [H. R. 184] concerning the quieting of titles to real estate.
By Mr. SUTTON [H. R. 185] to amend Section 4 of an act concerning husband and wife-being Section 5,119 of the Code of 1881.
By Mr. STUCKER [H. R. 186] to amend Section 33 of an act providing for the election of County Superintendents.
By Mr. STUCKER [H. R. 187] to amend Section 268-being Section 2,184 of the Revised Statutes of 1881-concerning proceedings in criminal cases, and to repeal Section 2,185 of the Revised Statutes of 1881.
By Mr. MONTGOMERY [H. R. 188] to amend Section 27 of an act concerning proceedings in civil cases.
By Mr. KNOWLES [H. R. 189] to regulate the carrying of baggage packages and freight by Railroad or other carrying Companies.
By Mr. McMULLEN [H. R. 190] to regulate proceedings of foreign Insurance Companies doing business in this State.
By Mr. BOWERS [H. R. 191] to regulate the practice of medicine, midwifery and surgery.
By Mr. JEWETT [H. R. 192] to amend Section 61 of the general city incorporation bill, being Section 3,101 of Revised Statutes of 1881.
By Mr. MUTZ, by request, [H. R. 193] to authorize turnpike and other road Companies to surrender their charters to Boards of County Commissioners.
Then came the noon recess.
Mr. HENDERSON offered a joint resolution that our Senators and Representatives in Congress be instructed and requested to use their influence to have Congress cede and convey to the State of Indiana all territory within its limits meandered out by the Government survey, included as lake and river bed in said survey.
The resolution was adopted.
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox. offered the following resolution: Whereas. The Association of County Surveyors, of this State, are now in session in this city; therefore be it resolved, that the courtesies and privelege of this House are hereby extended to that Association.
The resolution was adopted.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time and severally passed to the second reading unless otherwise stated:
By Mr. BEST [H. R. 194] to amend Section 9 of an act to amend an act to provide for a general system of common schools.
By Mr. HOLLER [H R. 195] to amend Section 2 of an act to amend Section 2 of an act to amend Sections 649, and 650 of an act to revise, simplify and abridge the rules, pleading, practice and forms in civil cases.
By Mr. AIKEN [H. R. 196] to amend an act to create a State Normal School, being Section 4,556 of the Revised Statutes of 1881.
By Mr. S SMITH [H. R. 197] to amend Section 243 of an act concerning public offences.
By Mr. WESTFALL [H. R. 198] for the relief of Allen Lepten and his sureties, JOhn J. Peteres, Henry Edwards and Levy Holliday.
By Mr. HAM [H. R. 199] creating the Forty-third Judicial Circuit.
By Mr. HAM [H. R. 200] to provide for the payment of certain claims for labor performed in ditching by persons living in Tipton County.
By Mr. SPANN [H. R. 201] to amend Section 19 of an act to provide for the organization of Savings Banks.
By Mr. SPANN [H. R. 202] to provide for the location and erecting of an additional Asylum for the Insane.
By Mr. PRUITT [H. R. 203] to provide for the incorporation of Street Railway Companies.
By Mr. SCHLOSS [H. R. 204] to prevent movers, gypsies, tramps and beggars from occupying public highways that lead into cities of 10,000 or more inhabitants, without having obtained permission of the person owning the property along each highway.
By Mr. CABBAGE [H. R. 205] to encourage the protection of the breeders of fine stock.
Mr. CAMPBELL offered a resolution that the thanks of the members be extended to the Cincinnati Commercial Gazette for courtesies extended to the members.
Mr. JEWETT moved to amend so as to include the Indianapolis dailies, the Cincinnati dailies, and the Louisville Courier Journal.
The resolution, as amended, was adopted.
Mr. HEFFREN moved that the House take a recess of fifteen minutes to exchange courtesies with the Mexican veterans.
The motion was agreed to.
The Speaker called the House to order at the expiration of the fifteen minutes.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time and severally passed the second reading, unless otherwise stated:
By Mr. WILEY [H. R. 206] to provide against the intoxication of public officers, and providing for their removal from office therefor.
By Mr. HEFFREN [H. R. 207] to provide fees and salaries for certain County officers therein named.
On motion, it was ordered that 500 copies of the bill be printed.
The Committee on Rooms reported that they had secured Rooms 66 and 67 of the Bates House for the use of the State House Investigation Committee and that the price to be paid for said rooms was $1 50, the proprietor to furnish heat, light, and keep the room in order, etc.
The report was adopted.
Mr. HEFFREN offered a resolution, which was adopted, that the Speaker draw warrants in favor of O. M. Wilson, Thomas Allen and others appointed by Secretary of State Hawn to assist in the organization of the House.
The House adjourned.
The following described bills were read the second time and passed to the third reading.
The bill [H. R. 148] ceding State jurisdiction over land used by the General Government.
Mr. Fletcher's bill [S. 67] authorizing municipalities to invest sinking funds temporarily in United States Government, County and State bonds.
Mr. Durscan's out-swinging door bill [S. 85].
Mr. Ristine's bill [S. 88] requiring record to be made of acting constables in Horse Thief Detecting Associations.
Mr. Ristine's bill [S. 79] to amend Sections 4 and 7 of the act creating the Bureau of Statistics.
Mr. Johnson's bill [S. 71] to provide for the canceling of debt secured by mortgage on real property by the sale thereof, etc.
Mr. Benz's bill [S. 76] to amend Section 6 of the homestead ace of March 29, 1879, was read the second time, with a Committe recommendation that it lie on the table.
Mr, SPANN thought this bill had merit, and moved its recommittal to the
Mr. VAN VORHIS deemed that unnecessary. It requires any one seeking benefit of the law to pay entire cost of proceedings.
The motion to recommit was agreed to.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR announced the resignation of Birdie Hollis, of Greene County, a page of the Senate, and that the Chair had appointed Thomas R. Edwards, of Hancock County, to fill the vacancy.
Mr. Fletcher's bill [S. 84] defining cruelty to animals-a misdemeanor-and for the destruction of certain animals, was read the second time, with a Committee report recommending that it lie on the table.
Mr. FOULKE considered that bill an important one. Though objectionable in some features, in its present form, there can be made out of it a substantial imrpovement on the present law. He moved to recommit the bill.
Mr. VAN VORHIS regarded the provisions so sweeping in their character that it would require a substitution of new matter.
On motion of Mr. WILLARD it was referred to the
The House concurrent resolution for a joint Convention next Tuesday at 11 o'clock a. m., for the purpose of electing a State Librarian, two Directors for the State Prison South and three Directors of the State Prison North, being read-
On motion by Mr. MARVIN, the Senate concurred in the resolution.
On motion by Mr. MAGEE, a recess of fifteen minutes was taken to hear addresses from General McKee Dunn and Colonel John W. Foster. General Dunn and Dr. Moss, President of the State University, (General Foster not appearing), made short speeches.
By Mr. SPANN: From the Chaplain of the Southern Prison.
By Mr. SAYRE: Against disfranchisement on account of sex.
By Mr. WILLARD: For an increase of the Teachers' Institute Fund.
By Messrs. VOYLES, BUNDY, YANCEY, SPANN, LINDLEY, HOWARD, ATKISON and HILLIGASS: For the submission at a special election of the prohibition constitutional amendment.
Mr. SPANN submitted a report from a minority of the
Mr. MARVIN stated a majority of the Committee were not ready to report, and actio nshould not be taken till then.
Mr. McCLURE thought this an extraordinary procedure to present the minority in advance of the majority report. It seems difficult to get the Committee together, and he much preferred this matter be delayed until the Committee are ready to report.
Mr. VOYLES regarded this action as out of place.
Mr. SPANN deemed it entirely in order it being understood a majority would report this morning. A majority should not stop action by withholding their report. He understood Senators on the other side are in some trouble as to what they will do.
Mr. VOYLES thought it not courtesy to present a minority report and move its adoption before a majority of the Committee make report. So as to give time, he moved to lay the minority report upon the table.
Mr. FOULKE raised the point of order that the minority report unaccompanied by a majority report is out of order.
Mr. SPANN asked leave to withdraw the report, but objection being made-
The PRESIDENT pro tem. [Mr. Sayre in the Chair] declared the point of order well taken, and that a matter in the possession of the Senate can not be withdrawn over objection.
Mr. VAN VORHIS dissented from the ruling of the Chair.
Mr. BUNDY said the minority report was presented for action, and no action being taken the report could be withdrawn by the member offering it.
The PRESIDENT pro tem. : If there be no objection it can be done.
Mr. ADKISON offered a resolution instructing the
Mr. FOULKE thought the resolution proposes an unconstitutional thing.
Mr BUNDY objected to discussion of its merits. It was referred to the
Mr. WILLARD called up his resolution submitted on Tuesday, the 6th inst., as follows:
Resolved, That the
Mr. WILLARD moved the adoption of this resolution and said that since the resolution was offered the Lieutenant Governor has assigned to this Committee all that part of the Governor's message referring to the new State House, thus making the Committee partially responsible for the Senate's action on that subject. The Committee unanimously think it should have an opportunity to make a full examination of the facts in the case. There is no question of more importance before this body than the new State House matter.
Mr. SPANN remembered the Senator from Lawrence [Mr. Willard] opposed a resolution some time since for a special Committee on this subject, and could not understand the zeal of that Senator now in this matter.
Mr. BROWN favored the contractors being held strictly to the performance of their contract, and did not think the Senate would vote them $800,000 bonus-he would not vote a single dollar. The Senate not being full this morning he moved a postponement of this matter till Monday at 2 o'clock.
Mr. YANCEY thought the resolution should meet with respectful consideration. The contractors want to steal some $750,000, as he understood it (to use plain English), and the State House Commissioners' report shows about that deficiency.
Mr. WILLARD could see no force in the remark that the Senate is not full at this time, and as this matter has now been delayed for some two weeks he counseled action at once.
Mr. FOULKE favored the resolution. The Senate is probably as full now as it will be next Monday. It is the duty of that Committee to take into consideration the subjects contained in the Governor's message, where it is given to be understood that the contractors are about to give up their contract. The State House had better remain as it is for twenty years than for it to go out that the contractors shall not be held to their contract.
Mr BROWN withdrew his motion to postpone.
The resolution was adopted.
The Senate took a recess until 2 o'clock.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time and severally passed to the second reading, unless otherwise stated:
By Mr. ATKISON [S. 135] to repeal Section 1 of the act authorizing aliens to hold title to real estate, convey the same, and being Section 2,967 of the Revised Statutes of 1881
By Mr. DAVIDSON [S. 136] making the Township Trustee Superintendent of Roads and Highways in his Township, and fixing the commutation of road tax.
By Mr. FLETCHER [S. 137] defining rape and prescribing punishment therefor. [On conviction of rape shall be castrated.]
By Mr. MAGEE [S. 138] concerning railroads crossing each other on a common grade. [Shall come to a full stop before crossing.
By Mr. MARVIN [S. 139] relating to gravel, macadamized and paved roads, and to protect the same from heavy burdens. [Between November 15 and May 15 not more than 2,500 pounds shall be hauled on wagon tires of less than four inches in width.]
By Mr. OVERSTREET [S. 140] to amend Section 5,293 and 5,294 of the revision of 1881 [Concerning mechanics' leins.]
By Mr. RICHARDSON [S. 141] to repeal the act authorizing aliens to hold title to real estate. Approved April 16, 1881.
By Mr. SMITH , of Jay, [S. 142] concerning elections, providing penalties. [Prohibiting the use of stickers]
By Mr. SPANN [S. 143] to amend Section 86 of an act concerning taxation. Approved March 29, 1881. [Relating to railroads and Express Companies.]
By Mr. VAN VORHIS, by request [S. 144] to amend Section 485 of a supplementary city incorporation act. Approved March 8, 1881. [Concerning concurrent action of Boards of Alderman and Common Council.]
By Mr. WHITE [S. 145] to amend Section 36 of
the Common School Law of March 6, 186, being Section 4,425 of the Code of 1881,
giving but one six months' teacher's license, which shall be entitled to an eight
years' license, which shall be styled a "professional license." Also allowing School
Trustees of certain cities and towns to appoint examiners for their school
By Mr. YOUCHE [S. 146] in relation to petitions for rehearing in the Supreme Court. (Upon request may permit oral argument-no voice by Judge rendering original decision.]
By Mr. HILLTGASS [S. 147] to amend Section 4,369 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, being Section 8 of the general Common School law. [School fund to be loaned at 6 per cent. per annum.]
By Mr BROWN [S. 148] to amend Section 419 of the Code of civil proceedure of 1881. [Concerning the notice for taking of depositions.]
By Mr. MAGEE [S. 149] authorizing the sale and conveyance of certain lands of the State of Indiana [The State Auditor is to prepare maps of unsold swamp or other lands, lands forfeited to the State for non-payment of taxes, lands escheated to the State to be appraised by three appraisors to be appointed by the Auditor and Treasurer of the Counties in which the land lies.]
By Mr. LINDLEY [S. 150] by request, supplemental to the act of April 14, 1881, for the settlement of decedents' estates.
On motion by Mr. BUNDY, this bill with bills numbered 9 and 56 on the same subject, was referred to a special Committee of five, which the Lieutenant Governor makes: Messrs. Bundy, Henry, Smith of Jay, Ristine and McCullough.
By Mr. LOCKRIDGE [S. 151] to amend Section 9 of the act of June 7, 1852-being Section 5,852 of the Code of 1881. [Concerning the election of Clerks of Counties.]
By Mr. McCULLOUGH [S. 152] supplemental to the act of April 14, 188
On motion by Mr. HILLIGASS, the resolution to authorize the printing of 1,000 copies of report of the survey of the Kankakee region was read with a Committee recommendation that the number be made 3,000.
Mr. VOYLES said no necessity for printing so many as 3,000 copies-not more than 200 would be read.
Mr. RISTINE: The whole purpose of the appropriation by the last General Assembly was to furnish information of that region. It interests a large portion of the State, and there is a demand for the n umber of copies proposed, and the extra copies can be furnished at comparatively small cost.
Mr. VOYLES did not think the State should drain the large area of territory proposed in this report. He thought one-third the number of copies named would supply the demand.
Mr. GRAHAM favored the printing of 3,000 copies. This is a matter of interest to the people of the entire State, and that large section of the country should be made productive-to do which might be a good investment for the State. He has been called upon for at least fifty copies. The plate from which the map was printed has been preserved and the cost of printing the extra copies will be comparatively trivial.
Mr. BUNDY also favored concurrence in the report of the Committee. If there is anybody interested in obtaining this information, it is poor economy not to have a sufficient number of copies printed to supply the demand. It is a question whether it would be such a great benefit to the State at large that the State should bear a portion of the expense of reclaiming the vast amount of waste land in that region, and whether the United States should not also bear a part of the expense.
Mr. SPANN moved to amend the report by directing that the copies be distributed among the members of both House and Senate.
Mr. WILLARD moved to recommit the resolution to the
Mr. HILLIGASS said but 500 copies were printed There remains unexpended. $376 30 of the $5 000 appropriated by the last General Assembly for this survey. The Bureau of Public Printing have stated the cost of printing will be for the first 1,000, $70, and $49 50 for each additional 1,000, making the 3,090 cost $169 12. He favored printing the 3,000.
Mr. YANCEY would be willing to vote most any amount to draining the land if it belonged to the State; but as these funds belonged to private corporations and individuals, he opposed expending the State's money for such purpose. He believed this whole thing a garb upon the purse strings of the State.
Mr. BROWN hoped the Senate would proceed to the discussion of a more interesting question, and moved the previous question.
The demand for the previous question being seconded, under its operations, the motion to recommit with instructions [Mr. Willard's] was rejected by yeas, 38; nays, 24.
The amendment [Mr Spann's] to the report of the Committee was agreed to.
The report of the Committee was then concurred in by yeas, 24; nays, 22.
The resolution, as amended, was agreed to.
Praying submission of the prohibition Constitutional amendments at special election were presented by Messrs Foulke, Benz, Bischowsky, Bundy, Compton, Davidson, Duncan, Faulkner, Hilligass, Howard, Johnson Marvin, McClure, Me- Cu Hough, Mclntosh, Smith of Delaware, Spann, Yancey and the Lieutenant Governor.
The Senate adjourned till to-morrow,
The SPEAKER commanded order and announced prayers by Rev. Mr. Sawyer, of Marion, Grant County.
On motion by Mr. HEFFREN, the reading of the Clerk's minutes of yesterday's proceedings was dispensed with.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time and severally passed to the second reading, unless otherwise stated:
By Mr. HEFFREN [H. R. 208] a bill for an act to prescribe the limit to be charged by all joint stock companies, corporations of individuals who own stock yards, and also prescribing the limit to be charged for weighing certain animals.
By Mr. MOCK [H. R. 209] a bill for an act concerning elections, providing penalties and repealing all laws in conflict. The bill makes it unlawful to use "stickers" or print the names of candidates nominated by different political parties on the s me ticket.
By Mr. SMITH [H. R. 210] to amend Section 1 and repeal Section 2 of an act for the changing of County boundaries.
By Mr. KIRKPATRICK [H. R. 211] to amend Sections 30 and 34 of the general common school law-being Sections 4,504 and 4,425 of the Code of 1881.
By Mr. CARR [H. R. 212] a bill for an act fixing the time for holding Court in the Thirty-eighth Judicial Circuit.
On motion of Mr. CARR the constitutional rule was suspended-yeas, 96; nays, 1-the bill was read the second time by title, the third time by sections, and passed the House by yeas, 96; nays, 1.
The bill [S. 32] to punish the disclosing of contents of telephone messages.
The bill [S. 20] relating to the qualification of petit jurors.
The bill [S. 12] to define the crime of false pretense so as to include oral represenation-
Were severally passed to the second reading.
The Senate concurrent resolution requesting the Secretary of War to reconsider his refusal to set apart a certain sum of money for the improvement of the harbor at Michigan City was taken up and concurred in.
Mr. McMULLEN, from a majority of the
Mr. MOODY said: It seems to me that the reason these standing Committees are appointed is in reference to their fatness, and it certainly seems to me that we should give some consideration to their recommendation.
Mr. SMITH said: What the gentleman says is very pertinent, but I am a little like Andrew Jackson, who said, when asked if he had not worn to support the Constitution, said I swore to support the Constitution as I understood it. He desired an explanation of the provisions of the bill before voting on it.
Mr. McMULLEN said: I think if the gentleman from Tippecanoe [Mr. Smith] will not insist on the reading of the bill I can briefly explain the changes proposed, and thereby save the time that would be consumed by the reading The first section proposes a change in the existing law in this: the present statute makes it embezzlement for a tenant to appropriate to his own use, with Intent to defraud his landlord, the share of the crop belonging to the landlord. Under the present statute an indictment will net lie unless the whole crop is appropriated. The amendment reported by the Committee makes it embezzlement to thus appropriate $25 worth of a crop. The amendment reported by the Committee to Section 2 takes out of the present statute but part of what is known as the provoke law, making it a misdemeanor to attempt to provoke another to commit a breach of the peace. Sections 4 5. 6, 7, and 8 seek to amend the game laws by allowing seining and netting fish and trapping and otherwise killing quails. The Committee believe the present laws are better than the proposed bill, and therefore ask that the said Section be stricken out. Your Committee has reported in favor of Section 9 of this bill, for the reason that the Statutes of 1881 leave out the words, "or any false pretense," and this bill seeks to re-enact the statute as it is found in the statutes of 1876. Our Supreme Court, in a late case that will be reported in 8lst Indiana, came to the conclusion that under the statute as it now is, an indictment will not lie unless the false pretense is a false token or writing. The bill seeks to remedy that matter by enacting that if a person obtain anything of value by false verbal misrepresentation, he shall be punished. Section 2 of this bill seeks to repeal the libel act. Your Committee believes that the existing act is a statutory law and should not be repealed. We believe that persons pecuniarily irresponsible can be reached in no other way than through this act A judgment in an action of slander avails nothing, and if this statute is repealed DO remedy is left.
Mr. PATTEN said: I am in favor of repealing this libel law; that is, the law that makes it criminal to write and print libel. It think it is contrary to the spirit of our Constitution. For sixty years the State of Indiana existed without criminal libel, and it was only four years ago that it was incorporated in the statutes of Indiana. All men who attempt to do what is right need no such law as this to protect them. Today libel stands upon the same footing as that of slander. I think if it is right to make criminal libel it is right to make criminal slander. I think it is proper that we should have press criticism. Let the newspapers lay on the lash to every scoundrel in Indiana. An honest man invites criticism at all times. The newspapers are the schoolmasters to educate the people. I think this is a law that ought to be repealed. I hope that this House will wipe it out of existence. Every man in this House is willing to stand upon his own character, and as one Representative I am willing to be criticised.
The minority report was rejected.
On motion by Mr. NAVE the House took a recess for ten minutes, in order that members might make acquaintance with a number of the Alumni of the State University on the floor of the House; during which time speeches were made by General W. McKee Dunn, Dr. Lemuel D. Moss and Major John R. Cravens.
The House took a recess till 2 o'clock.
Mr. STEWART hoped the report of this Committee will be concurred in.
The question being on the adoption of the majority report, the same was concurred in by the House.
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, from a majority of the
Mr. ADAMS said: I believe the report of the minority of this Committee ought to prevail, because I believe that if a Jury is competent to try a question of fact in one case it is in all cases. If a Jury is competent to try fraud in the execution of a note it is competent to try the same question with reference to the foreclosure of a mortgage. If a Jury can try fraud in a horse trade it can in a land trade. If a Jury is competent to try me for my life or my liberty it is competent to try me for my property or my money. There must have been somebody interested in the change of the rule that stood for nearly thirty years, and I can conceive of no people whose interest it affects sa much as the smart gentlemen who go over the country swindling men into the execution of mortgages through some fraud perpetrated upon them, and then denying them the right of a trial by a Jury of the citizens of their County.
Mr. MOCK: I believe in the minority report. I do not think it is right to leave it to the discretion of the Judge to say whether a man shall have a right to a Jury trial or not. If this minority report is adopted it will confer no greater right to any one for a trial by Jury than it did up to 1881. I believe that the law prior to 1881 was better than it, is now.
Mr. PATTEN: I do not see why, if a Jury has the right to try one case, why not let them try all cases. I am in favor of the minority report.
Mr. JEWETT: I think no man ought to vote for this minority report, and I hope that it will be voted down. It will almost double the length of our Courts should it prevail, and thereby incur a double expense to the taxpayers of the State.
Mr. WILEY: As one of the members of
Mr. GORDON: Nearly thirty years ago our code of civil procedure was adopted. By that code, as it stood until 1881, all questions of fact were triable by Jury. That plan worked well. The code established all distinctions between proceedings at law and in equity. The change made two years ago was a step backward; a step toward establishing the distinction abolished by the code. The litigants ought to decide whether they will try by Jury or not. Will the gentleman from Knox (Mr. Williams) give us anything like a definite idea as to what matters are triable by Jury as the law now stands? I am in favor of the the minority report.
Mr. FRAZER said: We have thus far tried to give stability to our laws, and not to suit the whim and fancy of some members. If gentlemen will examine the statute, they will find that there is no question of fact that may not be tried by Jury.
Mr. WILSON, of Marion, thought it would be going back to adopt the minority report.
The minority report was rejected-yeas, 60; nays, 35. The majority report, as amended by the minority report, was adopted.
Mr. MOCK, from the
After discussion thereon, the report was concurred in.
The House adjourned.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR took the chair and requested Senators to stand while prayer was offered by Rev. Mr. Baird.
On motion by Mr. MAY the reading of the Secretary's minutes of yesterday's proceedings was dispensed with.
Mr. BROWN, from a majority of the
Mr. BUNDY, from the minority of said Committee, reported the en tries as found on the journal of the two Houses in he session of 1881, and copies of the joint resolutions proposing to amend the Constitution as on the file in the Secretary of State's office, and published in the laws. It did not find they were referred to this General Assembly in words on the journal of either House, but the provisions of the Constitution have been substantially complied with, and in its opinion the proposed Constitutional amendments are properly before this General Assembly, signed by Messrs. Bundy and Graham.
Mr. BUNDY moved that these reports be made the special order for next Wednesday morning at 10:30 o'clock.
The motion was agreed to.
On his further motion 150 copies of the reports and the resolution were ordered printed.
Mr. GRAHAM, favoring the motion to print: Nothing of the importance equal with this has been yet printed. It would be better to print thousands, but he would not move to amend-
Mr. BROWN objecting to the motion.
Mr. FOULKE, from the
Mr. FAULKNER from the
Mr. LOCKRIDGE moved its recommittal. He was not present when the bill was considered by the Committee. The motion was agreed to.
Mr. MARVIN, from a, majority of the
Mr. RISTINE presented a minority report from the same Committee, recommending the indefinite postponement of the bill.
Mr. VOYLES, from the
Other Committee reports were made and placed on the files with the above for future consideration when they come up in the regular orders of the day.
Mr. SPANN offered a resolution instructing the
Mr. BROWN stated that this resolution casts a reflection on the Committee. The Committee had a meeting and unanimously agreed to adjourn to a meeting to-day. He moved to lay the resolution on the table.
The resolution was rejected by yeas, 19; nays. 20-the Lieutenant Governor giving the casting vote.
Mr. BENZ explaining his negative vote because the Committee has had plenty of time to consider this matter.
Mr. RAHM when his name was called, said he
The vote was announced as above.
So the motion to lay on the table was rejected.
The resolution was then adopted by yeas, 20; nays, 19-the Lieutenant Governor giving the casting vote again.
The LIEUTENENT GOVERNOR announced the first thing in order to be the report of the
Mr. BROWN: Does the Chair decide that the Senate must stand in statue quo until that Committee reports?
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: No: but I would like to hear from the Chairman of the Committee on Executive Appointments.
Mr. BROWN: The Committee is not prepared to report now. And I will say to the Senator from Rush [Mr. Spann] that I don't think his course has added anything to the speed of that Committee, either.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR; Senator Dun- can the Senator from Brown, is the Chairman of
the
Mr. DUNCAN: There is an announcement on your desk for a meeting of that Committee to-night. I sent it up about a half hour or an hour ago I will say this, as one member of that Committee, that I think our meeting to-night will satisfactorily comply with the resolution.
Mr. BUNDY moved that time be given the Committee till 2 o'clock to-day.
Mr. BROWN moved to amend till 10:15 o'clock to-morrow morning. The Committee has adjourned till this evening, and the members can not well be gotten together before then. I will say, so far as Senate bill No. 1 is concerned, no action will be taken to-day, if that is what is worrying Senators on that side.
Mr. SPANN: We are after the question as to whether the
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: It is the opinion of the Chair that the Committee ought to report immediately. Of course If the Senate gives It further time that is another matter.
Mr. BROWN insisted on his motion to give the Committee until 10:15 to-morrow to report.
Mr. SPANN made the point of order that this motion is out of order, as it conflicts with the resolution just adopted by the Senate.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: I think that point of order is well taken. Of course if the Senate will give consent to pass it over the Chair will let it go.
Mr. BUNDY: I think the Committee can mate a report by 2 o'clock to-day.
Mr. MAGEE: I voted in the affirmative on the resolution requiring the
The question now recurring on the resolution Mr. BROWN moved to amend the resolution by requiring the Committee to report at 10:15 to-morrow.
The amendment was accepted by Mr. Spann.
The resolution as amended was adopted.
Mr. HILLIGASS offered a resolution for the reference of his bill [S. 16] amend Sections 1,781 and 1,782 of the code of 1881 to a Sub-Committee of three, with the Senator from Morgan (Mr. Foulke) as Chairman.
Mr. VAN VORHIS thought that this was instituting a bad practice.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR regarded this proceeding as out of order till the bill comes up for the second reading. (Being advised the bill had been read the second time and was laid on the table, he said): Then there ought to be a motion to take it from the table
Mr. SPANN offered a resolution allowing Captain Owen $40 for services rendered the Doorkeeper of the Senate.
On motion by Mr. BROWN It was referred to a Select Committee of Three.
Mr. FOULKE offered a resolution authorizing a Special Committee to report on allowance to William B. Schlater, the late Secretary of the Senate, for making an index to the Senate journal.
It was adopted.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time and severally referred to appropriate Committees, unless otherwise stated:
By Mr. FLETCHER [S. l53], by request, to provide for the organization and government of the State Prisons, [it provides for one Board of Managers, introduces various measures for moral instruction and greater commmutation of time for good behavior.]
On motion of Mr. MAGEE the bill [ S. 121], to legalize the acts of the congregation of B'nai Israel, of Evansville-to legalize the purchase of cemetery grounds, was read the second time by title only, considered as engrossed, the third time by sections under a dispensation of the Constitutional restriction-yeas, 36; nays, 0. and finally passed the Senate by yeas, 37; nays, 0.
Mr. FOULKE'S bill [S. 2] to enable Turnpike
Companies in this State to connect with turnpike roads in other States coming up in
regular order, was read the second time, with a report from the
Mr. YANCEY'S bill [S. 75] to amend Section 71 of the act concerning taxation approved March 29, 1881, being read the second time with a Committee report recommending that it be passed.
On motion by Mr. FOULKE it was recommitted with instructions to supply the omissions of reference to the section of the R. S. of 1881 proposed to be amended.
Mr. Benz's bill [S. 99] making it a misdemeanor to defraud an innkeeper, hotel or boarding house by false show of baggage, being read the second time with a Committee report recommending it lie on the table. The report was concurred in.
Mr. Smith's, of Jay, bill [S. 89] to amend Section 28 of the Common School law, was read the second time with a favorable report which was concurred in, and the bill was ordered engrossed for the third reading to-morrow.
Then came a recess till 2 o'clock.
Mr. Youche's bill [S. 112] to amend Section 418 of the act of Section 1,403 of R. S., 1881. was read the second time, with a Committee report recommending that it lie on the table. The report was concurred in.
Mr. Duncan's bill [S. 113] to amend Section 1,467 of the R. S. of 1881, concerning Justices of the Peace, was read the second time with a Committee recommendation that it pass. The report was concurred in and the bill ordered engrossed.
Mr. Hilligass' bill [S. 48] providing for the purchase and conversion of toll roads into free roads, was read the second time, with a Committee report recommending favorable action. The report was concurred in and the bill was ordered engrossed.
Mr. Macartney'R bill [S. 52] to amend Sections
6,487, 6,496 and 6,497 of the Revised Statuses of 1881, concerning taxation (see
Brevier Reports,
Mr. Benz's bill [S. 6] for the election of Supervisors of Highways (see page 28 of the Brevier Reports), was read the second time, with a majority Committee report that it be amended, also a minority report amending the title and substituting new matter for the entire bill.
Mr. WILLARD raised the point of order that the minority report is out of order because unconstitutional and unparliamentary.
Mr. RISTINE understood a minority report can be made in this way. The bill proposes the re-enactment of the laws of 1877 with a change in the hours constituting a day's work. The minority report substitutes a bill [Mr. Voyles' S. 40] proposing to amend the present laws by excepting bridges, etc., under the control of gravel and toll roads; and it leaves off the closing words of Section 6 of the present law and provides that the road and poll tax may be worked out under rules prescribed by the Road Superintendent. Much work just commenced all over the State would be cut off by a repeal of the law as proposed by the bill recommended by the majority of the Committee. The law of two years ago as yet had no practical effect.
Mr. BROWN and Mr. FOULKE thought the point of order is not well taken, as did also Messrs, SPANN and VOYLES.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: The bill can oe amended by substituting new matter below the title and after the bill has passed, then the title could be amended so as to conform to the body of the bill. So the point of order is not well taken.
Mr. BROWN opposed the minority report, though the complaint is almost universal against the existing law. In the poorer Counties it is too expensive. The poorer classes should have the right to go upon the road and p'lit; in an honest day's work. He could not please the people of his District did he not favor the present law.
Mr. MAGEE: Two years ago the Legislature enacted the present law, which has had no opportunity to be practically tested The bill proposed by the majority report was enacted thirty odd years ago, and the present law was admitted to be a great improvement at the time it was passed in the Senate Chamber. The better way is to put a sum of money in the hands of a suitable person with which to improve the roads. We ought not to change the present system until it is fairly tried. Do not go back to She old system till the present law is fully tested. It was always a farce to allow a man to pretend to work six or eight hours a day on the public highway. He desired to see the majority report adopted.
Mr. VOYLES: As between the two systems, the old system is preferable. The people got used to it, and when a new system was introduced they were dissatisfied. There seems to be an almost universal demand for the old law, but if that be re-enacted then the minority report should be concurred in. No measure is useful if the people are constantly crying out with dissatisfaction against it. If the minority report be accepted he should vote for the bill, but as a test vote he should vote for the bill of the Senator from Crawford [Mr. Benz].
Mr. WHITE said in the northeastern part of the State the present road law is considered expensive. They prefer to work out the road tax. If the present law is not repealed the roads will become very bad and in an almost impassable condition.
Mr. HILLIGASS was sure all peoples in his District condemn the present road law. There are <3[Uite a number of young men in every County who pay no tax-no polls can be collected from them-and under the old law there would have been one or two days work collected from that Class. Here are some 1,200 Road Superintendents i in the State, and it is proverbial to see a Road i Superintendent riding miles from home to find a mud hole to fill up. The present bill takes from the people the right to work on the highways, and thousands of dollars are lost by losing the work of the class before referred to. There is a demand from the people, after more than a year's trial, that the present law be repealed and the old law substituted instead. The present law has been tried sufficiently in his District, and the people have had enough of it. They demand its repeal and the reinstatement of the old law.
Mr. BUNDY moved to postpone this matter and make it the special order for Tuesday next at 2 p. m.
The motion was agreed to upon a division affirmative, 27; negative, not counted.
Mr. Ristine's bill [S. 88] to amend Sections 31 and 34 of the Horse Thief Detective Association act of December 21, 1865, was read the third time.
Mr. RISTINE: It amends Section 3,431 of the R. S. It was before the Legislature two years ago and failed to get beyond the engrossment. This bill requires that the consent of County Commissioners that members of the Association may act as Constables, be made matter of record, so such persons may have written evidence of their authority to act as officers of the law.
The bill finally passed the Senate by yeas, 28; nays, 8.
Mr. Duncan's bill [S. 85] to amend Section 243 of the act concerning public offenses land their punishment, of April 14. 1869, was read the third time.
Mr DUNCAN explained: It simply provides that District School-house doors shall not be required to swing out, and also relieves the Trustee of the necessity of changing doors so they shall swing out.
Mr. VAN VORHIS thought the bill ought to pass, as the bill has been amended so as to apply only to one-story school houses.
Mr. BROWN hoped the bill will not pass. The country schools ere generally taught in winter time, and if fire occurs the little ones all break for the door, and it should be made to swing outward.
Mr. VAN VORHIS declared the bill has not , been correctly engrossed, because the Committee I attached an amendment limiting its application to one-story buildings,
Mr. GRAHAM took the blame upon himself, having failed to incorporate the amendment in his report. On his motion the engrossment was set aside and the bill was recommitted.
Mr. MAGEE offered a resolution authorizing one clerk for the
It was adopted.
On motion by Mr. Bell the bill [H. R. 148] ceding the jurisdiction to the United States over certain lands in this State as has been or shall hereafter be selected, by the United States for the erection ot Postoffices or other houses made exclusively by the General Government, was taken up and read the third time.
Mr. BELL explained it is such a bill as is re quired by act of Congress before the General Government will proceed with the erection of Federal buildings.
The bill finally passed the Senate by yeas, 86; nays, 13-with an amendment of title by adding a clause declaring an emergency.
A motion being made that when the Senate adjourn it be till Monday at 10 o'clock a. m., the Lieutenant Governor decided the motion carried by the sound. A division was called for and the Chair announced twenty seven Senators standing in favor of the motion. But the yeas and nays being demanded the motion was agreed to by yeas, 25; nays, 17.
Subsequently-
Mr. WILLARD moved to reconsider the vote by which the Senate agreed to take a recess till Monday morning.
Mr. VAN VORHIS made an ineffectual motion yeas, 18; nays, 23-to lay that motion on the table.
Mr. SPANN made an ineffectual motion- yeas, 17; nays, 26-to adjourn.
The motion to reconsider was agreed to.
The question recurring on the motion that when the Senate adjourn it be till Monday at 10 a. m.-
It was rejected by yeas, 17; nays, 25.
Mr. BUNDY demanded a call of the Senate.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: I don't think that is in order.
Mr. HILLIGAS moved that the Senate adjourn. The motion was rejected by yeas, 19; nays, 20-the Lieutenant Governor giving the casting vote.
Mr. FOULKE moved that when the Senate adjourn it adjourn till Monday at 10:30 o'clock a. m.
Mr. VOYLES moved to amend by making the hour at 10:30 o'clock to-morrow.
Mr. SPANN moved to amend the amendment by inserting 7 a. m. instead of 10:30 a. m.
Mr. MARVIN moved to lay the amendment on the table. The motion was agreed to by yeas, 30; nays, 10.
Mr. BROWN, saying the Senate was not reflecting credit on itself by this action, moved an adjournment.
The motion was agreed to.
And the Senate adjourned till to-morrow at 10 a. m.
The SPEAKER took the chair, and prayer was offered by Rev Mr. Hay, of this city.
On motion by Mr. JEWETT the reading of the Clerk's minutes of yesterday's proceedings was dispensed with.
Mr. BRYANT, from the
The report was concurred in.
Mr. CAMPBELL, from the
The report was concurred in.
Mr. SCHLOSS,, from the same Committee, reported back Mr. Wilson's bill [H. R. 66] to legalize the incorporation of the town of Syracuse, in Koscuisko County, and to legalize the acts of the records of Trustees of said town, with recommendations that it pass with certain amendments. The report was concurred in.
Also Mr. Wilson's bill [H. R. 67], a bill to legalize the incorporation of the town of Silver Lake, Koscuisko County. Indiana, with a recommendation that the bill do pass.
The report was concurred in.
By Mr. HEFFREN, from the same Committee. returned Mr. Kirkpatrick's bill [H. R. 53] to legalize the incorporation of the town of Barnettsville, White County, Indiana, with certain amendments.
Also Mr. Beeson's bill [H. R. 152] to regulate the number of voting Precincts in towns, with certain amendments.
Also Mr. Chittenden's bill [H. R. 159] concerning the taxation of certain lands and other property within the limits of cities and towns, recommending that it be indefinitely postponed.
The report was concurred in.
Also the bill [S. 29] legalizing the incorporation of Westfield, Hamilton County, with an amendment that this act shall not affect pending suits.
The report was concurred in.
Also Mr. Best's bill [H. R 141] to amend Section 60 of the election law approved April 21, 1881, recommending that it be indefinitely postponed. The report was concurred in.
Mr. HANSON, from the
On motion the bill and report was referred to the
By Mr. BEESON, from the same Committee. Mr. Shafer's bill [H. R. 12] concerning roads and highways, with a recommendation that it be indefinitely postponed. The report was concurred in.
Mr. McMULLEN, from the
Mr. FRAZEE, from a minority of said Committee, submitted a minority report that these amendments are on file in the Secretary of State's office, and are properly referred to this General Assembly. Signed by Messrs. Adams, Wright, Frazer, Wiley and Stewart.
Mr. Patton, from a minority, presented a report somewhat similar to the last one, signed by Mr, Patton and Mr. Jewett.
Then reports were made the special order for Thursday at 10 a. m.
Subsequently-
Mr. HUSTON offered a resolution that there be printed 300 copies of the resolution
concerning the proposed constitutional amendments [introduced last Friday-see page 52
of the Brevier Reports'! together with the three reports therein submitted this
morning from the
On motion by Mr SCHLOSS the resolution was laid on the table-yeas, 46; nays. 44.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time and passed to the second reading, unless otherwise stated:
By Mr. ELEY [H. R. 213] concerning the competency of witnesses.
By Mr. CHITTENDEN [H. R 214] to repeal the sixty-seventh section of the criminal procedure act, R. S. 1,640.
By Mr. CHITTENDEN [H. R. 215] to empower cities and towns to tax foreign Insurance Companies.
By Mr. CHITTENDEN [H. R. 216] to amend Section 6 of the act authorizing cities and towns to construct, maintain and operate water works.
By Mr. BROOKS [H R 217] by request, supplemental to the act authorizing cities and
towns to
By Mr. McCORMICK [H. R. 218] to prohibit the Infliction of whipping as a punishment of convicts confined in Penitentiaries.
By Mr. WILEY [H. R 219) to amend Section 147 of the common school act, being Section 4,497 of the Revised Statutes of 1881.
By Mr. WEAVER [H. R. 220] to amend Section 3 of the wet land drainage act, being Section 4,287 of the code of 1881.
By Mr. Thomas [H. R. 221] to regulate the practice of medicine, midwifery and surgery.
By Mr. GIBSON [H. R. 222] concerning intoxicating liquors.
By Mr. Price [H R. 223] to amend Section 199 of the decedents' estates act of April 14, 1881.
By Mr. ROBINSON [H. R. 224] to regulate the incorporation of the town of Carbon, Clay County.
By Mr. WOODLING [H. R. 225] to authorize Boards of County Commissioners to oner and pay rewards for the apprehension of criminals.
By Mr. MELLETT [H. R 226] to repeal the high- way act of 1881. being Section 4,764 of the Revised Statutes of 1881.
Then came a recess for dinner.
By Mr. GREEN [H. R. 227] to legal the acts of the Board of Trustees and other officers of town of Jasper, Dubois County, for the years 1879, 1880, 1881, 1882.
By Mr. GERBER [H. R. 228] concerning fire es- capes in hotels and other buildings in which people lodge.
By Mr. MOSIER [H. R. 229] to protect hotels. inns and boarding houses from being defrauded.
By Mr. HOUSTON [H. R. 230] to legalize the sale of certain real estate in the town of Connersville, Ind.
By Mr. TULEY [H. R. 231] to fix the time of holding Court in tile Fourth Judicial Circuit.
By Mr. NAVE [H R. 232] to regulate the costs In action rendered upon judgments in any of the Courts of Indiana.
By Mr. CHANDLER [H. R. 233] to regulate judgments rendered Railway Companies in certain Cases.
By Mr. Wilson, of Kosciusko, [H. R. 234] to amend Section 1 of an act to protect sheep husbandry.
By Mr. FRAZER [H R. 235] to amend Section 1 of an act, being Section 2,540 of the Revised Statute of 1881, to authorize foreign guardians to take possession of personal property or assets of wards.
By Mr. SUTTON [H. R. 236] to amend Section 75 of an act concerning taxation. being Section 6,343 of the Revised Statutes of 1881.
By Mr. SUTTON [H. R. 237] to amend Section 95 of an act concerning public offenses.
By Mr. WHITSIT [H. R. 238] to amend Section 1 of an act-being Section 3,262 Revised Statutes 1881-to abolish certain officers in cities and towns.
By Mr. WHITSIT, [H. R. 239] to amend an act-being Section 5,304 Revised Statutes-concerning liens ot mechanics merchants and others.
By Mr. HOWLAND, by request, [H. R. 240] to amend Section 4 and 5 of an art supplemental to an act repealing all general laws now in force in regard to the incorporation of cities.
By Mr. WILSON, of Marion, [H. R. 241] in relation to the satisfaction of mortgage,
recording the same, etc. Referred to the
By Mr. SHAW [H. R. 242] to amend Section 204 of an act concerning public officers and their punishment-being Section 2,117 Revised Statutes 1881.
By Mr. ANTRIM [H. R. 243] to amend Section 15 of an act regulating prosection in cases of bastardy, and providing for the support of illegitimate children.
By Mr. STRAUGHN [H. R. 244] providing for the purchase of toll roads, and providing for their maintenance.
By Mr. ADAMS [H. R. 245] to amend Section 39 an act concerning elections and their contest being Section 4,716, Revised Statutes of 1881.
By Mr. MONTGOMERY [H. R. 246] to require foreign Insurance Companies doing business in this State to lay judgments rendered against them.
By Mr. GORDON [H. B. 247] for Incorporation of towns.
Mr. JEWETT moved'to suspend the rules and read the bill a first time by title only. By consent the motion was agreed to.
Mr. DEEM offered the following resolution:
Whereas, One Harry Foxwell, a most infamous murderer, has escaped from the State Prison South, and
Whereas, One Ruttenhouse, a notorious counterfieiter, has escaped from the State Prison South, therefore be it
Resolved, That the
Mr. HEFFREN offered an amendment to the effect that the investigation include all pardons granted by our present Governor.
Mr. DEEM said the man Foxwell named in the resolution was convicted in the Rush Circuit Court for the murder of John W. White, a resident of Wabash County, who was on his way to visit a relative in Rush County. This red-handed scoundrel did not stop in taking the life and robbing the dead body of this noble young man, but by the most unparalleled perjury sought to convict an innocent man for his own infamous crime. Large rewards were paid for his apprehension and conviction, and he was sent to the State Prison South on a life sentence. He escaped after a short imprisonment The counterfeiter Ruttenhouse is a noted and most accomplished criminal in his line, and was convicted by the Federal authorities after many years of labor and after the expenditure of large sums of money. It is asserted that some of the new counterfeit now in circulation is the work of his hands and put upon the market since his escape. I want the matter of their escape investigated. I do not ask for a, Special Committee. The regular Committee can do the work. They expect to visit the Prison next week, and no additional expense will be incurred.
Mr. COPELAND moved that the amendment be laid on the table.
The motion was rejected-yeas, 44; nays, 49.
Mr. SHIVELY now offered an amendment to the amendment that the investigation be extended back to the year 1877.
On motion by Mr. PATTEN the amendments and the original resolution were laid on the table yeas, 48; nays. 40.
Mr. BRAZELTON offered a resolution, which was adopted, that 200 copies of the bill [H. R. 91] concerning the relocation of County seats be printed for the use of the members.
Mr, WILLIAMS presented certain claims from E. E. Myers, architect, which were
referred to the
By consent the following resolution was offered:
Whereas, It has been reported to this House that there have been two cases of smallpox in the County Jail, and that the said cases had escaped from this Jail, situated in this yard; therefore be it
Resolved, That the Speaker of this House appoint a Special Committee of three physicians of this House to inquire into the whereabouts of said cases of smallpox.
The resolution was adopted and the Speaker appointed Drs. Thomas, Price and Bowers said Committee.
And the House adjourned till 10 a. m. to-morrow.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR commanded order and requested Senators to attend while prayers were offered by Rev. C. H. Raymond.
Mr. BUNDY presented a petition from citizens of Henry County, praying for the submission of the proposed prohibition amendment to the Constitution at a special election.
Mr. HENRY presented a similar petition from the voters in the County of Grant.
Mr. HOSTETTER presented a petition praying for legislation requiring lectures to be given in Public Schools and Colleges on the effects of alco- hol upon the brain and character as an antidote to intemperance.
Mr. BELL presented a petition from citizens of Allen County praying for protection of fish from spearing during the spawning season.
Mr. KEISER presented a petition, signed by 800 voters and over of the County of St. Joseph, in favor of submitting the prohibition amendment to the voters of the State at a special election.
These petitions were severally referred to appropriate Committees.
Mr. JOHNSON, from the
Also the bill [S. 147] to amend Section 4,369 of the Revised Statutes of 1881-the Common School law relating to interest on school funds, with a Committee report recommending that the bill lie on the table.
Mr. DAVIDSON, from the
Mr. JOHNSON, from the same Committee, returned the bill [S. R. 28] to regulate the interest on school and other trust funds, with a recommendation that it lie on the table.
These reports were severally placed on the files for future action.
Mr. DUNCAN. from the
Mr. FOULK, from a minority of the same Committee, recommended the Governor's appointments be confirmed forthwith.
He moved that they be made a special order for Monday, at 2 o'clock.
Mr. RAHM moved to amend by substituting Tuesday morning at 11 o'clock.
Mr. FOULK accepted the amendment.
It was so ordered.
Mr. McCLURE. from the
It was so ordered, by consent.
Mr. DAVIDSON, from the
The report of the Committee was placed on the files to come up with the orders of the day of bills on their second reading.
Mr. SPANN, from the Special Committee thereon, returned the resolution allowing Captain J. T. Owen $40 for services rendered as Doorkeeper.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR stated that Captain Owen was the Janitor two years ago, and I told him to attend to the temperature, and spoke to the Doorkeeper about it, but got no satisfactory answer. I would rather pay for it out of my own pocket than to have the temperature as it was at the beginning of the session two years ago.
Mr. McINTOSH said the Doorkeeper stated Captain Owen had absolutely done nothing, and that already $6 had been voted him.
Mr. VOYLES moved to amend the report of the Committee by making the amount $15.
Mr. GRAHAM did not care whether the Doorkeeper employed this Assistant or not, he
ought to be paid for services performed. He referred to
Mr. FOULKE made an ineffectual demand for the previous question.
Mr. VOYLES insisted, as the Doorkeeper still says Captain Owen has rendered no service, and there is no use of making a gratuity to Captain Owen, that his amendment be adopted. He has done no service at the instance of the Doorkeeper. If anything has been done on his part it is a gratuity.
Mr. HILLIGASS favored the Committee report because of the retention of Captain Owen by ihe President of the Senate.
Mr. BUNDY demanded the previous question, which was seconded by the Senate, and under its operations-
The amendment was rejected by yeas, 11; nays, 26.
The Committee report was concurred in by yeas, 19; nays, 18-the Lieutenant Governor giving the casting vote.
The resolution was amended by consent to read $34-deducting from the $40 the $6 already paid and as so amended was adopted-yeas, 22; nays, 15.
It was ordered that when the Senate adjourn it be till Monday at 2 o'clock p. m.
Mr. BROWN, by consent, introduced a bill [S. 154] to protect freedom of election to employes of manufacturing establishments and prescribing punishment for the violation thereof.
It is as follows:
Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Indiana-Section 1. That whoever having the control of or being the managers, proprietors or agents of any manufacturing establishments in this State, having more than sixty workmen in their employ, shall neglect or refuse to close such establishments from the hour of 12 o'clock noon lo 6 o'clock of the evening of the day of the general elections held on Tuesday after the first Mon- day in November, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and, upon conviction thereof, shall be fined in any sum not less than $100 nor more than $1,000; to which may be added imprisonment for not more than sixty (days, and disfranchisement for any determinate period.
Sec. 2. And whoever having the control of or being such proprietors, agents or managers afore- said, shall, upon the day of the general election held on Tuesday after the first Monday in November in any year, send their employes in squads, under the charge of the agents or foremen of such manufacturing establishments, to the polls for the purpose of voting, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished in the same manner and to the same extent as provided for in the first section of this enactment.
Mr. BISCHOWSKY [S. 155] to authorize Charitable Associations to change their names and declaring an emergency. He stated the object of the bill to be to give members of Boards of Charitable Institutions the right to change the names of such institutions. We have one Orphans' Home in Terre Haute which was established by Chauncey Rose, the original name of which was Vigo County Orphan Home, and the Board desire to chan e the name to the Rose Orphan Home. That is the whole object of the bill. He moved for a suspension of the Constitutional rule that the bill may be read the second time by title, considered as engrossed, read the third time by sections and put upon its passage now.
The rule as laid down in the Constitution was set aside by yea, 34; nays, 1. The bill was read the second time by title, considered as engrossed, read the third time and passed the Senate by yeas, 34; nays 0.
The Senate adjourned till Monday at 2 o'clock p. m., under an order adopted this morning.
The session was opened by prayer by Rev. Mr. Swears.
On motion by Mr. HEFFREN the reading of the Clerk's minutes of yesterday's proceedings was dispensed with.
Mr. JEWETT called up a substitute to the amendment of the rules which he offered on yesterday, to provide that the Speaker may order bills read the second time to the exclusion of other business, except special orders, on Mondays, Wednesdays and Saturdays.
It was adopted.
Mr. WILSON, of Marion, moved to have 300 copies of Mr. Jewett's amendment to the rule printed on slips for the use of the members.
The motion was agreed to. '
The following described bills were read the second time and severally referred to appropriate Committees:
Mr. Harrison's [H. R. 166] to amend Section 51 of the act covering public offenses.
Referred to the
Mr. Mauck's [H. R. 167] to amend Section 193 of the public offense act. It was
referred to the
Mr. Hamilton's (H. R. 168] to establish County Committee It was referred to the
Mr. Robinson's [H. R. 169] to amend Section 28 of the general school law. It was
referred to the
Mr. Gilman's [H. R. 170] to provide for: the
sale of escheated estates. It was referred to the
Mr. Eraser's [H. R. 171] to amend Sections 3, 4, 10 and 12 of the act concerning
drainage. It was referred to the
Mr. Wilson,s, of Kosciusko, [H. R. 172] notes obtained by false pretense not
collectable. It was referred to the
Mr. Davis' [H. R. 173] for the relief of Robert Keifer and Henry Lumon, of Laporte
County. It was referred to the
Mr. McClelland's [H. R. 174] to amend Sections '269 and 284 of and repeal 268
concerning public offenses. It was referred to the
Mr. McClelland's [H. R. 175] to repeal Section 1 of the act authorizing aliens to
hold real estate. It was referred to the
Mr Wilson's, of Marion, [
Mr. Wilson's, of Marion, [H. R. 177] for the relief of John Martin, contractor for
brick work on the Hospital for Insane Women. It was referred to the
Mr. Howland's [H. R. 178] concerning the powers and duties of County Commissioners
and requesting them to give bond. It was referred to the
Mr. Howland's [H. R 179] to encourage the formation of voluntary association for the
encouragement of agriculture in all its forms. It was referred to the
Mr. Whitsit's [H. R. 180] to abolish the office of City Assessor in towns of 15,000 or more inhabitants.
It was referred to the
Mr. Whitsit's [H R. 181] to provide for the election and qualification of Justices of the Peace.
It was referred to the
Mr. Ferriter's [H. R. 182] to create the office of Supervising Inspector of Steam Boilers.
It was referred to the
On motion by Mr. STEWART-yeas, 67; nays, 2 the remaining bills on the Speaker's table were read by title only, and then referred to the appropriate Committees.
Mr. GORDON offered the following resolution:
Resolved, That Rule 57 be amended to read as follows:
57. The first reading of bills shall be for information, and if opposition be made or if the question shall be, shall this bill be rejected? If no opposition be made or if the question to reject be negatived, the Speaker shall state it is ready for commitment; and If committed, then the question shall be whether to a Special or Standing Committee; if to a Committee of the whole House , the House shall determine on what day; but if no motion be made to Committee, the bill shall then pass to a second reading, unless the House shall order otherwise.
That Rule 58 be amended to read as follows:
Upon the second reading of a bill the Speaker shall state if read for amendment or engrossment, and if it be not ordered to be engrossed on the day of its second reading it shall be placed on general file on the Speaker's table to be taken up in order.
In pursuance of the rules of the House Mr Gordon's amendment was placed on the table for future action.
On motion by Mr. STEWART-yeas, 67; nays, 2-other bills on the Speaker's table, described as follows, were read by title only and referred to appropriate Committees:
Mr. Ferriter's [H. R. 183] to abolish Boards of Aldermen in incorporated cites. It
was referred to the
Mr. Sutton's [H. R. 184] concerning the quieting of titles to real estate. Ii was
referred to the
Mr. Sutton's [H. R. 185] to amend Section 4 of an act concerning husband and wife. It
was referred to the
Mr. Stucker's [H. R. 186] to amend Section 33 of an act providing for the election of
County Superintendents. It was referred to the
Mr. Stucker's [H. R. 187] to amend Section 268, being Section 2,184 Revised Statutes
of 1881, concerning proceeding in criminal cases, and to repeal Section 2,185 of the
Revised Statutes of 1881. It was referred to the
Mr. Montgomery's [H. R. 188] to amend Section 27-being Section 943 of the Revised Statutes of 1881-concerning proceeding in civil cases.
It was referred to the
Mr. Knowles' [H. R. 189] to regulate the carrying of baggage, packages and freight by
railroad or other carrying company. It was referred to the
Mr. McMullen's [H. R. 190] concerning proceeding of Insurance Companies doing business in this State.
It was referred to the
Mr. Bowers' [H. R. 191] to regulate the practice of medicine, midwifery and surgery.
It was referred to the
Mr. Jewett's [H. R. 192] to amend Section 61-being Section 3,101 of the Revised Statutes of 1881-of the general city incorporation bill.
It was referred to the
Mr. Mutz's [H. R. 193] to authorize turnpike, macadamized and other road companies to surrender their charters to Boards of County Commissioners.
It was referred to the
Mr. Best's [H. R. 194] to amend Section 9 of the Common School act.
It was referred to the
Mr. Holler's [H. R. 195] to amend Section 2 of an act to amend Sections 649. 650 of an act to revise, simplify and abridge the rules, pleadings, practice and forms in civil cases.
Mr. Aiken's [H. R. 196] to amend an act to create a State Normal School.
It was referred to the
Mr. Smith's [H. R. 197] to amend Section 243 of an act concerning public offences.
It was referred to the
Mr. Westfall's [H. R. 198] for the relief of Allen Lepten and his sureties, John J. Peten, Henry Edward and Levy Holiday.
It was referred to the
Mr. Ham'S [H. R. 199] creating the Forty-third Judicial Circuit.
It was referred to the
Mr. Ham's [H. R. 200] to provide for the payment of certain claims of persons for ditching swamp lands in Tipton County.
It was reported 10 the
Mr. Spann's [H. R. 201] to amend Section 19 of an act to provide for the organization of Savings Banks.
It was referred to the
Mr, Spann's [H. R. 202] to provide for the location and erection of an additional Asylum for the Insane.
It was referred to the
Mr. Pruitt's [H. R. 203] to provide for the incorporation of Street Railway Companies.
It was referred to the
Mr. Schloss' [H. R. 204] to prevent movers, gypsies, tramps and beggars from occupying public highways.
It was referred to the
Mr. Cabbage's [H. R. 205] to encourage and protection of breeders of fine stock.
It was referred to the
Mr. Wiley's [H. R. 206] to provide against the intoxication of public officers.
It was referred to the
Mr. Heffren's [H. R. 207] to provide fees and salaries for certain County officers.
Mr. Heffren's [H. R. 208] so prescribe the limit to be charged by all joint Stock Companies, corporations or individuals who own Stock Yards, and also prescribing the limits to be charged for weighing animals, etc.
It was referred to the
Mr. Mock's [H. R. 209] concerning elections, providing penalties and repealing ail laws in conflict therewith. The bill makes it unlawful to use stickers or print the names of candidates nominated by different political parties on the same ticket.
It was referred to the
Mr. Smith's [H. R. 210] to amend Section 1 and repeal Section 2 of an act for the changing of County boundaries.
It was referred to the
Mr. Kirkpatrick's [H. R. 211] to amend Sections 30 and 34-being Sections 4,504 and 4,425 of the Revised Statutes ot 1881-of the common school law.
It was referred to the
Mr. Eley's [H. R. 213] concerning the competency of witnesses.
It was referred to the
Mr. Chittenden's [H. R. 214] to repeal the 67th section of the criminal procedure act, Revised Statute 1,640.
It was referred to the
Mr. Chittenden's [H. R. 215] to empower cities and towns to tax foreign insurance companies.
Mr. McCormick's [H. R. 48] to prohibit the indiction of whipping as a punishment of convicts confined in the penitentiaries.
Mr. Wiley's [H. R. 219] to amend Section 147 of the Common School act-being Section 4,497 of the Revised Statutes of 1881.
It was referred to the
Mr. Weaver's [H. R. 220] to amend Section 3 of the wet land drainage act-being Section 4,287 of the Code of 1881.
It was referred to the
Mr. Thomas's [H. R. 221] to regulate the practice of medicine, midwifery and surgery.
It was referred to the
Mr. Gibson's [H. R. 222] concerning intoxicating liquors.
It was referred to the
Mr. Priced [H. R. 223] to amend Section 199 of the decedents estates act of April 14,1881.
It was referred to the
Mr. Robinson's [H. R 224] to legalize the incorporation of the town of Carbon, Clay County.
It was referred to the
Mr. Woodling's [H. R 225] to authorize Boards of County Commissioners to offer rewards for the apprehension of criminals.
It was referred to the
Mr. Mellet's [H. R. 226] to repeal the highway act of 1881, being Section 4,764 of the Revised Statutes of 1881.
It was referred to the
Mr. Green's [H. R. 227] to legalize the acts of the Boards of Trustees and other officers of the town of Jasper, Dubois County, for the years 1879, 1880, 1881. 1882.
It was referred to the
Mr. Gerber's [H. R. 228] concerning fire escapes in hotels and other buildings.
It was referred to the
Mr Mosier's [H. R.
It was referred to the
Mr. Huston's [H. R. 230] to legalize the sale
of certain real estate in the town of Connersville, Ind. It was referred to the
Mr. Tuley's [H. R. 231] to fix the time of holding Court in the Fourth Judicial Circuit.
Mr. NAVE [H. R, 232] to regulate the costs in actions rendered upon judgments in any
of the Courts of Indiana. It was referred to the
Mr. Chandler's [H. R. 233] to regulate judgments rendered against Railway Companies
in certain cases. It was referred to the
Mr. Wilson's, of Kosciusko, [
Mr. Frezer's [H. R. 235] to authorize foreign guardians to take possession of
personal property or estates of wards. It was referred to the
Mr. Sutton's [H. R. 236] to amend Section 75 of an act concerning taxation-being Section 6,343 of the Revised Statues.
Mr. Sutton's [ H. R. 237] to amend Section 95 of an act concerning public officers.
It was referred to the
Mr. Whitsit's [H. R. 238] to amend Section 1 of an act-being Section 3,262 Revised Statues of 1881, to abolish certain offices in cities and towns.
It was referred to the
Mr. Howland'a [H. R. 240] to amend Sections 4 and 5 of an act supplemental to an act repealing all general laws not in force in regard to the incorporation of cities.
It was referred to the
Mr. Wilson's, of Marion, [H. R. 241] in relation to the satisfaction of a mortgage, recording the same, etc.
It was referred to the
Mr. Shaw's [H. R. 242] to amend Section 204 of an act concerning public officers and their punishment.
It was referred to the
Mr. Anthony's [H. R. 243] to amend Section 15 of an act regulating prosecution in cases of bastardy and providing for the support of illegitimate children.
Mr. Straughn's [H. R, 244] providing for the purchase of toll roads and providing for their maintenance.
It was referred to the
Mr. Adams' [H. R. 245] to amend Section 34 of an act concerning elections and their contests, being Section 4,716 Revised Statutes of 1881.
Mr. Montgomery's [H. R. 246] to require foreign Insurance Companies doing business in this State to pay judgments rendered against them.
It was referred to the
Mr. Gordon's [H. R. 247] for the incorporation of towns.
It was referred to the
The House then adjourned until Monday, January 22, at 2 p. m.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR requested permission to attend while prayer was offered by Rev. Isaac N. Thompson.
On motion by Mr. WILLARD, the reading of the Secretary's minutes of yesterday's proceedings was dispensed with.
Mr. BUNDY presented a petition signed by sixty-five voters of Stoney Creek Township,
Henry County, praying for temperance legislation the submission of a prohibition
amendment to the Constitution at a special election which was referred without reading
to the
Mr. WILLARD, by consent, introduced a bill [S. 156] providing for the submission or rejection of any amendments that may be proposed to the Constitution of Indiana to the qualified electors thereof-at the general election next succeeding submission by the General Assembly-for ratification or rejection of any amendments which may at any time be agreed to by two General Assemblies in succession, in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution prescribing certain duties of officers of elections, etc., which was read the first time.
On his further motion it was referred to a Special Committee of Five-to consist of three Democrats and two Republicans-which the Chair made to consist of Messrs- Willard, Sayre, Smith of Delaware, Compton and McCullough.
Mr, BUNDY presented petitions from the citizens of Henry County praying for the
passage of a law for the protection of breeders of fine stock, which were referred to
the
Mr. FLETCHER presented a remonstrance against the repeal of the public health bill signed by eight physicians.
Mr. MACARTNEY presented a claim, which was referred to the
Mr, SMITH presented a remonstrance of eighty voters of Jay, against the repeal of the public health act. These petitions and remonstrances were referred to the appropriate Committees.
Mr. Davldson. from the
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time and severally referred to appropriate Committees, unless otherwise stated:
By Mr BELL [S. 157] to require the payment of certain premiums to Fire Departments of cities from foreign Fire Insurance Companies-with memorial praying for the passage of such ah act.
By Mr. NULL [S. 158] to provide that legal advertisements shall be printed weekly in newspapers having the largest bona fide annual circulation in the County, provided such publication can be had at the rate provided by law.
By Mr. YANCEY [S. 159] to secure safety in the use and management of portable and stationary steam engines and boilers. [The Governor shall appoint a Supervisor and an assistant engineers shall be licensed by District Supervisors, etc.]
By Mr. MAY [S. 160] to amend Section 2,390 of the Revised Statutes of 1881. [Relating to filing accounts again at decedents' estates.]
By Mr. HENRY [S. 161] creating an Appellate Court, [To consist of five Judges, to have exclusive jurisdiction of all appeals, except by defendants in. cases of felony, by the State in criminal cases and Superior Courts in general term, from Circuit and Superior Courts; the Governor to appoint-until an election-the first general election after the taking effect of this act; shall hold four years, except at the first election, two shall hold for two years and two for four years. Said Court shall have all powers of the Supreme Court to enforce its judgments and orders and to punish contempt; shall have power to provide furniture and stationery proper for the transaction of its business at the expense of the State; argument tp be upon written and printed briefs, unless the Court shall decide to hear oral argument]
By Mr. HENRY [S. 162] concerning deeds exe
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR called up the Special order, being the consideration of the bill [S. 46] concerning the proposed Indiana Reformatory sewer[See Brevier Reports, pages 62 and 63.]
On motion by Mr. BELL, it was recommitted to the
Mr. Brown's bill [S. 1] to provide for the better government and management of the Reformatory Institutions of this State, coming up in order, it was read the second time with a majority report recommending amendments, striking out Sections 3, 4 and 5. Also, a minority report recommending its indefinite postponement.
The first two sections of the bill are as follows:
Section 1, Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Indiana, That the government and management of the Indiana Hospital for the Insane, of the Asylum for the Blind, and the Institution for the Education of the Deaf and Dumb, shall be and is hereby vested In three several Boards of Trustees, consisting of two Trustees for each of said institutions and one President for the three several Boards, which President shall be the Presiding Officer and Third Trustee of each of Mid Boards. The terms of such President and Trustees shall be four years, dating from the first day of February first following their election. The said Boards shall, on or about the first Monday in February after the adoption of this act, and every two years thereafter, select one of their number as Secretary and one as Treasurer thereof.
Sec 2. The General Assembly shall elect, on joint ballot, on or about the 15th day of January. 1883, one of said Trustees for each of said Institutions, and at the same time and in like manner, the President of the said Boards snail be elected. Every four years thereafter a President of said Boards shall be elected, and every two years thereafter, one Trustee for each of the said Institutions shall be elected, it being understood and declared that the Trustees now holding office and whose terms do not expire until February 1, 1885, shall continue in office under this act. and discharge the duties thereof until that time. If a vacancy shall occur in any of the said Boards when the Legislature is not in session, such vacancy shall be filled by appointment by the Governor, the appointment to hold good only until the following session of the General Assembly, when it shall be filled by election in the manner provided for in this act.
Section, third requires that the husband or wife, father or mother, or guardian of an insane person, it able, shall furnish the patient clothing; Section 4, that the proper relative of a recovered patient, who has been supplied with clothing, shall pay for such patient's transportation home; Section 5, that a medical officer, to be designated by the Board, shall take charge of one of the departments of the Insane Hospital, and such 'office shall, within the sphere prescribed by the Board. enjoy all the privileges and discharge all the du ties of a Superintendent, and, in the absence of the latter shall act in his stead and discharge his duties.
Mr. SPANN, as a substitute for both reports, moved to amend by striking out from the enacting clause of the bill [S. 1] and in lieu thereof substituting the bill [H. R. 42, Representative Wilson's, of Marion], to amend Sections 1 and 2 of the act providing for the government of the Benevolent Institutions of the State, providing that the term of the outgoing Trustees extend to the 1st of February, 1883, ana that in the event of the Senate not approving the nominations made by the Governor, the present Trustees shall be continued in office. It also provides means by which charges against the Trustees may be prosecuted and investigated, and empowers the Attorney General to act for the State in the prosecution of the same, and declares that the Trustees hall be removed if cause is found to exist, and their successors appointed by the Governor, and the Governor can not remove them wit 'out the fact of their inefficiency, carelessness or dishonesty has been established in Court.
Mr. BROWN stating it is the desire of quite a number of Senators that this subject shall not be considered now, and reserving the point of order on the substitute just proposed, he moved the bill and report be made the special order for Thursday at 10:30 o'clock a. m. It was agreed to,
Mr. Bell's bill [S. 5] supplemental to the act for the publication of the Revised Statutes of 1881 [see Brevier Reports, page 28] was read the second time with a favorable Committee report. The report was concurred in and the bill was ordered engrossed for the third reading.
Mr. Ristine's bill [S. 22] to amend Section 1 of the act of March 3, 1881, to amend Section 7 of an act authorizing County Commissioners to issue bonds to purchase gravel or other turnpike roads [see Brevier Reports, pages 29 and 62,] was read the second time, with a Committee report favorable to its passage. The report was concurred in and the bill ordered engrossed.
Mr. May's bill [S. 72] to fix the time of holding Courts in the Second Judicial Circuit, affecting the Counties of Warrick, Spencer and Perry, was read the second time, with a Committee report recommending its passage with an amendment.
Mr. MAY referred to the trouble as to fixing the time of these Courts, and moved the
recommitment of the bill to the
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. Lockridge's bill [S. 117] fixing the fees of Prosecuting Attorneys [see page 61 of the Brevier Reports] was read the second time. with a Committee report recommending its indefinite postponement.
The report was concurred in.
Mr. Hilligass' bill [S. 134] to authorize the cities of this State to permit municipal taxes to be paid in installments [in equal semi-annual installments on or before the third Mondays in April and November] was read the second time, with a Committee report favorable to its passage. The report was concurred in, and the bill was ordered engrossed for the third reading.
Mr. Youche's bill [S. 28] to regulate the interest upon school and other trust funds [after May 10, 1883, to be 6 per cent.] was read the second time, with a Committee report recommending that it lie on the table.
Mr. FOULKE insisted there should be some such bill enacted, as in his County there is some $60,000 lying idle because it can not be loaned at 8 per cent.
Mr. JOHNSON: The Superintendent of Public Instruction, has statements to show that from 94 to 96 per cent. of the school fund is being loaned, and has been for the past four years, at 8 per cent., readily, and therefore the Committee was not willing to recommend a reduction of the interest.
Mr. VOYLES moved that the bill be recommitted to a Special Committee of Three, with
instruction to loan the school fund at 6 per cent There is no reason why school fund
interest should be placed, higher than the legal rate of interest in the State. And
there are other reasons why school moneys should be loaned as low as other moneys.
Whether the money is loaned out or not the County has to account to the State for the
interest on the school fund. Farmers can not
Mr. FOULKE moved to amend so that the bill may be referred without instructions.
There is & good deal of reason In the remarks of the Chairman of the
Mr. VOYLES accepted the amendment.
Mr. HENRY opposed the motion. He has a communication from the Auditor of his County saying the fund of $54,000 in that County can be loaned at 8 per cent. readily, and this is the experience in nearly all the Counties in the State. Where the money is not loaned it must be the fault of the officers. In his County the records having been burned the County officers can not certify there are no outstanding judgments against applicants and consequently they have to procure extra personal security.
Mr. MAGEE looked at this as a practical business question, and insisted that the Legislature should not interfere with the present law. In his County the best class of borrowers take all the school money as fast as it is ready to be loaned. The passage of this bill would reduce the revenue from interest about $260,000, and consequently he spoke in opposition to it.
Mr. BROWN insisted the rate of interest on this fund should be uniform all over thus State, and that 6 per cent. is high enough. A man must have a remarkable business to justify paying more than 6 per cent. In his County a great deal of this money is loaned on securities that are not good, and one reason why the rate should be reduced is the solvent, debt-paying farmers will not borrow from the school fund while they can obtain it cheaper elsewhere. Safety to the fund ana justice to the people demand that the rate of interest shall be brought down.
Mr, VAN VORHIS said if 94 to 96 per cent. of this fund can be loaned at, 8 per cent. he opposed anything looking to a reduction of the interest on this fund.
Mr. FOULKE did not think a proper determination would be arrived at without finding, out the exact status of the fund ia the various Counties of the State. He would not favor reducing the rate of interest to 6 per cent. if more can be realized. He supposed the greater part ia loaned on good security. If necessary, the school fund should be reapportioned.
Mr. VOYLES-insisted the rate is too high for borrowers in the Southern part of the State. If the rate was reduced men would not go to the banks for money when obtainable from the school fund. Men who pay the money back will go for money where it can be had the cheapest. Loan agents want to deal with men who will pay not only the money back, but the money with interest, and such agents desire to see the interest on the school funds kept up at a high rate.
Mr. VAN VORHIS: If the income from the school fund is reduced the number of days of schooling must necessarily be reduced, unless teachers be hired at a less salary.
Mr. HENRY could not see why the school fund Interest should be reduced to 6 per cent. when private parties can loan at 8 per cent. It would be a very foolish and unwise movement to reduce the rate of interest on the school fund at this time.
Mr. WHITE opposed the move to reduce the rate of interest. We ought to be very careful About this Common School interest-one of the most important in the State.
Mr. JOHNSON said: Within a short time letters have been addressed to the Auditors of the ninety-two Counties of the State, seventy-four of which have replied, and out of seventy-four forty County Auditors respond that they can loan the school fund at 8 per cent., nine for 7, and the balance recommend a reduction to 6 per cent. So it is clear that any reduction of the rate of interest would be considered a blow at free schools. Only about 4 1/2 per cent. of the entire fund is not loaned out. These figures were obtained recently through correspondence by the Superintendent of Public Instruction. Before consenting to any reduction the Senate should carefully consider the matter.
On motion by Mr. WILLARD the motion to refer was laid on the table by yeas, 23; nays, 13.
And then the Senate adjourned.
The House was opened with prayer by Rev. Mr. Reddig.
On motion by Mr. JEWETT the further reading of the journal was dispensed with
Mr. WILLIAMS, of KNOX, rose to a question of privilege, and said: Mr. Speaker-I rise to a question of privilege. When the newspaper representatives here have failed to report me at all, I have found no fault. When they have ascribed to me opinions and expressions contrary to those held or expressed by me, I have remained silent, but there are certain of the papers that from day to day refer to me as "Mr. Wilson," of Knox, and to this I wish to enter my protest. I have never before sailed under an assumed name or alias, and I do not wish my good constituents in Knox County to have any reason to believe that I am doing so now. My name always has been Will- iams, and I wish it to so remain
Mr. WILSON, of Kosciusko, offered the following resolution:
Whereas, The muster-in roll and the muster-in out roll of the Indiana soldiers of the Mexican and the Indiana soldiers of the late civil War, on file in the Adjutant General's office, have not been recorded in any book, but are being worn out by much handling; and
Whereas, The loss or destruction of this army roll would be a material loss to a large number of the people of this State; and Whereas. The same are liable to be burned or lost; threfore
Be it Resolved by the House of Representatives, That the
Mr. COPELAND moved to amend the resolution by appropriately inserting the following:
Whereas, The names of many members of the Indiana Legion have been, by accident or oversight, omitted from the pay-rolls, and have never received any compensation for their valuable services in repelling the Morgan and Kirby Smith raids.
Mr. JEWETT explained that inasmuch as the outlay that it would occasion would be
considerable, he could not favor the resolution until some investigation could be
made, and therefore moved that the resolution be referred to the
Mr. WILSON, of Kosciusko, said: I have been at the Adjutant General's office, and find that there are no muster-in and muster-out rolls of several regiments.
Mr. SMITH thought the muster rolls should be preserved, but was not in favor of any special bill that would occasion a large outlay of money in the end.
Mr. COPELAND said; I hope the resolution will be unanimously adopted. The papers
containing the records of our soldiery should be sacredly
Mr. HEFFREN (interrupting): May I ask the gentleman from Jefferson a question?
Mr. COPELAND: Certainly.
Mr. HEFFREN: Can you tell me whether or not John Overmeyer was a member of the Sons of Liberty at that time?
Mr. COPELAND; I take pleasure in answering the gentleman I heard one other gentleman make that fool charge [cries of "order," "order."]. He was not then or ac any other time a member of the vile Knights of the Golden Circle.
Mr. PATTEN: I am sorry that the gentleman from Jefferson [Mr. Copeland] should make a partisan fight on this measure or allude to parties. The gentleman from Jefferson is young yet.
Mr. COPELAND: I was not aware that any one had made or attempted to make a partisan allusion in this discussion. If there is any party on this floor that claims or backs John Morgan or sympathises with his treason, then I have made an allusion to party.
Mr. PATTEN thought that as there had been five copies of the muster-out roil made the Government had taken all necessary steps to preserve these records. He was not in favor of bringing up such questions, as he thought the House had "other fish to fry." He thought it was the duty of the Adjutant General to preserve the muster rolls. He did not wish to incur any unnecessary expense.
The motion to refer the resolution to the
Mr. Heffren's bill [H. R. 207] to provide fees and salaries for certain County offices therein named was called up and read a second time.
Mr. Wiley offered a resolution, which was adopted, that the Auditor of State be instructed to furnish the House a list of all foreign corporations which had not complied with the law in filing their regular semi-anaual detailed statements, as the law requires.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time, and were severally passed to the second reading, unless otherwise stated:
By Mr. SHIVELY [H. R. 248] to amend Section 64 of an act concerning proceedings in criminal cases, being Section 1,637 01 the Revised Statutes of 1881 [the jurisdiction of Justices of the Peace ]
By Mr. WILEY [H. R. 249] in relation to petitions for rehearing in the Supreme Court.
By Mr. HEFFREN [H. R. 250] to amend Sections 25 and 26 of an act concerning decedents' estates being Sections 2,489 and 2,490 of the code of 1881, [relating to the estate of husband of wife.]
By M, HEFFREN [H. R. 251] to amend Section 1 of an act in regard to foreign Insurance Companies.
The Senate concurrent resolution authorizing the printing of 3,000 copies of the report of the engineer on me survey of the Kankakee River region was concurred in.
The bill [S. 155] to authorize Charitable Associations to change their names [see Senate proceedings of Saturday] was taken up, and under a dispensation of the Constitutional restriction moved by Mr. Jewett-yeas, 71; nays 1-the bill was pressed to the final reading and passed the House of Representatives by yeas, 73; nays, 0.
The bill [S. 12] to amend Section 288 of the
act concerning public offenses and their punishment being Section 2,204 of the code of
1881, was taken up, read the first time and referred to the
The bill [S. 20] relating to the qualification
of petit Jurors was read the first time and referred to the
The bill [S. 32] to punish persons who
disclose the contents of messages sent over telephone wires, was read the first time
and referred to the
Mr. McMULLEN, from the
Mr. WILSON, of Marion, from the same Committee, returned Mr. Frazer's bill [H. R. 94] to provide for the sale of lands purchased on the part of the State at judicial sales. With a favorable report, the report was concurred in.
Mr. McMULLEN, from the same Committee, reported back Mr. Mellett's bill [H. R. 157] to amend Section 82 of an act concerning public offenses, with an amendment, the report was concurred in.
Also, Mr. Bowers' bill [H. R. 163] to legalize the acts of Notary Publics whose commissions have expired, with a recommendation that it be in- definitely postponed. The report was concurred in.
Also, Mr. Whitsits bill [H. R. 13] concerning the use of firearms, with an amendment striking out the emergency clause. The report was concurred in.
Mr. HEFFREN, from the same Committee, returned Mr. Shively's bill [H. R. 149] to amend Section 516 of the Revised Statutes concerning procedure in civil cases, with an amendment striking out the emergency clause. The report was concurred in.
Mr. STEWART, from the same Committee, returned Mr. Frazer's bill [H. R. 38] for taxing the ownership of property for school purposes, with an amendment striding out the emergency clause. The report was concurred in.
Mr. WILSON, of Marion, from the same Committee, returned Mr. Copeland's bill,[H. R. 637] to amend Section 473 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, with a recommendation that it be indefinitely postponed. The report was concurred in.
Mr. SMITH, from the
Mr. McHENEY opposed concurrence in the report of the Committe on the ground that
people outside of towns and cities should be granted the right to choose Boards of
Trustees as well as people living inside of corporations, and it is not wise to leave
school matters in the hands of one person who is irequently chosen, not because of
qualifications for the place, but for different rea
Mr. SMITH objected to the bill because it would change the entire school system, and required a revision of the present law.
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, did not believe that the best interests of our Public Schools demand this proposed change. He believed the report of the the Committee should be concurred in. and as time enough had been taken up on this discussion, he demanded the previous question-
The demand for the previous question was seconded by the House, and under its operation the report of the Committee was concurred in.
And so the bill was indefinitely postponed.
The House then adjourned till 10 a. m. to-morrow.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR announced prayer by Rev. David Walk, of the Central Christian Church.
On motion by Mr. McINTOSH the reading of the Secretary's minutes of yesterday's proceedings were dispensed with.
Mr. RISTINE presented a petition from citizens of Montgomery County, praying for a tax
on Foreign Fire Insurance Companies, which was referred to the
Mr. SMITH of Delaware presented the following which was referred to the
Whereas, It has been the recognized right of Government to prohibit or destroy anything detrimental to the public good, as decided by the Supreme Court of the United States; and
Whereas, The liquor traffic-the foe of God and man-with its long train of crime and wretchedness, stands judged and condemned by large multitudes of good and intelligent people; and
Whereas, The present laws of the State, adopted for the pretended regulations of the sale of intoxicated liquors as a beverage, have failed to protect the inhabitants of the State against the excessive taxation, pauperism, crime and the destruction of morals resulting from the liquor traffic; and
Whereas, The last session of the General Assembly of the State of Indiana passed a joint resolution, intended as an amendment to our State Constitution, forever prohibiting in the State the manufacture and sale of intoxicating liquor as a beverage; therefore
Resolved, That we, the Quarterly Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church, of Winchester, Ind., do most heartily approve the action of the last General Assembly of the State of Indiana in voting to submit to a vote the people such an amendment to our State Constitution.
Resolved, That we hereby memorialize, request, petition, and pray your Honorable Body to agree to said amendment and vote to submit the same to a direct vote of the people at a special election.
Mr. BROWN, from the
Mr. DUNCAN, from the same Committee, recommended the discharge of all employes not authorized by law. If more is necessary, then there should be a change in the law.
Mr. DUNCAN: At the time the resolution was offered for the appointment of the extra five Doorkeepers there was an impression among new members that the law governing these appointments was enacted long ago, whea not so many were needed; but at the close of a hundred days' session of the last General Assembly, there was a law passed authorizing the Doorkeeper to employ but seven assistants; and if it was necessary to have more than seven, Senators must then have understood it. As long as the law stands as it does, he should oppose the appointment of a single attendant more than is allowed by law.
Mr. SPANN contended that the Senate may direct more attendants than the law allows.
Mr. McINTOSH possibly has been caught in a trap in offering this resolution, but he found in the statute the number of assistants the Doorkeeper was authorized to appoint and their duties. He did not know where these employes are. In the House where there are 100 members, they have but seven, the number authorized by law under the Doorkeeper, while we have twelve-the Doorkeeper himself making thirteen. They are not all necessary and it is an imposition and an outrage on the taxpayers. There are at least forty employes in the Senate, as he understood.
Mr. BROWN favored the majority report, believing these employes are all needed. He moved to lay the report and resolution on the table.
The motion was agreed to by yeas, 31; nays, 14.
Mr. WILLARD offered a resolution according the privileges of the floor to ex-Senator Wright, ot Iowa, which was adopted.
Mr. YANCEY offered a resolution complimentary to the officials of the Benevolent Institutions cf the State. and declaring that they be continued in office until the meeting of the next General Assembly.
Mr. BROWN objected to its consideration.
The LIEUTENENT GOVERNOR: It will lie on the table.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR announced the special order being the majority and minority
reports from the
The question being on concurring in the minority report recommending that the Senate consent to and confirm the appointments of the Governor for Superintendent and Trustees for the Benevolent Institutions of the State forthwith-
Mr. FOULKE believed these appointments should be confirmed at once, every one being competent and fit persons for the positions named. There is no objection on personal grounds, but only that time may be given for the consideration of a bill proposing to take these appointments from the Governor. As a politician, as soon as it shown these appointments are to be made, not so much for fitness as the means to further partisan ends, the worse it will be for the Democratic party. Appointees of legislative caucuses are rewarded for party labor, while more competent persons are more likely to come by executive appointments. If incompetent persons are recommended by the Governor let them not be confirmed.
Mr. BUNDY could not understand the object of postponing the confirmation of these appointments. It has not even been insinuated that these men are not competent for the positions to which they have been appointed. If the Senate is to wait for partisan legislation to be enacted we are not discharging our duties under the law, nor acting as common courtesy would indicate to the Governor.
Here a Committee from the House of Representatives await their presence for a Joint
Convention in pursuance of concurrent action of the two bodies of the General
Assembly. Thereupon, on motion, Senators left their chamber in charge of the
When Senators returned the Senate took a recess till 2 o'clock p. m.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time and severally referred to appropriate Committees unless otherwise stated:
By Mr. WHITE [S. 163] concerning County Teachers' Institutes where an average attendance of twenty five an allowance of $35; where an average of forty teachers, drawing a warrant for $50; an average of fifty-five, the warrant shall be drawn for $100 for the purpose of defraying the expense of said institute.
By Mr. BUNDY [S. 164] to amend Section 457 of the act concerning proceedings in civil cases, being 586 of the Revised Statutes of 1881.
By Mr. SPANN [S. 165] concerning attorneys employed as counsel in the several Counties of the State. It provides that attorneys who are employed by Boards of County Commissioners to give counsel and are employed by said Boards shall not be employed or accept employment from any litigant who may have any business before said Boards. It is intended to stop the practice of attorneys taking fees from the County Commissioners and from litigants at the same time.
By Mr. GRAHAM [S.166] to prescribe causes for removal from office of County officers. One hundred and fifty copies ordered printed.
[The bill provides that if any County officer shall demand or receive any fee to which he is not entitled by law he may be proceeded against by any citizen, on complaint filed in the Circuit Court, and if the complaint be found to be true the officer shall be removed and a successor appointed by the Board of Commissioners.]
The Senate returned to the consideration of the subject pending at the time of Senators leaving the chamber for the Joint Convention.
Mr. HENRY thought the minority report should be adopted. These political questions should be disposed of as early in the session as possible.
Mr. BELL asked if one of these appointees was one of those persons who went and helped to count out by fraud a President duly elected to be the Chief Magistracy of the United States.
Mr. HENRY answered, no. He was glad to know that it is the purpose of the Democrats to postpone these nominations until the law is changed, so that the Democrats can get themselves together upon a proposition that will change the mode of appointing these officers. If that be the purpose, why not take up Senate bill No. 1 and dispose of it? If that legislation is important, and above everything else, let it be disposed of without further delay. It has been conceded b; Democrats in this General Assembly that the present law of appointments is a proper one, and in their opinion no new places should be made for party applicants. It is worse than tossing up a penny for a choice to have places filled by action of the General Assembly. It is in the power of the Democratic side to defeat the nomination of an improper person. He hoped the present incumbents would be allowed to retain their places, and not be upturning the management of these Institutions every two years.
Mr. SPANN understood that Senators on the other side divided on this quesiton. One of the Governor's nominees was what is called a visiting statesman of whom it can be said there is no more honorable man in the State of Indiana. If that gentleman went to the South it was in the interest of a free ballot and a fair count. The Presidential Electoral Commission was a Democratic measure, and could have been defeated by Democratic votes. No objection can be raised to the confirmation of these nominees but a partisan one. The helpless, unfortunate inmates of these Benevolent Institutions reach out to some twenty thousand families in this State, and yet the Democratic party propose to make them the shuttle-cock in politics. What single man in all these lists of appointments but has a character above suspicion, and who is pure-hearted and capable? He spoke in favor of concurrence in the minority report.
Mr. BELL: The question before the Senate is, shall these appointments be postponed till the 30th of January? For several reasons it should be postponed. We ought to know what legislation will be had in reference to this matter, and whether there will be any necessity for filling these places in this way or not, before any definite acton is taken. He favored the majority report.
Mr. GRAHAM understood there is a purpose of undoing what was done by a Democratic
Legislature four years ago. There Is no honest reason why these appointments should
not be instantly confirmed by the Senate. What is the objection raised by the
Senator from Allen, Mr Bell? Simply that one of these nominees was what is called a
visiting statesman. He supported the report of the minority of the
Mr. BROWN would not be betrayed into the dis
Mr. FOULKE contended that it was the duty of Senators not to act as politicians, but to act for the best interests of the State of Indiana; and yet no reason has been given for the postponement of action upon the Governor's appointments, except the desire of Senators on the other side of the Chamber to act upon a bill for the reorganization of the Benevolent Institutions of the State. The Democratic party in he last campaign posed as an advocate of civil service reform, and yet, at the opening of this session, on the first day, immediately after the organization of the Senate, and before the Senate was called for bills, a bill was introduced by the Senator from Jackson [Mr. Brown] to take away the appointing power from the Governor and make these officer nothing more nor less than the spoils of a political parry and the rewards for political preferment. Is that the kind of civil service reform which the Democratic party announced to the people of Indiana in its late platform? If there be one thing above all others which should be kept pure-even as the Judicial ermine-is the State's exercise of guardianship over her wards; and in doing that there is only one thing we have a right to consider, and that is in what way may the best appointments of such Trustees be secured. He favored concurrence in the report of the minority of the Committee.
Mr. VOYLES opposed the confirmation of the Governor's appointees, because it would make a revolution in the management of the Benevolent Institutions of the State and because the appointees are such strict partisans. The management is entitled to credit, and the friends of the present management should be retained so as to continue to reflect credit upon the State and upon themselves.
Mr. MAY did not think but there is a question of politics in this matter. The Senator from Rush [Mr. Spann] discussed many questions of a political character. And the line of argument was elaborated by the Senator from Hamilton, [Mr. Graham] who gave Governor Porter taffy because he saw him in front of this Assembly [laughter] and then went over and shook hands with him as much as to say, "See what I have done for you." [Renewed laughter.] The line of argument used by Senators has had nothing to do with the question before the Senate. The time has come fur the reappointment of the Trustees and Superintendent ot these institutions, and the Governor sends the names of Republicans, thus throwing the political Issue in, and showing that it is the intention to change the management of these institutions. If the Governor had sent the names of those who have been managing those institutions so well. as he acknowledged in his message to the General Assembly, the question would not have taken the phase it has He thought this matter has been sufficiently discussed, and he demanded the previous question.
The demand for the previous question was seconded by the Senate, and under
The minority report of the Com
The report of the majority of the Committee recommending postponement of further action till January 30, was concurred in.
And then the Senate adjourned.
The Speaker announced prayer by Rev. H. C. Mable, of the First Baptist Church of Indianapolis.
A motion to dispense with the reading of the Clerk's minutes of yesterday's proceedings was agreed to.
Mr. SMITH. of Tippecance, offered the following resolution:
Whereas, There is a great complaint on account of the unjust and ruinous competition arising from the contract system in vogue in our State Prisons, by which not only free competition in the awards of contract of Prison labor is destroyed, but worse than this, and far more ruinous, the labor of prisoners, fed, clothed, and housed by the State, is put on the market at an average of fifty-three and one half (53 1/2) cents per day of nine and one-third (9 1/3) hours average for the year, thus throwing the manufactured products of this slave paid labor, associated with the best machinery and skilled management, on the market to ruinously compete with the manufacturers by free labor, self-clothed, self-fed, and self-housed laborers who are taxpayers, faithful to all the obligations of citizenship, guilty of no misdemeanor unless it be, in that they are the heads and members of families whose fortunes it is to eat bread honestly earned in the sweat of their brow; and,
Whereas, This is an opportune time to commence the investigation which must lead to Prison labor reform; therefore
Resolved, That we instruct our
Mr. SMITH, of Tippecanoe, said: Mr. Speaker, I desire to say a few words on this
resolution, and I begin by quoting an expression of the resolution, "this is an
opportune time" to consider this question. To day we elect the Directors of both
Prisons, and before they enter upon the duties of their office we make the move in a
new departure. One not only new, but radical in its purpose. We have no reflection as
to the outgoing officers or anything to offer by way of reprehension. They may have
worked faithfully the policy they were elected to carry out. The Committee will at an
early day, give us the reports as to whether the contracts have been let in a free and
impartial manner and as to whether, under cover of legal forms, they have violated
the
Mr. WILSON, of Marion, moved an amendment to instruct the
Mr. JEWETT said: I had thought before I came here that some steps should be taken in
this direction, and if there is nothing in the resolution which reflects upon the
present Prison managers I shall heartily support it. It seems to me that there is
something wrong in allowing Prison labor to be brought into competition with free
labor. I have my opinion, which is that convict labor could, and ought to be used in
maintaining the highways of Indiana. It seems to me possible for the
Mr. SHOCKNEY said our present convict labor is self-supporting and has been for some time. We have a great number of men in our Penitentiaries and they must be employed in some way. I think that as Legislators we should look to the interest of the State and not to the interest of individuals.
Mr. SHIVELEY was in favor of any bill that would protect free labor from the odium cast upon it by coming into competition with convict labor.
Mr. GIBSON did not favor the resolution, and stated that while the persons, who employ this convict labor made more money on their product than other manufacturers they did not place the products of this convict labor upon the market at reduced prices, or at prices lower than other manufacturers. He thought it was not practicable to employ this convict labor in constructing and maintaining our highways as had been suggested by the gentleman from Scott [Mr. Jewett]. The expense of guarding these men while work and building jails to confine them in would make such a thing impracticable.
Mr. SMITH, of Tippecanoe, accepted the amendment [Mr. Wilson's].
The resolution as amended was adopted by yeas, 83; nays, 9.
Mr. SHOCKNEY offered a resolution authorizing the
Mr. GIBSON moved to lay the resolution on the table. This motion was agreed to.
Mr. KESTER from the
The report was concurred in.
Also, Mr. Patten's [H R 166] concerning legal enclosures, with the recommendation that the bill be indefinitely postponed.
Mr. PATTEN said: I want to say this in behalf of my bill: Personally I have very little interest in a bill of this nature for I usually keep good fences myself, but I have been requested by many farmers to introduce a bill of this kind. As the law now stands we have no standard of a legal fence-we have no legal fence in the State of Indiana. This bill simply provides for and defines what a legal fence shall be. I think it a necessity that we have some legal definition in regard to what constitutes a fence in the State of Indiana. This subject has caused a great deal of litigation in this State and has cost our people a great deal of money. A great part of this expense might be saved to our people by making our statutes provide for a legal fence.
Pending the consideration of this report-
Mr. WILSON, of Marion, moved that a Committee of two be appointed to inform the Senate that the House is now ready to go into the election of a State Librarian, two Directors of the Prison South and three Directors of the Prison North.
The motion was agreed to, and in a few minutes thereafter the Senate, conducted by the House Committee appeared, and took seats on the floor of the House.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR stated the object of the Convention to be the election of a State Librarian, three Directors for the State Prison North and two Directors for the State Prison South, and announced the first thing in order to be the nominations of a State Librarian.
Senator BROWN nominated for State Librarian Miss Lizzie O. Callis, of Morgan County.
Senator BUNDY nominated for State Librarian Mrs. Emma A. Windsor, of Putnam County.
There being no further nominations, the Lieutenant Governors directed the names of the Senators to be called by the Principal Secretary of the Senate, and the names of Members of the House of Representatives to be called by the Principal Clerk of the House.
The first ballot resulted:
For Miss Callis-Senators, 26; Representatives, 57; total, 83.
For Mrs. Winsor-Senators, 19; Representatives, 38; total, 57.
Miss Callis having received a majority of all the votes cast, the Lieutenant Governor declared her duly elected for the legal term of two years; and announced nominations for Directors for the State Prison South to be in order.
Representative McMULLEN nominated Mr. W. D. H. Hunter of Dearborn County, as a Director for the Prison South.
Senator SPANN nominated Morris McDonald, of Floyd County.
There being no further nominations the ballot was taken and resulted:
For Mr. Hunter-Senators, 26; Representatives, 58; total, 84;
For Mr. McDonald-Senators, 19; Representatives, 37; total, 56.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR declared Mr. Hunter elected Director for the State Prison South to serve for the legal term, and announced nomination for another Director of the same Prison to be now in order.
Senator McINTOSH nominated Dr. Horace V. Norvelle of Greene County, as a Director for the State Prison South.
Senator BUNDY placed in nomination William G. Young, of Sullivan County.
There being no further nominations the ballot resulted:
For Mr. Norville-Senators, 26; Representatives, 58; total. 84.
For Mr. Young-Senators, 19; Representatives, 36; total, 55.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR declared Mr. Norvelle elected, and then stated that nominations for Directors of the State Prison North to be in order.
Senator BELL nominated Henry Monning, of Allen County.
Senator YOUCHE placed in nomination Wm. T. Horine, of Lake County.
No other nominations being made the ballot resulted:
For Mr. Monning-Senators, 26; Representatives, 58; total, 84.
For Mr. Horine-Senators, 19; Representatives, 35; total, 54.
THE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR declared Mr. Monning elected, and announced nominations for another Director for the State Prison North to be in order.
Senator MAGEE nominated George Majors, of Benton County.
Representative SHOCKNEY nominated Amos C Beeson, of Randolph County.
There being no further nominations, the ballot resulted:
For Mr. Majors-Senators, 26; Representatives, 59; total, 85.
For Mr. Beeson-Senators, 18; Representatives, 34; total, 52.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR declared Mr. Majors elected a Director of the State Prison North for the term prescribed by law, and called for nominations" for a third Director of the State Prison North.
Senator WILLARD nominated as a candidate for a Director of thy State Prison North John C. Shoemaker, of Marion County.
Senator BUNDY placed in nomination Leopold Levi, of Huntington County.
There being no further nominations, the ballot resulted:
For Mr. Shoemaker-Senators, 6; Representatives. 58; total, 83.
For Mr. Levi-Senators, 19; Representatives, 37; total, 56.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR declared Mr. Shoemaker elected one of the State Prison Directors for the Prison North for the legal term, and said: The purpose for which the Joint Convention assembled having bean accomplished I now wait for a motion to adjourn.
Representative SMITH moved that the Convention adjourn sine die
The motion was agreed to.
The House then took a recess till 2 o'clock.
The House returned to the consideration of the report from the committee on Agriculture on Mr Patten's bill [H. R. 165] interrupted by the Joint Convention.
Mr. KESTER said, in justice to the Committee, lie desired to state that they had no 111 feeling against the gentleman from Sullivan (Mr. Patten) or his bill. We simply acted upon the bill and maae a miammous report.
Mr. MONTGOMERY was not in favor of killing the bill so abruptly, and therefore moved
to recommit it to the
Mr. MOODY spoke in favor of recommitting the bill. He thought the bill in some respects was an improvement on the present statute on the subject, and while he would not argue in favor of the bill, he would speak in favor of what was good in it. He thought there should be some legislation on this subject.
Mr. HEFFREN thought some of the provisions of the bill were not good. He did not
consider a four and a half foot fence a good substantial fence in case a pack of mules
or a drove of steers were running at large He thought It would be discourtesy to take
it from the
Mr. PATTEN protested against sending his bill to the
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. KESTER, from the Committee on Agriculture, reported back Mr. Howland's bill [H. R. 134] to provide for the regulation of stock running at large, with a recommendation that, with certain amendments, the bill do pass. The report was concurred in.
Mr Pruitt's bill [H R 147] was reported back from the
The report was concurred in.
Mr. ELEY, from the
The report was concurred in.
Mr. KESTER, from the same Committee, reported Mr. Montgomery's bill [H. R. 20] concerning roads and highways, with the recommendation that it be indefinitely postponed. The report was concurred in.
Mr. WILLIAMS, from the
The report was concurred in.
Also Mr. Weaver's bill [H. R 109] to enable owners of wetland to drain the same, with a recommendation that the same pass with certain amendments.
The report was concurred in.
Mr. THOMAS, from the special Committee to investigate the matter in regard to the cases of small pox in the County Jail, reported that the report was true, and that the cases escaped from the conveyance while on the way to the Pest House.
The report was accepted.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time, and severally passed to a second reading, unless otherwise stated:
By Mr. SUTTON [H. R 253] to amend Section 90 of an act concerning proceedings in criminal cases, being Section 1,666 of the Revised Statutes of 1881.
By Mr. WILEY [H. R. 254] to amend Section 8 of an act establishing a State Board of Health, being Section 4,993 of the Revised Statutes of 1881.
By Mr. STERRITT, by request, [H. R 255] to provide for the election and qualification of Justices of the Peace, etc.
By Mr GRAHAM [H. R. 256] to provide a fund for the permanent endowment of the State University.
By Mr GRAHAM [H. R. 257] to amend Section 2,911 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, concerning the Issuing and taking up of tickets and coupons on tickets, etc.
By Mr. PRICE [H. R. 258] to amend Section 544 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, concerning proceeding in civil cases.
By Mr. ROBINSON [H. R. 259] to repeal all laws for the protection of English sparrows.
By Mr. ROBINSON [H.. R. 260] concerning Grand and Petit Juries.
By Mr. S TUCKER [H. R. 261] to repeal Sections 1 to l5, inclusive of an act ( establishing a State Board of Health-being Sections 4,986 to 5,000, inclusive, of the Revised Statutes of 1881.
By Mr. WOODLING [H. R. 262] to repeal an act establishing a State Board of Health.
Mr. MERING offered a resolution of respect in referee to the death of the Hon Henry O. Meredith, former member of the House from the County of Wayne.
On motion the resolution was made the special order for Friday, January 26, at 10 a. m.
By M. MELLET [H. R. 263] to amend Sections 64, 75 78, 89, 95 and 106, concerning proceedings in criminal cases.
By Mr. MOODY [H. R 264] to regulate the incorporation of the town of Garrett, DeKalb County.
By Mr. FISHER [H. R 265] to amend Section 5,795 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, authorizing Boards doing; County business to declare water courses navigable.
By Mr. HUSTON [H. R. 266] to amend Section 2 of an act to provide more effectually for the support and care of pauper children.
By Mr. TULEY [H. R. 267] to amend Section 49 of an act-being Section 1,622 of the Revised Statutes of 1881-concerning proceeding in criminal cases.
By Mr. TULEY [H. R. 268] to amend Section 251 being Section 6,519 of the Revised Statutes of 1881concerning taxation.
By Mr. JEWETT [K. R 269] to amend Section 378 being Section 535 of the Revised Statutes of 1881concerning proceeding in civil cases.
Mr. ROBINSON offered the following concurrent resolution, which was adopted by a unanimous vote-yeas 90; nays, 0:
Resolved, That our Senators in Congress be and are hereby instructed, and our Representatives in Congress are informed, that it is the sense of this General Assembly that in the pensioning of our soldiers allowance should be made wholly on disabilities incurred, and not upon rank held while in service.
The House adjourned until 10 a. m., January 24.
On motion by Mr. BENZ the reading of the Secretary's journal was dispensed with.
Mr. BUNDY, by consent, offered a resolution, which was adopted directing the
Mr. BROWN, under a suspension of the rules, introduced a concurrent resolution authorizing a Joint Committee of Women's Claims to consist of four Senators and five Representatives, Mr. Brown desiring the Senator from Green (Mr. McIntosh) be named as Chairman, should the House concur in his resolution.
Mr. SPANN offered a joint resolution providing for the payment by the State of the costs incurred by the Superintendent of Public Instruction in the case of the State vs. the Superintendent of Schools in Martin County, charged with corruption in selling the questions prepared for examination of teachers by the Superintendent of Public Instruction which was read the first time.
On his farther motion the Constitutional rule was suspended-yeas, 45; nays, 1-and the joint resolution was read the second time by title, the third time by section, and passed the Senate by yeas, 24; nays, 19.
Before the final vote Mr. JOHNSON asked unanimous consent to amend by providing that the warrant shall not exceed $1,000.
Mr. VOYLES (objecting): the entire amount would be probably used.
Mr. WILL A RD moved to refer to the Committee on Education, with instructions to limit the amount, [which was not entertained by the Chair].
The amendment was rejected.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR announced the special order to be the consideration of Mr. Benz's bill [S. 6] for the election and appointment of Supervisor of highways. [See p. 28 and 78 of the Brevier Reports.]
The majority report recommend amendment of the bill [S. 6] by making the tax in Section 3 not less than five cents nor more than forty cents on the $100. The minority report entirely new matter as a substitute for the bill.
Mr. HENRY offered a substitute for both the majority and minority reports-being new matter from and after the enacting clause. He said there is nothing of so much importance to the farming community as the road law. The present law gives dissatisfaction and there is a demand for a new system for the repair n improvement of roads. The substituted provisions of tho measure now proposed as a substitute are: It does away with the Road Superintendent and with the Road Master: it makes the Trustee ex-officio Road Superintendent of all highways in his Township, who shall divide his Township into road districts not less than six square miles in area, in each of which there is to be elected a Road Supervisor who has charge of the work on the road, under the direction of the Township Trustee, citizens to work out the poll tax similar to the (. Id law for, working out road tax. The Township Trustee shall have control of all the roads so there may be a system of roads. The property tax shall be paid to the Township Trustee to be expended under his direction.
Mr VOYLES, interrupting, suggested that this bill be printed and the subject postponed till after the printing.
Mr. BELL seconded the motion to print.
Mr. GRAHAM thought the explanation of the author would be better than printing the bill.
Mr. HENRY (continuing): The Road Supervisors should expend this road money under the direction of the Township Trustee. The bill permits every taxpayer to work his road tax out, if it is done as cheap as other labor is performed. It makes the Supervisor an officer, requires bond, and subjects him to removal by the Township Trustee for cause. He did not claim this bill as a perfect one but insisted it contains the better provisions of the present and the old law.
On motion by Mr BROWN the subject was postponed till Monday next at 2:30 o'clock. The substitute [offered by Mr. Henry] and the bill [S. 126, Mr. Davidson's] were ordered printed-300 copies of the former and 150 of the latter bill.
Mr. SPANN called up the special order, being the resolution offered by Mr. Van Vorhis
on the 12th inst., [see pp. 49, 50 and 76 of the Brevier Reports] instructing the
The minority report, signed by two members, states: We do not find that said resolutions were spread at length upon the journals of the General Assembly, nor that they were, in words, referred to this General Assembly. We do find that they are in the same condition as resolutions heretofore adopted and agreed to as amendments to the Constitution of Indiana, which were agreed to by a succeeding majority of the electors of the State of Indiana, and declared by the Governor of the State to have been duly adopted as a part of the Constitution of Indiana. We, therefore, find and report to the Senate that the provisions of Section 1, Article 16, of the Constitution of Indiana have been substantially complied with, and that said several joint resolutions above set forth are duly and legally before this General Assembly for its action thereon.
The question being on concurrence in the minority report-
On motion by Mr. BROWN, the Senate resolved itself into a
Mr. BUNDY moved that the Committee recommend that the Senate concur in the minority report of the Committee.
Mr. BELL moved that the Committee recommend the Senate concur in the majority report.
Mr. BUNDY did not propose to discuss all the questions that arise on this subject,
but to give a few reasons why the report of the minority of the
On motion by Mr. BROWN, the Committee took a recess till 2 o'clock.
Mr. JOHNSON said: Mr. President-To obey and support the Constitution of Indiana as it stands to-day is what every Senator upon taking his oath has sworn to do. The Constitution is an instrument of such momentous importance that every one of its provisions should be followed and obeyed to the letter and that no room for any other construction except its literal demands should be entertained. In no ease is this. however, more necessary than when an attempt is being made to amend the great instrument which protects the rights of every man, woman and child in this State, and, as in the case of the so-called prohibitory liquor amendment, to introduce into the Constitution a provision which will, to a large degree annul and invalidate both the Constitutional and natural rights of citizens, In such case I claim more than usual caution and a strictly literal compliance with every demand and direction of the Constitution should be exercised.
It seems to me that party polities have nothing whatever to do with the question. I
am well aware that the Republican party has made the adoption of the prohibitory
amendment a party question, and it is pretty generally understood, and some of their
ablest representatives in the press freely admit that in doing so, in placing itself
upon a prohibitory platform, the Republican party has made a fatal mistake, a mistake
which has in the November election cost them several great States, upon which the
Republicans seemed to hold a life-long lien, and which, if they pursue in their
course, will unquestionably cost them the Presidency. It is true, too, that the
Democratic party, at least a great majority of the Democratic party, is opposed to the
prohibitory amendment, but in doing so, the Democratic party has merely reasserted the
fundamental principle underlying our system of government, the great principle that
there are rights, inherent in human nature, sacred natural rights which on State and
no political majority has any right or power to deprive them of. However, disregarding
these Constitutional and natural rights of every citizen of this State, the Republican
majority of the last General Assembly adopted a prohibitory amendment, which, for the
second stage of its consideration, and in its regular course of Constitutional action,
had to be referred to the present General Assembly. This reference to the present
General Assembly could only be made according to certain regulations and rules, laid
down in and prescribed by the Constitution itself. Article 16, of the Constitution,
prescribing the mode of procedure in the case of amendments, says: "If the same shall
be agreed to by a majority of the members elected to each of the two Houses, such
proposed amendment or amendments shall, with the yeas and nays thereon, be entered on
their journals, and referred to the General Assembly to be chosen at the next general
election." Now, Mr. President, it seems to me the language of the Constitution is very
clear on the subject, and can not possibly be misunderstood by any one who is willing
and unprejudiced enough to interpret it literally. The Constitution demands that the
amendment, that is to say the full text of the amendment, adopted by the Legislature,
be entered at length-and every word of it-on the journals of each House. The
Constitution demands it, I say, for the words "shall, with the yeas and nays thereon,
be entered on their journals." in my opinion can not have any other meaning. In a
question of such vital importance as a Constitutional amendment, the General Assembly,
to which this amendment was to be referred for action thereon, was not to be left in
Now let us see what has been done and In what manner the provision of the Constitution has been complied with. I have only had an opportunity to consult the Senate Journal, but on turning to the index I find that the final action on the House joint resolution No 7. which is the prohibitory amendment, is recorded on pages 828 and 829, and in what in what manner? [Reads ] Not one word designating that joint resolution as the prohibitory amendment, much less the full text and the language of the amendment itself! Now, Mr. President, I ask, in all candor, the gentlemen of the legal fraternity on this floor whether, in legal or legislative language, what has been done this case is correctly expressed by the word "entered?" Is it not true that there are three different words expressing, so to say, a gradation of one and the same action, but each used only in a separate stage of such action? Is it not true that resolutions may be filed, noted or entered, and that to file a resolution merely conveys the idea that a certain paper has been deposited at the proper place, and that that act is recognized by an indorsement on the back of the instrument? Is it not true that a resolution is noted, when it is marked down in an official record, journal or book, merely by reference to its number or title-but that the legislative expression entered is always used when the full text and language of a resolution are recorded and spread at length in an official journal, and that the expression "entered" is used in no other sense. It seems to me that this is this is conclusive proof of what the Sixteenth Article of the Constitution wanted done in case an amendment was to be referred to the next General Assembly. It wanted the amendment entered on the journals of both Houses, and consequently it wanted the full text, the full language of the amendment cited in the pages of the journals, and it did not require the amendment merely noted, as has been done in this case. Mr. President, this amendment is of too serious, too grave, and too far-reaching a character to be treated lightly and superficially. All amendments are the organic law of the land has been and must be surrounded by bulwarks and entrenchments, which ought to be so strong and so difficult of access that not a mere assault and surprise, but only a protracted and patient siege, can overcome and conquer them. The framers of our Constitution have in then wisdom reared those bulwarks and intrenchmems by laying down the Constitutional rules for amending it. The very words of these rules should be religiously observed, and not an iota should be tempted in going through a slow and tedious process of an amendment. It is this very difficulty and slowness which constitute our security and guarantee the perpetuity of our liberty and freedom-both as a Nation and as individuals.
In conclusion, Mr. President, I would say that I entirely disagree with the senator
form Henry [Mr. Bundy], when he says that in this case it would be desirable if every
Senator on this floor were a lawyer. If the language of the Constitution with
reference to these amendments were clothed in complicated and technical phraseology;
if to the ordinary reader or Legislator that language presented difficulties not
readily to overcome then. It might be desirable to have this question decided only by
a tribunal of lawyers, But this is not the case; the provisions of the Constitution
are laid down in plain English, and I do not believe that there is one Senator on this
floor or one Representative on the floor of the House who is not fully competent to
decide the matter for himself. But even admitting, for the sake of argument, that the
wish of the Senator from Henry might be justified, to have this question decided
solely and exclusively by attorneys the learned expounders of Constitutional law, is
he not even then beaten by the force of his own argument? Has not the Senate been
informed by a majority of the
Mr. McCULLOUGH: For this Legislature to Fay the proposed Constitutional amendments are Constitutionally before this General Assembly would be committing an error indefensible. The only right the Legislature has to take steps like this is a right given by the Constitution itself, and before taking such step, the Legislature must find authority therefor in that organic instrument. In plain language, the Constitution requires that the proposed amendment itself must be put upon the journals-there must be some identification of its language upon the journals. Taking it for granted, these proposed amendments were not entered upon the journals of the last General Assembly, he proceeded to call attention to some other provisions of the Constitution. By virtue of the Constitution it is provided that proposed amendments shall be set forth in the journals of the General Assembly, and the laws of the State provide that those journals shall be circulate in every County in the State. It does not take any great Constitutional lawyer to understand this plain requirement of the Constitution, and so every citizen can search those journals and see if the proposed amendments are set forth in those journals, and if one word is different in one journal from the other then the Legislature has no business to consider the amendment in which such difference in words as set forth in the two journals may be found. It is a question of their publication-in order that the people may be prepared to pass upon such question-so stated by the framers of the Constitution-that the people may know an amendment has been proposed to the organic law-not through newspapers, but in a Constitutional way; by publication in the journals of the two Houses of the General Assembly. He thought there was no very grave Constitutional question involved in this matter. It is as clear as the noonday sun that the Constitutional provision in regard to these proposed amendments has not been complied with. The only conclusive evidence as to whether these proposed amendments were agreed to by the last General Assembly is pointed out in the Constitution itself, which provides that they must be spread upon the journals of the two Houses. Members of the Legislature took an oath to support the Constitution of the State, and not to support any proposed amendments, and where there is a question or a doubt as to whether or not there is a Constitutional amendment before this General Assemble, the safest thing to do is to give the Constitution the benefit of the doubt and say the plain, simple provisions of the Constitution must be complied with before members should vote to adopt any such proposed amendments. He was anxious to see the report of the majority of the Committee sustained
Mr. FOULKE sincerely believed, as a lawyer, that the proposed constitutional
amendments are ' now before this General Assembly for its consid
Mr. Spann, on whose motion the Committee rose, reported progress, and asked leave to sit again to-morrow at 11 o'clock.
On motion by Mr. Brown this report of the
And then the Senate adjourned.
The Speaker announced prayer by the Rev. Mr. Lynch.
On motion by Mr. SMITH, of Tippecanoe, the reading of the Clerk's journal was dispensed with.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time and severally passed to a second reading, unless otherwise stated:
By Mr. GENUNG [H. R. 270] to legalize the incorporation of the town of Oakland, Gibson County, Indiana.
By Mr. GILMAN [H R, 271] to quiet the title of land escheated to the State of Indiana.
By Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, [H. R. 272] denning the offence of compelling or attempting to compel a person to marry, and fixing a penalty therefor.
By Mr. PETTIBONE [H. R. 273] to authorize the State of Indiana to issue 650 internal revenue improvement bonds of $1,000 each.
By Mr. WHITSIT [H. R. 274] to amend Section 9, in relation to the laying out, widening and opening streets and highways.
Mr. WHITSIT [H. R. 275] to regulate the indebtedness of cities having a population of over 16,000 in habitants.
By Mr. ADAMS (by request) [H. R 276] to amend Section 4,688 of the Revised Statutes of 1831, concerning elections and the contest thereof.
By Mr. ADAMS (by request) [R.R. 277] to authorize Boards of County Commissioners to straighten and change the course of the channels of booties of water, upon petition of person living adjacent to such water course.
By Mr. STEWART [H, R. 278] to amend Sections 47 and 66 of the decedents' estate act,
being Sections 2,2
By Mr. Wilson, of Marion, [H. R, 279] to amend Sections 4 and 7 of an act providing for the establishment of a State Bureau of Statistics-being Sections 5,720 and 5,722 of the Revised Statutes of 1881.
By Mr. Smith, of Perry [H. R. 280] touching, the duties of Township Trustee.
By Mr. Williams of Posey, [H. R 281] concerning witnesses in certain criminal cases.
By Mr. Shockney [H. R. 282] requiring Judges of the Circuit Criminal and Superior Courts to give charges to Juries in writing.
By Mr. Mutz [H. R. 283] to amend Sections 94, 95 and 161, and repeal Sections 157 and l58 of the decedents' estates act.
By Mr. Mutz [H. R. 284] to repeal Section 4 and amend Sections 47, 66 and 165 of an act for the settlement and distribution of decdents' estates.
By Mr Stephenson [H. R. 285] fixing the time of holding Court in the Second Judicial Circuit.
By Mr. Holler [H. R. 286] to empower Manufacturing Companies to take and hold stock in Corporations furnishing water power.
By Mr. Atken [H. R. 287] to amend Section 3 of an act concerning Grand and Petit Juries-being Section 1,387 of the Code of 1881.
By Mr. Spann [H. R 288] to amend Section 1 of an act concerning taxation of property in cities and towns-being Section 3,261 of the Code of 1881.
By Mr. Campbell [H. R. 289] to amend Section 4 of an act concerning drainage of April 8, 1881.
By Mr. Schloss [H. R. 290] to repeal Section 105 of an act concerning taxation-being Section 6,373 of the Revised Statuses of 1881.
By Mr. Mutz [H. R. 291] for the relief of Lewis S. Colder.
By Mr. Kester [H. R. 292] to provide for issuing bonds by Boards of Commissioners in Counties to construct and repair Court Houses, Jails, and other County buildings.
By Mr. Shively [H. R. 293] concerning Mutual Life Insurance Companies.
By Mr. Heffren [H. R 294] to amend Section 115 of an act concerning public: offenses-being Section 2,020 of the Revised Statutes of 1881.
By Mr Heffren [H. R. 295] to amend Section 64 of an act concerning proceedings in criminal cases being Section 1,637 of the Code of 1881.
By Mr. Beeson [H. R.
By Mr. Dean [H. R. 297] to amend Section 8 of an act establishing a State Board of Health.
By Mr. Gibson [H. R. 298] to amend Section 214 being Section t>,485 of the Revised Statutes of 1881-concerning taxation.
By Mr. Barr [H. R. 299] compelling Railroad Companies to provide for the safety of persons and property in loading and unloading cars.
Mr. MONTGOMERY offered a resolution, which was adopted, instructing the
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, offered a joint resolution [H. R. 17] proposing an amendment to Section 6, Article 7, of the Constitution of the State.
Also, a joint resolution [H. R.] to amend Section 5 of Article 7 of the Constitution of the State.
Mr. JEWETT thought these resolutions were out of order. A provision of the Constitution declaring that when an amendment has been acted upon by a preceding General Assembly, and is awaiting the action of a succeeding one, no other amendment to the Constitution can be proposed for the ratification or rejection of the voters of the State. He, therefore, moved to reject them.
Mr SMITH, of Tippecanoe, moved to refer the resolution to the
Mr. WRIGHT insisted the House should decide this question without any trouble. Every member who believes the Constitutional amendments pending should vote for the rejection of the resolutions.
Mr. HEFFREN explained that if there are no amendments pending before the House at the present time passed by the last General Assembly and referred to this General Assembly, then the gentleman's resolutions are in order. If, however, the amendments passed by the last General Assembly are now pending before this General Assembly, then the gentleman's resolutions are not in order [Mr. Heffren here read the sections of the Constitution which provide for its own amendment] He asked that the gentleman from Knox (Mr. Williams) would withdraw his resolutions for the present, as he did not want the members of this House to be caught in a trap.
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, said: My purpose is to secure if I can such amendment to the
Constitution as will result in keeping out of the Indiana Reports all cases that have
no public or general interest. As the law now stand's the reporter prints each and
every case decided by the Supreme Court, and as a result, in the last two years ten
Indiana Reports have been published. The Reports sell at S3 50 each, a good thing for
the official reporter, but a heavy and unnecessary draft upon the people. I have given
considerable time to an investigation of this matter, and I am satisfied that the
Bench and Bar of this State are a unit in demanding relief. Each lawyer in the State
who keeps up the Reports Is doing so at an expense of $1750 per year, and the State
for Reports for the use of its officers pays $9,625 per year 'Thu is too much. Bills
are pending here to reduce the price per volume, but the best way to get relief is to
reduce the number. The
Mr. SMITH stated that so far as he knew and so far as the House knew there are amendments pending before this House at the present time, but if this House decides that there are no amendments now pending then any amendment or amendments may be proposed.
Mr. JEWETT said: My object in moving to reject, I very candidly confess, is to take the sense of this House whether or not these amendments are before this House. I am as well satisfied as to the condition of these amendments as if I had heard every member express themselves. Those who believe that the amendments are now pending are compelled to vote against these resolutions- I
Mr. GORDON moved to postpone further consideration of this subject until Friday 2 o'clock.
Pending which came the recess for dinner.
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox; said: I am satisfied from the drift of the debate upon these resolutions this morning that the members of the minority have not yet read the decisions of the Supreme Court of Iowa upon the question of Constitution amendments, or if they have read it they have not given it mat prayerful consideration to which the voice of a Republican Court of the great Republican State of Iowa is entitled from these gentlemen. I wish them to have the full benefit and force of this cold wave from the north before they vote upon the Constitutional question, Therefore, I withdraw the joint resolutions from the further consideration of this House and will, at some future day, again present them.
The Senate concurrent resolution to provide for the appointment of a Joint
Committee, to be known as a
Mr. AKIN moved to concur in the resolution.
The motion was agreed to, and the SPEAKER appointed on the part of the House Messrs. McMullen, Bowers, Chittenden, Campbell and Wiley.
The following described Senate bills wire taken up, read a second time, and severally referred to appropriate Committees, unless otherwise stated:
The bill [S. 88] to amend Sections 31 and S4 of an act authorizing the formation of Companies for detection ad apprehension of horse thieves.
It was referred to the
The bill [S. 121] to legalise the acts of a certain voluntary Association in Vanderburg County.
It was it referred to the
The bill [S. 29] to legalize the proceedings and records of the Trustees of the town of Westfield, Hamilton County.
Mr. SMITH moved that the House amendments to the bill be engrossed.
The motion was agreed to.
The following described House bills were read the second time and ordered engrossed unless otherwise stated:
Mr. Gibson's [H. R. 2] to legalize the acknowledgement a'id recording of certain instruments of writing.
Mr. McMullen's [H. R. 3] to amend Section 461 of an act concerning proceedings in civil cases.
Mr. Deem's bill [H. R. 5] concerning town elections.
Mr. Williams', of Knox, [H. R. 10] to amend Section 9 of an act concerning proceedings in criminal cases.
Mr Whitsit's [H. R. 13] concerning the use of firearms.
Mr. Shockney's [H. R. 22] to equalize the assessments of taxes made by the Board of Trustees of the incorporated town of Winchester, Randolph County.
Mr. Henderson's [H. R. 29] to enable the several Counties of the State to sell and dispose of land for the benefit of the school fund.
Mr. Best's [H. R. 30] to amend Section 3 of an act to regulate the descent of heirs, approved March 2, 1855.
Mr. Patten's [H. R. 32] to create the Forty-third Judicial Circuit.
Mr. Patten's [H. R. 33] to amend Section 1 of an
Mr. Patten's [H. R. 34] to legalize the election of the Board of Trustees of the town of Sullivan, Sullivan County.
Mr Patten's [H. R. 35] to amend Section 16 of an act incorporating the town of Sullivan, Sullivan County.
Mr. Patten's [H. R. 36] to amend certain sections of an act concerning public offenses.
On motion by Mr. HOWLAND it was recommit to the
Mr. Weaver's [H. R. 55] to prevent the sale of impure butter.
Mr. Kirkpatrick's [H. R. 53] to legalize the incorporation of the town of Bannettsville, White County.
Mr. Wilson's, of Kosciusko, [H. R. 66] to legalize the incorporation of the town of Syracuse, in Kosciusko CountY.
Mr Wilson's, of Kosciusko,[H. R. 67] to legalizing the incorporation of the town of Silver Lake. Kosciusko County.
Mr. Wilson's, of Marion, [H. R. 72] concerning taxation.
On motion by Mr. STERRETT, it was recommitted with instructions.
Mr. Adams' [H. R. 74] to amend Section 372 of the civil procedure act, approved April 7, 1881.
Mr. Gerber's [H. R. 75] to establish the Thirty-fourth Judicial Circuit.
On motion by Mr. BEST, the enacting clause was stricken out.
Mr. Heffren's [H. R. 79] concerning elections and the contest thereof.
Mr. Mutz's [H. B. 80] to prohibit the tilling of quails. Mr Heffren's [H. R 81] to protect the elections of voluntary political Associations.
Mr. Mock's [H. R, 83] to amend Section 1,629 of the Revised Statutes of 1881 concerning proceedings in criminal cases.
Mr Graham's [H. R. 85] to legalize the plats of towns and town plats additional to towns.
Mr. Jewett.'s [H. R. 89] to amend Section 346 of an act concerning proceedings in civil cases.
Mr. BRAZELTON'S [H R. 91] concerning the relocation of county seats.
Mr HEFFREN moved to recommit this hill to the
Mr BRAZELTON said: I hope, sir, that the motion will not prevail. I think that the
Mr. JEWETT considered the only question before the House to be the one to recommit. He thought the Committee was a good one and believed that the members of the Committee had given this bill sufficient consideration before they submitted the same to the House. He felt that the Committee had done its duty. He thought that the bill should be engrossed, and when it came up for final passage the merits of the bill could be discussed.
Mr. HEFFRFEN spoke in favor of his motion to recommit. He was in under the impression that the bill had been formed for the relocation of the County seat of one County, and that in the consideration of the bill the Committee had only heard one side of the question. He was informed that there were persons present who desired to go before the Committee and represent the other side of the matter. He considered these sufficient reasons to recommit the bill,
Pending the consideration of the motion to recommit-
The House adjourned until 10 a. m. January 25.
Mr. WILLARD introduced the following bill [S. 156] see page 86.
A BILL for an act providing for the submission to the electors of the Stale of Indiana for ratification or rejection f any Constitutional amendment or amendments which may at any time be pro- posed and agreed to by two General Assemblies in succession, in accordance with the provisions of Article 16 of the Constitution of the State of Indiana, prescribing certain duties of officers of election and other, providing penalties for violation thereof, repealing all laws in conflict therewith, and declaring an emergency.
Whereas, We are in favor of the submission of all proposed Constitutional amendments to the people according to the provisions of the Constitution for its own amendment, and the people have the right to oppose or favor the adoption of any or bill amendments at any or all stages of their consideration and any submission of Constitutional amendments to a vote of the people should be at a time and under circumstances most favorable to a full vote, and, therefore, should be at a general election. Therefore,
Section 1. Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Indiana that whenever any amendment or amendments to the Constitution of the State of Indiana shall have been proposed and agreed to by two successive General Assemblies, in accordance with the provisions of Article 16 of the Constitution of the State of Indiana, the same shall be submitted to the electors of the State for their ratification or rejection at the general election next succeeding, at which Representatives in the General Assembly shall be elected.
Sec. 2. The Secretary of State shall on the first Tuesday in October, immediately preceding said general election, cause to be prepared ballots, on each of which shall be printed the proposed amendment or amendments, numbered severally, and below any proposed amendment shall be printed the word "yes" in one line and in another line the word "no." He shall on said first Tuesday in October send to the sheriff of each County a number of said ballots, not less than three times the number of votes cast in said County at the last general election: and the Sheriff shall, Immediately after receiving said ballots, deliver to the Trustees of each Township in his County a number of said ballots not less than double the number of votes cast at said election in said Township. It shall be the duty of each Trustee to see that a number of said ballots, not less than double the number of votes cast at said election in each Precinct in his Township, be in the hands of the Inspector thereof at the opening of the polls. The Inspector shall, on request, deliver to each elector at the time of the election one of said ballots. The Secretary of State shall also procure and furnish on said first Tuesday in October, as other election papers are furnished, the blanks for the poll-lists; tally sheets and certificates required by this act.
Sec, 3 Any qualified elector may vote at such election, for or against any or all
proposed amendments, by depositing one of said ballots in the ballot-box. If he in-
tends to vote for any amendment he shall leave under the same the word "yes" and
erase the word "no" by drawing a line across it or otherwise. If he intends to vote
against any amendment he shall leave under the same the word "no" and erase the word
"yes," and the votes cast shall be counted accordingly. I', 'under any proposed
amendment or amendments as printed on
Sec. 4. The laws of this State governing gen-elections as to the organization, powers and duties of election Boards, and the return and canvassing of votes, shall be observed by the several Boards of Election in making return and canvass of the votes cast at the election herein provided for, so far as they may be applicable, modified, however, as to the contents and return of certificates to correspond with the requirements of this act.
Sec. 5. The Board of Election of each Precinct shall count the votes for and against each proposed amendment separately, and also the whole number of electors who voted at the election, and certify all said numbers, specifying separately the number of votes cast for any proposed amendment, and the number cast against any, and the whole number of electors who voted at the election, over their signatures or the signatures of a majority of them to the Clerk of the Circuit Court in their County within two days after the election. The Clerk of each County shall, within four days after said election, ascertain from such certificates the total vote in his County for and against each proposed amendment separately, and also the whole number of electors who voted at the election and certify the same to the Secretary of State. The Secretary of State shall, as soon as possible after the election, determine from said certificates of the Clerks of the several Counties the total vote cast in the State for and against any proposed amendment separately and also the total number of electors who voted at the election, and certify the same to the Governor; and the Governor shall immediately issue and publish his proclamation declaring therein the number of votes cast in the State for and against any proposed amendment separately, and also the whole number of electors who voted at the election. And if it shall appear that the number of votes cast in the State for any one or more of proposed amendments was greater than the number of votes cast against the same amendment, and equal to the majority of all the electors who voted at the election then each such amendment shall be deemed and taken to have been ratified by the electors of the State, and become part of the Constitution, and shall be so declared by the Governor in his proclamation. But if it shall appear that any proposed amendment has received in its favor a number of votes less than a majority of all the electors who voted at the election, then each such amendment shall be deemed and taken to have been rejected by the electors of the State, and shall be so declared by the Governor in his proclamation. For the purpose of the ratification or rejection of any proposed amendment or amendments the number of electors who shall vote at the election herein provided for shall be conclusively taken and deemed to be the whole number of electors in the State. The certificate of the Secretary of State, herein provided for, and the proclamation of the Governor, based thereon, shall be final and conclusive evidence of the number of votes cast for and against each amendment, and of the whole number of electors who voted at the election, and of the ratification or rejection of each proposed amendment, as the case may be. In all proceedings had under this act any proposed amendment may be designated by number, except in the ballots.
Sec. 6. Nothing in this act contained shall be construed to require the use of the ballots provided for in this act, to the exclusion of other written or printed ballots, and all ballots cast shall be counted and returned in accordance with the intention manifested on the face thereof.
Sec. 7. Any officer whose duty it is, under this act, to make or sign any return or certificate of the number of votes cast for or against any proposed amendment or amendments or of the number of electors who voted at the election, who shall knowingly make or sign any false return or certificate of any such number, and any officer violating any of the provisions of this act, or failing to discharge any duty by this act imposed on him, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and on conviction thereof, shall be fined in any sum not exceeding $1,000, to which may be added imprisonment in the County Jail for any period not exceeding six months.
Sec. 8. If any elector shall cast, or personally offer, or attempt to cast more than one ballot at such election, he shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and on conviction thereof he shall be fined in any sum not exceeding $500, to which may be added imprisonment in the County Jail not exceeding six months. If any person shall vote, or offer to vote, on any amendment or amendments without being a qualified elector in the Precinct in which he so votes or offers to vote, he shall be liable to all the pains and penalties provided by law for the like offense at a general election.
Sec. 9. It shall be the duty of the Governor, on the first Tuesday in September immediately preceeding such general election, to issue a proclamation notifying the electors of the State of the election therein provided for. It shall be the duty of the Secretary of State to cause said proclamation and this act to be printed for the purposes of following, and transmit to the Sheriff of each County, with the ballots and blanks herein before provided for, a sufficient number of such printed copies to enable such Sheriff to deliver four of the same to each Clerk, four to each Auditor, one to each Township Trustee for himself and one for each Inspector of Election in his Township, other than himself, which it shall be the duty of such Sheriff to do. It shall be the duty of the Secretary of State to send the printed copies of this act, and the Governor's proclamation, and the ballots, poll-list, tally sheets and certificates which he is by this act required to send to the Sheriffs of the several Counties, by express to all Counties, with the County seat, of which there is communication in that manner from Indianapolis, and to the Sheriffs of other Counties by special messengers. And it shall be the duty of the Clerks of the several Counties to make in duplicate the certificates herein required from them, and to send one of said duplicates to the Secretary by mail and the others by express from every County from the County seat of which there is communication in that manner with Indianapolis and from other Counties by special messenger.
Sec. 10. The Secretary of State shall be allowed the actual expenses of printing the Governor's proclamation and this act, procuring the ballots, poll-lists, tally sheets and certificates and the expense of distributing the same and the expense of the transmission of the returns from the Clerk to him, to be audited by the Auditor of State and paid out of the State Treasury. The Sheriff of each County shall be allowed for his services $10 to be paid out of the County Treasury. The special messengers of the Secretary and the Clerks, if any shall be found necessary, shall be allowed $2 per day for the time necessarily occupied by them, and their actual necessary expenses of travel, to be evidenced by an itemized and verified account, filed with the Secretary and embraced in the expenses to be audited and paid out of the State Treasury as above provided.
Sec. 11. It shall be the duty of every officer charged with any service under this act to perform the same with the utmost promptness and fidelity, but the failure of any such officer or officers to perform any duty such duty in the time or manner herein designated, or the failure of the electors in any Precinct or County to hold an election as herein provided, shall not in any manner affect the validity of such election.
Sec. 12. It is declared that an emergency exists, requiring that this act shall take effect immediately, and that the same shall be in force from and after its passage.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR requested Senators to attend while prayer was being offered by Rev. H. Doddridge.
Petitions praying for a submission of a prohibition amendment to the Constitution, at
a special election, were presented and referred to the
Mr. FLETCHER presented a petition concerning the public health; also, by Mr. RAHM, on the same subject.
Mr. FOULKE presented a petition from the Woman's Equal Suffrage Society of Indianapolis, praying for the right of suffrage.
Mr. HENRY presented a prayer from officers of Anderson, Madison County.
Mr. BUNDY presented a petition from fifty-eight citizens of Henry County praying against the repeal of the State Board of Health act.
These reports were severally referred to appropriate Committees.
Mr. SPANN called up the special order, being Mr. Brown's bill [S. 1] for the better management of the Benevolent Institutions of the State-see page 87 of the Brevier Reports-and asked and obtained leave to withdraw his pending substitute for the majority and minority reports, the latter recommending indefinite postponement of the bills.
The question then being on concurrence in the minority report, it was rejected by yeas, 21; nays, 26.
The majority reports, recommending the passage of the bill, with amendments, as set forth on page 87 of the Brevier Reports, was concurred in by yeas, 27; nays, 22-as follows:
Yeas-Messrs. Bell, Benz, Brown, Compton, Davidson, Duncan, Ernest, Faulkner, Fletcher, Hill, Hilligass, Hoover, Howard, Hutchison, Johnson of Tippecanoe, Marvin, May McClure, McCullough, McIntosh, Null, Rahm, Richardson, Smith of Jay, Voyles and Willard-27.
Nays-Messrs. Adkison, Bichowsky, Bundy, Campbell, Fleming, Foulke, Graham, Henry, Keiser, Lockridge, Lindley, Macartney, Magee, Overstreet, Ristine, Sayre, Smith of Delaware, Spann, Van Vorhis, White, Yancey and Youche-22.
Mr. BROWN moved to amend the bill by adding an additional section, providing for the removal of officers for cause, the Governor to fill the vacancy until the next meeting of the Legislature, and that the General Assembly shall elect the first incumbents immediately on the taking effect of this act. He said this section is taken from what is known as the Wilson bill [H. R. 42]
These amendments were agreed to by yeas, 27; nays, 20.
Mr. SPANN moved to amend by inserting a section requiring the Female Department of the Insane Asylum to be placed in charge of a competent female physician. He insisted that there should be this recognition given to the women of the State.
Mr. BROWN opposed the amendment, as that question will properly come up for decision before the Trustees of that institution, and if they think it advisable, a female physician will be selected by them. He demanded the previous question.
The demand was seconded by yeas, 26; nays, 28; and under the operation of the previous questions the amendment (Mr. Spann's) was agreed to by yeas, 25; nays, 24.
The bill as amended was ordered engrossed.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR announced the special Joint Committee on the part of the Senate on woman's claims, viz: Messrs. McIntosh, Yancey, Foulke and Hilligass.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR announced the special order for this hour-11 o'clock-being
the consideration of the proposed Constitutional
Mr. FOULKE (continuing his speech, begun yesterday afternoon) regretted the consumption of so large an amount of time in his argument of this question, but it is to be presumed that members of the Senate are trying so to do their duty, and their duty is to decide this case according to the Constitution and the law. No party pledges were made in consideration of this defect, the amendments not being found in the Legislative journals, and the question whether or not this General Assembly is to consider the amendments was not sprung. A large number of this body not being members of the legal profession, it seems right to present fully the legal aspect of this case. He insisted wherever the means of identification are complied with that is all the law requires. The requirement that the amendment be entered on the records in directory only and not imperative. But even if imperative it has been sufficiently complied with. It has been said that two of the resolutions passed by the last General Assembly are concurrent and not joint resolutions. The title says they are joint resolutions, but the style indicates they are concurrent. In the Brevier Reports an examination showed [he had not examined the journals] that the same course was taken with them as with bills. They were read three times and passed by a yea and nay vote. And so it would seem they can properly be construed as Joint resolutions. If they are concurrent resolutions they are not properly before us, but if from the mode of procedure they can be considered as joint resolutions they have been properly authenticated and they properly before us. If in our duty to submit these amendments to the people They are before us and we have no right to stifle the popular voice upon a mere technical plea. He tried to discuss the question as free as possible from all political bias, and was extremely glad to find his convictions on the legal aspect of the case agreed with his convictions as a man. It is presumed all will try to pass upon this question as free as possible from party affiliations. If gentlemen on the other side feel themselves bound by the dictates of party let them remember a course that shall stifle the voice of the people unless it is imperatively demanded by the Constitution, will read upon the persons and the party attempting it.
We are acting as a Court in this matter-a Court of exclusive jurisdiction-and a
decision has heretofore been rendered in a precisely similar case. He bad gone over
the record of proceedings in the Wabash and Erie Canal amendment question pretty fully
and found that the amendment was referred to the
Mr. BROWN (interposing): The Senator from Jackson was a very young man when he was a Senator on the Wabash and Erie canal. [Laughter ] And another infirmity the Senator from Jackson then suffered was that he was outside of the Democratic camp, and just then was among you fellows. [Renewed laughter.]
Mr. FOULKE continued his remarks but a few moments longer. When he had concluded.
On motion by Mr. BROWN the Committee rose, reported progress and asked leave to sit again at 2 o'clock.
The report was concurred in by the Senate.
Mr. BELL presented a petition from the President and Secretary of the Women's Christian Temperance Union of Indiana, praying a hearing before the Senate be given Mary A. Hunt, of Boston, to show why this Legislature should enact laws requiring instruction in the nature of alcohol and its effects upon the human tissues, brain and character, given in all schools supported by public moneys, and on his motion time was granted immediately after the close of the discussion, probably 2 o'clock to-morrow afternoon. "
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time and severally referred to appropriate Committees, unless otherwise stated:
By Mr. MARVIN, by consent, [S. 167] defining the Twentieth Judicial Circuit.
By Mr. MACY [S. 168] to legalize the incorporation of Cannelton, Perry County, and each and every act of every officer of said town.
By Mr. GRAHAM [S. 169] to regulate the liability of principals and sureties upon new or other official bonds.
By Mr. RISTINE [S. 170] to create the Forty- fourth Judicial Circuit making Montgomery County a Circuit to itself.
By Mr. HENRY [S. 171] to give authority to Sheriffs to administer oaths and take affidavits, etc., in connection with the discharge of their duties.
And then came a recess till 2 o'clock.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR called the Senate to order. The hour having arrived for the
Senate to resume its sitting as in a
Mr. VOYLES had thought of expressing his views on the merits and demerits of the proposed amendment, but as the main point in this discussion has been made a legal one, he would detain the Senate but a short time in referring to the conclusions of the majority and minority reports under consideration. There is much unnecessary detail in the minority report. It will not be supposed anything is proved because much is said. The field of citing authorities has been well scanned. He regretted this legal obstacle stood in the way, because there is something always in a legal proposition that appeals so strongly to a lawyer that he can not resist its influence. But the legal obstacle stands in the way of a clear and fair presentation of the question concerning those amendments.
The Senator from Wayne [Mr. Foulke] took a perilous route in his argument,
endeavoring to divide Constitutional essentials and Constitutional non-essentials, and
then subdividing the essentials and non-essentials, making a distinction too fine for
a man of limited comprehension. There can be no reason for this attempted distinction.
It doesn't address itself to the common sense or common right to undertake to go
Mr. CAMPBELL said he was no lawyer, had no experience or ability to range the wide fields gleaned so fully and so ably by the lawyers from both sides; that he could only decide this question by the rule of practical common sense and by precedents, which he knew to exist in our own State and by the decisions to which others had called his attention. He was surprised to note the independence with which Senators had so often on this floor proclaimed themselves uninfluenced by others, and that they considered they need no advice and should in no way be governed by what others may do or have done. As for himself, he confessed that in his boyhood's days and first flush of manhood he had possibly felt some of that independence and strength which needed no advice and would brook none, but he had long since passed that age, and found that in all walks of life and in all that he had to do, he almost invariably was glad to go for advice to some precedent or some authority that he regarded as worthy to lean upon, and that he had never regarded it as reflecting upon his manhood to thus seek advice, and so in the validity of this question, in the opinion of Governor Baker, given after a careful examination, saying that he had no doubts as to the legality of the Wabash and Erie Canal amendments in the exact condition that these are, and added to this that the Assembly, after having their attention called to the the condition of the record, had concurred in the amendments with but one dissenting voice, and Governor Hendricks had approved them, declaring them duly passed and a part of the Constitution, without suggesting a question of doubt All found a precedent satisfactory to him, and gave him confidence to follow without hesitation or any feeling of having lost his dignity or his independence of manhood. He felt this all the more because the canal amendments were of vital importance, protecting in their scope millions of the State's money, and as there was no emergency calling for undue haste, he felt that the Governors and the Assembly setting the precedent had established a very formidable one, and one that he did not hesitate to follow. He occupied the floor about fifteen minutes, referring briefly to several points that had been made, and to the importance of the question under discussion.
Mr. BROWN gave a history of the state of affairs prior to the consideration of the Wabash and Erie Canal amendment, and conceded Governor Baker then took the ground that the portion of the Constitution requiring the amendments thereto entered upon the journals of the two Houses was advisory. He repeated what he said the other day: To at the question was not raised or considered in the Legislature twelve years ago. What had been read this morning by the Senator from Wayne (Mr. Foulke) from the Brevier Legislative Reports, Volume xiii, as remarks of his on that occasion is entirely true, and it is also true, as there recorded. ' that he then charged upon the Republican party dereliction of duty. He said then, and would make no appology for it now, that there was in existence a joint resolution which was authenticated by the signatures of the presiding officers of the preceding body. The decision of the Supreme Court referred to on the floor bad just been published, and he then relied upon that decision because there was no discussion and no controversy in the Legislature about that question, for everybody desired this amendment to go into the Constitution, to prevent the possibility of any Legislature assuming this debt created by the bills of 1846-47. When he said twelve years ago mat the signatures thereto authenticated thereto resolution, he made one of those grevious mistakes and grievous blunders that a boy of his age might have made, and he is not ashamed. When he has made a mistake, to stand before the Senate and the country and acknowledge it Mr. B. then proceeded to discuss the question before the Committee, declaring it to be the meaning of the Constitution that every word, line and syllable of every proposed amendment thereto shall be placed upon the journals of each House of the General Assembly, referring such amendments o the succeeding one; and until that is done no action can be taken by the succeeding General Assembly.
Mr. SPANN replied to Mr. Brown's speech, insisting there is no Senator on that side who can answer the legal arguments made on this question by the Senator from Henry [Mr. Bundy], and the Senator from Wayne [Mr. Foulke] This question has been made a political one on this floor by the Senator from Tippecanoe [Mr. Johnson], who said the Republican party forced this measure in politics. The question of prohibition never would have been before the people in the last campaign had it not beau for the vote of the Senator from Jackson and five other Democrats on this floor. He continued for some time, recounting the course of the Democratic party in the last canvass, and concluded by asserting his strong belief as a lawyer and Senator, that the only question now before the Senate is one of jurisdiction, and being a jurisdictional question as far as the proposed amendments are concerned, it is a Court of the last resort. When Courts of Record are determining a question of jurisdiction upon the record the Court will always give the benefit of the doubt to the record. He took the equitable side of this question, and equity takes him him over on the side of the people. He never will allow his vote on a technical question to override the will of the people of Indiana. When he had concluded-
On motion by Mr. BELL the Committee rose, reported progress and asked leave to sit again to-morrow at 10:30 o'clock.
The report was concurred in by the Senate.
And then the Senate adjourned.
The session was opened with prayer by Elder David Walk, pastor of the Central Christian Church of this city.
The SPEAKER directed a call of the House, which, being taken, discovered ninety-five members as present and answering to their names.
Mr. SHOCKNEY made an ineffective motion to dispense with the reading of the Clerk's minutes of yesterday's proceedings.
The SPEAKER announced the first thing in order to be the consideration of the
subject pending at the adjournment yesterday, being Mr. Brazelton's bill [H. R. 91] to
provide for the relocation of County seats, the question being on the motion to
recommit it to the
Mr. BRAZELTON said: It was stated or insinuated by the gentleman from Marion (Mr. Wilson) on yesterday, that the mover of this bill appeared before the Committee when the same was considered. I confess that I did, as I had a right to do, and every member of this Committee will bear me out in saying that I did not in any manner urgently insist or antagonize their action in the least. I take it that this motion to recommit is simply a dilatory measure only. The gentleman from Marion said that the bill repealed certain law, and I answered that the bill does, but I understand that that law was enacted for the County which I have the honor to represent. As the law now stands, if every man, woman and child in the County desired to change the location of the County seat, they could not do it. Under the present provisions it would be removed three miles out into the woods. He continued at some length in opposition to the motion to recommit.
Mr. ADAMS stated that he would not have said anything on this question had h not been called out by the remarks made by certain members yesterday while discussing the subject. He thought that if it was a fair and honest bill gentlemen ought not to object to its going back to the Committee, so that persons might appear before the Committee who represented the opposition to the bill. He said the bill was introduced on the 10th day of January, and on the 15th of January it was reported back from the Committee. I am told by gentlemen that before they knew that the bill was before the House it had come back from the Committee. I say that it is but fair and equitable that these men should be allowed to go before this Committee and present their side of the question.
Mr. MOODY desired to know who should decide a question of relocation if 65 per cent. of the inhabitants of a County can not. This Committee has had the bill under consideration once, and it had better lie on the table than be recommitted. The House ought to act upon it now.
Mr. JEWETT spoke in opposition to the motion to recommit.
Mr. GORDON spoke in opposition to the bill and favored the motion to recommit.
Mr. HEFFREN favored his motion to recommit. There is no provision in the bill to contest a selection should one be carried by fraud.
Mr. WILSON also favored the motion to recommit.
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, spoke in favor of recommittal and against the passage of the bill.
The motion to recommit was rejected by yeas,
The bill was ordered engrossed for the third reading.
Then came a recess for dinner.
Mr. JEWETT moved that the order of the day be now taken up, the same being the
several reports from the
It was so ordered and accordingly the House resolved itself into a
The several reports were then read.
Mr. McMULLEN moved that the
Mr. PATTEN moved to amend by substituting the minority report signed by Messrs. Jewett and Patten.
Mr. FRAZER moved an amendment to the amendment by substituting the report signed by Messrs. Adams, Stewart, Wiley, Wright and Frazer.
Mr. PATTEN said: I do not feel physically able to attempt to discuss this question to-day. I can neither do myself nor the question justice. Therefore, I will have to be excused from attempting any argument of this question. I felt that I am in the right on this matter, and I suppose that the gentlemen on the other side of this question fell that they likewise are in the right. All that I can do is to present this matter for discussion. I have acted under the best dictation of my conscience, and if I am wrong my report ought not to prevail, and if I am right then it ought to prevail. I have tried to be governed by the proper mind and feeling in this matter. I believe from what little I have examined into the question that the Constitution has been complied with in every step. I believe this and I have so entered my conclusion in our report. To decide whether or not these amendments have been properly referred is not in the province of any Committee. That is a question for this House exclusively. I am in favor of submitting this to the House and taking a fair and square vote upon it. Let the members of this House say whether or not these amendments are pending, and there is no Court in the world to repeal their decision.
Mr. FRAZER: Of the numerous questions which suggest themselves in the investigation of this question, nearly all can be readily settled by argument and without debate. It will be conceded by all-
Mr. F. continued his argument at some length, reading from the Constitution and citing judicial authorities.
Mr. HEFFREN said:
Mr. SPEAKER-In proceeding to discuss the question as to whether the Constitutional
amendment, known as the prohibition amendment, is properly before this General
Assembly, or I perhaps should say whether any such amendment
I will first call the attention of the House to Section 12, of Article 4, of the Constitution of Indiana. It is as follows:
"Section 12. Each House shall keep a journal of its proceedings, and publish the same. The yeas and nays, on any question, shall, at the request of any two members, be entered together with the number of the members demanding the same, on the journal; Provided, That on motion to adjourn, it shall require one-tenth or the members present to order the yeas and nays."
that upon resolutions, motions, references and all other matters that come before this House, although required to keep a journal, the yeas and nays were not entered thereon, together with the names of members, "unless two members demand it. We find by Section 18, Article 4, of our Constitution the following:
"Section 18. Every bill shall be read by sections on three several days in each House, unless, in case of emergency two-thirds of the House where such bill may be depending shall; by a vote of yeas and nays, deem it expedient to dispense with this rule; but the reading of the bill by sections, on its final passage, shall in no case be dispensed with, and the vote on the passage of every bill and joint resolution shall betaken by yeas and nays."
Neither this section nor the one first quoted requires the yeas and nays to be "entered" on the journal except demanded by two members. A vote on the passage of a bill by yeas and nays need not necessarily be placed upon the journal. There is nothing mandatory or directory requiring their entry upon the journal except at the "demand of two members," when they shall be so entered. It need not be done, so far as the Constitution is concerned, at all upon the passage of any bill or other matter. You may ask why. By the common law the presiding officer is presumed to know several things in connection with the business pertaining to the House over which he presides He is a sworn officer, and the law sup poses that every officer will do his duty. It is therefore presumed that he would allow no business transacted unless a quorum was present to act. It is presumed that he knows whether a resolution or motion has been adopted or rejected. It is also presumed that
which puts it on its passage, that in this House fifty-one members have voted for it. Yet the names of members to verify this fact may not be entered upon the journal unless demanded by two members." It is presumed that the presiding officer will not sign a bill as having passed, unless all the requirements of the Constitution have been complied with. When he signs a bill the law presumes all the necessary and proper steps in the House over which he presides to have been legally taken.
But suppose that in an action at law between John Doe and Richard Roe
Section 1. Any amendment or amendments to this Constitution may be proposed in either branch of the General Assembly; and if the same shall be agreed to by a majority of the members elected to each of the two Houses, such proposed amendment or amendments shall, with the yeas and nays thereon, be entered on their journals and referred to the General Assembly to be chosen at the next general election; and, if in the General Assembly so next chosen, such proposed amendment or amendments shall be agreed to by a majority of all members elected to each House, then it shall be the duty of the General Assembly to submit such amendment or amendments to the electors of the State, and if a majority of said electors shall ratify the same, such amendment or amendments shall become a part of the Constitution.
Sec. 2. If two or more amendments shall be submitted at the same time, they shall be submitted in such manner that the electors shall vote for or against each of such amendments separately; and while such an amendment or amendments which shall have been agreed upon by one General Assembly shall be awaiting the action of a succeding General Assembly, or of the electors, no additional amendment or amendments shall be proposed.
No one will contend but that the first section is mandatory. It is a command to the General Assembly: "And if the same shall be agreed to by a majority of the members elected to each of the two Houses, such proposed amendment or amendments shall (a direct command), with the yeas and nays thereon, be entered on their journals and referred to the General Assembly to be chosen at the next general election." Both the House and Senate journals are mere blanks, so far as the amendments proposed is concerned, nor is there any reference of such proposed amendment to the next General Assembly. But this immediately raises the question of allowing the journals of each House to be used as evidence.
each House shall keep a journal, etc. They are kept by sworn officers and are presumed to do their duty. They are public record's attested by the signatures of the proper presiding officer, and I believe are competent evidence, a;id should be searched to find out the truth, Suppose an act is properly enrolled, duly signed, by the Speaker of this House and the President of the Senate and approved by the Governor, and filed, as the law directs, in the office of the Secretary of State, we all would say that it was the law of the land. But, suppose when the journal of this House came to be examined, only fifty members voted for it, as appears by the journal, would anyone say that the bill had become a law? Most assuredly not.
In the recent Iowa case of Kochler and Lang vs. Lee, the Supreme Court of Iowa, used the following language upon the proposed amendment to the Constitution of that State, and which is identical with our own:
"The question before us is to the validity of a Constitutional amendment, and we
think there
They quote from Cooler's Constitutional Limitations as follows:
"In all that we have said on this subject we have assumed the Constitutional provisions to be mandatory. The fact Is this: That whatever Constitutional provision can be looked upon as directory merely is very likely to be treated by the Legislature as if it is devoid even of moral obligation, and to be therefore habitually disregarded. To say that a provision is directory seems with many persons to be equivalent to saying that it is not law at all. That this ought not to be so must be conceded. If it is not so we have abundant reason and good authority for saying. If, therefore, a Constitutional provision is to be in force at all it must be treated as mandatory, and if the Legislature habitually disregards it, it seems to us that there is all the more urgent necessity that the Courts should enforce it. And it also seems to us that there are few evils which can be inflicted by a strict adherence to the law so great as that which is done by the habitual disregard by any department of the Government of a plain requirement of that instrument from which it deliver authority, which ought, therefore, to be scrupulously observed and obeyed " [Cooley's Constitutional Limitations, 2 ed. 140 ]
After referring to the above, the Court, which is said to be
and to be all of one political party, and that one not of my own kind, they proceed as follows:
"We deem it sufficient to say that if there is any provision of the Constitution which should be disregarded as mandatory it is not where the Constitution provides for its own amendment otherwise than by means of a Convention called for that purpose. The powers of a Convention are of course, limited. The members thereof are the representatives of the people, called together for that purpose. The object of the provision can not be doubted or misunderstood. It is to preserve in the manner indicated the identical amendment proposed and in an authentic form, which, under the Constitution, is to come from the succeeding General Assembly. No better mode court have been adopted, when it is considered that, to be effective, the proposed amend men t must be agreed to by The succeeding General Assembly. This thought; is much strengthened by the consideration that the proposed amendment is only required to be entered on the journals of th first General Assembly which acts thereon. This distinction, to our minds, is significant, and enhances the importance of the Constitutional injunction that, the proposed amendment shall be entered on the journals of both Houses of the General Assembly which first agrees thereto.
"It is immaterial, however, whether the Constitution provides the best method for the preservation and authenticity of proposed amendments or not, for the Constitutional mode must prevail, even if it be conceded some other would have been better.
"It may be suggested that to enter or entering on the journal does not necessarily mean spreading the same at length thereon. This will be conceded, but that it may so mean must, we think, be conceded. [See Webster's Dictionary.] Various instances where the words "to enter or entered" occur in the statutes or the Constitution may no doubt be cited where they do not mean spread at length. But this is of much insignificance, for the object to be attained must be considered in determining the meaning of the word entered as used in the Constitution. The evident intention of the Constitution is that the proposed amendment shall be entered at length on the journal, or at least be so entered as to leave no reasonable doubt as to its provisions. This must be so, or the entering of the yeas and says can be as readily dispersed with as entering the resolution, and yet this is the Constitutional mode of ascertaining whether a majority of members elected to each House agreed to the amendment. [Cooley's Constitutional Limitations, 2 ed., 141.1
"When the object intended to be accomplished is considered, we think there is no doubt that it is the design and intent of the Constitution that a proposed amendment there should be so entered on the journals that it can be known by an examination of the journals precisely what it is that has been agreed on by each House of the General Assembly which first acts thereon to the end that the succeeding General Assembly may certainly know what its predecessor did. It seems to us that a simple entering on the journal of the title or object of a proposed amendment does not accomplish the intent of the Constitution, and the thought that this must be so is much strengthened when regard is had to all the provisions of the Constitution. That instrument provides that upon the final passage of the bill the yeas and nays must be taken and the same entered upon the journal. This necessitates the entering on the journal of the title page or substance of the bill to be voted n. This being so it no more than this was intended in relation to a Constitutional amendment, the provision as to entering on the journal is unnecessary and meaningless. There is no provision requiring a bill to be entered on the journal, but the Constitution does require that a proposed amendment thereto 'shall be entered' on the journals 'with the yeas and nays.' This must mean that the amendment shall be spread at length thereon, and the yeas and nays set out in the journal in full or at length. No distinction between the two can possibly be drawn. Amendments were proposed to the Constitution in the Eleventh General Assembly, some of which were agreed to, but all were spread at length on the journals. The amendment afterward ratified by the electors striking out the word 'white' where it occurred in the Constitution was among the amendments proposed at that session. These amendments were spread at length upon the journals of both Houses. Here we have a legislative construction of the Constitution which should not and can not be ignored.
"It will be observed that the Constitution does not provide in what manner the amendment shall be proposed. Whether it shall be done by a bill or joint resolution seems to have been left to the discretion of the General Assembly to determine; but, in whatever way proposed, when agreed to this provided it shall be entered on the journal "
It does seem to me that this decision is decisive of the case, and that
are not now nor can not be before this General Assembly. Some may say that Section 25 of Article 4, which reads as follows:
"Sec. 25. A majority of all the members elected to each House shall be necessary to pass every bill or joint resolution, and all bills and all joint resolutions so passed shall be signed by the presiding officers of the respective Houses."
Whether this supposed proposed amendment was by joint resolution, by concurrent
resolution or by a resolution or motion, could
for the proposed amendment. On this point, the Supreme Court of Iowa says:
"Now suppose a member of either House had, while it was in session, really proposed the amendment in question in the form it was agreed to by the electors and it had been entered at length on the journal and agreed to, and the amendment so entered bad been correctly copied and properly transmitted to the other House, entered at length on its journal, and agreed to and published, as provided by the Constitution and law, and the subsequent General Assembly had agreed thereto as required by the Constitution, and the same submitted to the electors, as was done, could it be said, it was not Constitutionally adopted because it was not enrolled, signed by the presiding officers of the two Houses, and approved by the Governor? If it can be so said, why or for what reason? Suppose the Governor had vetoed the joint resolution and returned it with his objections to the House in which it originated, and, upon being put on its passage, it had failed to receive a two-thirds majority In one or both Houses as provided in Article 3, Section 16, of the Constitution would this have been fatal to the amendment? No one will so contend. It was not essential, therefore, that the Governor should have approved the joint resolution; nor is there a statute which by implication requires that a Joint Resolution proposing to amend the Constitution shall be signed by the presiding officers of the two Houses. Such a signing therefore is not essential, and may be dispensed with. There is no provision of the Constitution or statute which requires it shall be enrolled. But there is a Constitutional injunction to say the least that it shall be entered on the journals. In a Constitutional sense the journals constitute and are the primary evidence, and the enrolling and signing, as above stated, at best are only secondary evidence, which may and can only be considered when the primary evidence has been lost or destroyed."
Is not this conclusive of the question? and can any lawyer who sits here as a Judge come to any other conclusion ?
A few words as to the decision of our own Supreme Court in Evans vs. Brown. 30 Indiana page. That case was in all respects different from this. That question was as to the validity of an act passed by the Legislature. It was duly signed by the Speaker of the House, President of the Senate, and approved by the Governor, and duly filed in the office of the Secretary of State. The journal of the House showed a quorum present at the last roll-call before the passage of the act. Forty-two members, I believe, resigned in the afternoon and handed their resignations to Governor Baker. He did not notify the House unto next day f their resignation; in the meantime the bill had been passed. There was nothing to show that a quorum was not present when the bill passed, and the presumption of law was in favor of its legality. The Court presumed the officers performed their duty irrespective of the Constitution. But the
is against that decision. The dicta of the learned Judge who rendered the opinion and for whose sound and discriminating judgment and accurate understaning of the law I have long entertained the highest respect, is dangerous and revolutionary.
I have no doubt, was he to re-examine the case, much that is mere dicta, would be omitted.
No section of the Constitution, no paragraph of the same, requires a bill to be "entered on the journals of each House together with the yeas and nays thereon " before it shall become a law, and as I have said, the yeas and nays are not commanded to be entered upon the journals, only as demanded by two members, save and except where the instrument provides for its own amendment. The distinction is marked plain between the two.
I will here cite a few authorities bearing upon the question of the journals being used as evidence, and I will again quote fully from the Iowa decision to which I have already alluded:
"A brief examination of some of the authorities may, however, be of advantage when we come to consider the beaming of the provisions of the Constitution and the statutes of this State on the question under consideration. The leading and better reasoned of the cases which hold the enrolled bill was Constitutionally passed by the General Assmebly, or the contents of the bill, are: The People vs. Devlin, 33 N. Y.; Sherman vs. Story, 30 Cal., 254; Pabord vs. Young, 32 N.J., 29; Pacific Railroad Company vs. the Governor, 23 Mo., 353; Evans, Auditor of State, vs. Brown, 30 Ind., 514.
"These cases are based on substantially the same reasons, which are stated in the New York case as follows: 'The journals are not made evidence by the Constitution; they are not made so by the statutes; they were never made so at common law.'
"In the New Jersey case it is said: 'They [the journals] are not required to be tested in any way whatever. There is required not a single guarantee as to their accuracy or truth. No one need vouch for them, and it is not enjoined that they should be either approved, copied or recorded.'"
"In addition to the foregoing counsel for the appellant have cited the State of Nevada vs. Swift, 10 Nev., 176; Eld. vs. Gorham 20 Conn., 7; Green vs. Weller, 32 Miss., 650; Division of Howard County, 15 Kan. 394; Annapolis vs. Howard, 32 Md., 471; Clara vs. The State, 5 Iowa, 509; and Duncombe vs. Prindle, 12 lb. 1.
"All that was determined in relation to the question under consideration in the two
last named cases was that, where there is a conflict between the printed act or
statute and the enrolled act filed in the office of the Secretary of State, the
latter is the ultimate proof of the true expression of the legislative will. Whether
the journals were competent evidence or their effect was considered in neither case.
On the other hand, omitting reference to the earlier New York, Missouri and Indiana
cases, there may be cited as sustaining the rule laid down by Cooley the following:
Spangler vs. Jacoby, 14 111., 297; The People vs. Stame, 35 ib., 121; Miller vs
Martin, 70 ib., 659: Burr vs. Ross, 19 Ark., 250; The State vs. Poatt, 2
I have not time nor shall I weary the patience of this House by even attempting an abstract of all these cases. I wish to quote
because he is a text writer of great authority and for years Chief Justice, I believe, of the Supreme Court of Michigan. He says:
"But courts tread on very dangerous ground when they venture to apply rules which distinguish directory and mandatory statutes to the provisions of the Constitution. Constitutions do not usually undertake to prescribe mere rules of proceeding, except when such rules are looked upon as essential to the thing to be done; and they must then be regarded as limitations upon the power to be exercised. It is the province of an instrument of this solid and permanent character to establish these fundamental maxims and fix those unvarying rules by which all Departments of the Government must at all times shape their conduct; and if it descences to prescribing mere rules of order in unessential matters, it is lowering the proper dignity of such an instrument and usurping the proper province of ordinary legislation. We are not, therefore, to expect to find in a Constitution provisions which the people, in adopting it, have no regard as of high importance and worthy to be embraced in an instrument which for a time, at least, is to control alike the Government and the governed, and to form a standard by which is to be measured the power which can be exercised as well by the delegates as by the sovereign people themselves. If directions are given respecting the times and modes of proceeding in which such a power should be exercised, there is at least a strong presumption that the people designed it should be exercised in that time and mode only; and we impute to the people a want of due appreciation of the purpose and proper province of such an instrument, when we infer that such directions are given to any other end, especially when, as has already been said, it is but fair to presume that the people in their Constitution have expressed themselves in careful and measured terms, corresponding with the immense importance of the power delegated, and with a view to leave as little as possible to implication."
Here I might close my argument and submit this case to
of this House, but I will refer to few of the many cases with which our law reports abound.
In People vs. Sterne, 35 Ill., 12, the validity of an act was called in question upon the grounds that the journals were wholly silent in regard to the bill; the law was held to be a nullity. The Constitution required the proceedings to be entered on the journals, and it had not been done.
In Collier vs. Friesson, 24 Alabama, 108, Goldthwaite, Judge, in speaking for the Court said: "We entertain no doubt that to change the Constitution in any other mode than by a convention, every requisition which is demanded by the instrument itself must be observed, and omission of any one is fatal to the amendment. The Constitution is the supreme and paramount law. The mode by which amendments are to be made under it is clearly defined. It has been said that certain acts are to be done, certain requisitions are to be observed before a change can be effected, but to what purpose are these acts required, or their regulations enjoined, if the Legislature or any other department oft the Government can dispense with them? To do so would violate the instrument which they are sworn to support, and every principle of public law and sound Constitutional policy requires hte Court to pronounce against every amendment which is shown not to have been made in accordance with the rules prescribed by the fundamental law."
This body must judge for itself whether there are any amendments pro nosed to the organic law "awaiting its action," and must therefore resort to that organic law to see if its provisions have been obeyed in preparing the proposed amendments. If they have not been obeyed, the whole is null and void. The journals must show that the same amendment was proposed and voted on in each House of the General Assembly, and that said proposed amendment received
in each House, and that the same identical proposed amendment passed each House by a majority of all, and that the same, together with the yeas and nays, were recorded upon the journals of both Houses find that they were referred to this General Assembly.
Will some member take the House journal of 1881 and show me the supposed proposed amendment? Will he show it to me on the Senate journal? Will he show me where the amendment proposed, together with the yeas and nays thereon, was referred to this General Assembly? It can not be done. They are not there.
The words "shall be entered" is a direct and positive command, and is a mandatory order that can not be evaded. I care not what other legislators or other Legislatures have done, this question was not then raised; this is its first appearance, and we must deal with it as the supreme law commands and in no other way. One may say that it is directory. If so, whom does it direct? It directs us who have sworn before our God to support and obey it. Its direction is a command to our hearts, our consciences and to our judgments. We dare not disobey its positive instructions or its positive directions.
I have spoken of this in a legal point of view. It, Is nor for me to discuss in this argument the question of prohibition. Other times will do for that. I appeal to every member on this floor to lay aside partisan feeling and judge of this matter as men who sit upon the Bench deciding questions of law. Let not questions of expediency or of policy creep in to distract your mind from the legal question. Rise above party utterance and party bigotry, above party policy and party trickery, and solve this problem as becomes honest legislators and we shall do but our duty.
will beat in vain against our coats of mail if we but judge aright. But whatever we do let us preserve untarnished that Constitution we have so solemnly promised to obey and support. Fanaticism may for a time raise a clamor about our ears, but it will howl in vain. The people of Indiana, or a large majority at least, are not bigots. Let us stand as brave men with strong arms and stout hearts and breast the storm that would shiver our Constitution. Let us never forget its teachings nor its lessons. Let us be true and mindful of everything it contains, and follow its directions in all things upon which it speaks. Let us but do our duty and trust to God for the consequences.
Mr. Speaker, I have expressed my views upon this great question, great in its
inception, great in its growth and great at its maturity. It is a question which
arouses passion, incites envy, beget jealousies and rivalries, distracts
neighborhoods and communities. It is a Pandora's box of evils, and even were it a
thousand fold worse than it is, and the requirements of the Constitution had been
followed, I should have
Mr. HUSTON said: We have had this matter discussed from a legal standpoint, but I propose to discuss it from the standpoint of a citizen of Indiana. It is not for lawyers alone to decide whether or not this question is properly entered, but the people of the State will take this matter in their own hands and decide. Why was this amendment introduced? It was because 46,000 voters of the State requested it that it was introduced. It seems to me, Mr. Chairman, that this matter has been fully discussed. The press throughout the State, for the last three or four weeks, has been teeming with the considerition of these resolutions. I do not suppose that any argument could change one vote. I think that every member has decided how he will vote. I say, however, that this is not a party question, and that it was not introduced as a party question.
On motion, the Committee rose, reported progress and asked leave to sit again.
The report was concurred in by the House and then the House adjourned.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR commanded order and attention while prayer was offered by Rev. W. H. Hay.
On motion by Mr. HUTCHINSON, the reading of the journal of yesterday was dispensed with.
Petitions praying for a submission of the Constitutional prohibition amendment at a
special election were presented and referred to the
Mr. McINTOSH presented a petition from his District against, changing the Judicial Circuit.
Mr. RISTINE presented a petition in favor of his Montgomery County Court. These petitions were referred to the appropriate Committees.
Numerous reports from Committees were submitted and placed on the files for future action.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR announced the special order for mis hour-10:30 o'clock-being
the consideration of the resolution and Committee reports thereon concerning the
status of the proposed prohibition amendment to the Constitution, by the Senate as in
The Senate thereupon resolved itself into a
Mr. SMITH, of Delaware, said: I do not propose to make an extended legal argument as to whether the amendments are properly before us or not; that has been done by others. Nor do I propose in this discussion to make an exhaustive research among the laws and decisions of Iowa and Kansas, or any other States, to learn what we should do in the amendment of our Constitution. Nor do I propose to ask foreign authorities to determine for us whether the amendments are properly before this Legislature or not. We are not governed by me laws and customs of those States They settle their Constitutional questions in accordance with their awn rules and precedents. We should do the same. Their Constitutions and requirements for amendments are different from ours, and those constructions that would be applicable and appropriate to them would not be to us. We can get all the information that is necessary in the settlement of this vexed question by applying to our Court decisions and Legislative records. Although our Supreme Court has never rendered an opinion directly defining what is necessary in a Constitutional record, yet its decision in 30 Indiana and other cases, by implication, gives to the pending amendments all she record that is essential for them to have. There is not a decision of a Court or a law anywhere in our State that would invalidate them. There is not an amendment to the Constitution that has not the same record, declared deficient and fatal in the present amendments by Democratic Senators, and yet that they are all a legal part of the Constitution has never been questioned. Our Supreme Court has never been applied to by importunate creditors, who imagined they had been wronged by the adoption of these various amendments, to declare them void. The State has moved quietly along in her simple grandeur for thirty years, wholly unconscious of this legislative storm that threatens to dismantle her I ask Democratic Senators to pause and consider well the step they are taking, for bad precedents are fixed curses. In addition to the decision of the Supreme Court, we have the journals of the two Houses, both attesting to the the passage of the joint resolution. In addition to that we have it in its enrolled form, signed by the officers of the two Houses and filed in the office of the Secretary of State, the depository of the laws of the State, by the Governor It does seem to me, from the above facts, which have always been regarded as sufficient, that the object of the Constitution in having the proceedings spread upon the journals is fully met.
Mr. MAY preferred to vote against the amendments on their passage, thus reflecting
the views of his people. But it happens a question of jurisdiction has arisen-a legal
proposition that must be solved by legal rules and legal practice. He could not come
to the conclusion that these amendments are properly before this General Assembly. No
lawyer will say we should go out- side of the Constitution [Article 16, Sections 1 and
Mr. DUNCAN regarded this as a question of purely Constitutional law, and can not and should not be made a proper subject of party caucus. No caucus can bind his judgment and conscience up in a subject of Constitutional law. The Senator from Wayne (Mr. Foulke) dropped into a political threat unworthy the dignified legal argument he made. The Constitution is paramount to the Legislature, and its acts must be controlled by that instrument. The journals of the two Houses are made the Constitutional depository for proposed amendments to the Constitution clearly contemplating if a proposed amendment fail that only a brief entry need be made, but if agreed to it must be entered with the yeas and nays thereon and referred to the next General Assembly. The rule of construction of stymies should also apply here. The ratification of the amendment now under consideration would prove a nullity and be overthrown by the Courts. Viewing it as a partisan, its submission at the general election next year would prove beneficial to the party with which he acted: but being sworn to support the sixteenth article as well as the entire instrument, he could not conscientiously favor the minority report. He read from manuscript, and when he concluded-
On motion by Mr. BELL the Committee rose, reported progress and asked leave to sit again at l:45 o'clock.
The Senate concurred in the report of the Committee.
The Senate then adjourned till 1:45 o'clock, p. m.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR called the Senate to order.
On motion by Mr. BELL the Senate resumed its sittings as in
Mr. SAYRE believed this to be the first time in the history of the Democracy of Indiana when they have been driven to Republican Iowa for succor, and the only time when Republicans are compelled to cite almost entirely Democratic authority and Democratic precedents in favor of the adoption of the minority report. He was understood to say that in construing the Constitution, it is not always to be done according to the letter. Every lawyer who reads the Constitution for himself does so by the aid of certain rules of construction, because of the infirmity of human nature and our language, which become to him part and parcel of the Constitution itself. The spirit of the instrument itself is to be determined by many circumstances. In this case, if the word "entered" does not mean to spread at length upon the journal, then it is the duty of every Senator, if he can find in the dictionary or in the common acceptation of the meaning of the word, any meaning that will permit another action for the purpose of accomplishing this result, it is his sworn duty lo give it that meaning and let the progress of these amendments go on. Another rule which ought to be applied in determining questions of this character is to look at precedents. The Wabash and Erie Canal precedent is one that ought to be binding upon the consciences and oaths of members of this General Assembly. Referring to the plea of strict constructionists, he declared that no journals of any General Assembly have ever yet been published according to the strict construction of the Constitutional provision, that "each House shall keep a journal of its proceedings and publish the same."
Mr VAN VORHIS said: I should not have troubled this Committee with my views had I not believed it robe a duty The burden imposed by my convictions of duty is not a Lght one, and the road it compels me to travel is not likely to lead to preferment. It is not always easy to sink every personal consideration, and in the face of misconception, misrepresentation and personal abuse and in opposition to the wishes of many party and personal friends be guided alone by convictions of right. The most difficult thing to answer is the sneer of those who effect contempt for anything like convictions, and who desiring to banish all moral questions from the political arena, do not trouble themselves to inquire whether even ordinary moral conduct remains. So far as I know, with one exception I urn, alone in my party on this floor in the position I have taken on this question. But, sir, if my late colleague [Mr. Chapman] had been permitted to remain with us, I know where he would have stood with a courage that followed duty in the face of fire and flame and leaden storms into the very jaws of death. He would not have been dismayed by party clamor, but would have stood for what he believed to be right though he stood alone. Among the last words he addressed to the public upon this subject were these:
"Every member is entitled to exercise the divine attribute of conscience, and has a right, and it is his duty, not to follow any instructions from his constituents which, in his judgment, require him to disregard the Constitution."
Is there any man on this floor who in sober thoughtfulness, dare face his own conscience and say he was not right? The meaning of the word instruct, as taken from Webster, is "to communicate knowledge to, to teach; to form by precept; to educate; to inform " The considerations mentioned (referring to arguments preceding) and this meaning of the word ought to be sufficient, to convince any thoughtful man that no such thing as "authoritative instructions," "mandates issued," was ever dreamed of by the Convention when Section 76 of the Bill of Rights was adopted.
The fact is, we stand face to face with a duty imposed upon us by the Constitution, and individual member must, from necessity, decide for himself the bounds of that duty. There is no other tribunal to which he can apply except his own judgment. The highest and only instructions of which I have any knowledge is the Constitution; and that Constitution, according to the convictions of my best judgment, makes it my duty to decide according to the best light I have the questions before us.
I have received no other instructions, and if I had they could not absolve me from my duty to obey the Constitution.
This is my conclusion, and I shall act in accordance with it when called upon to vote upon the question contained in these reports, or any one or all the proposed amendments if the judgment of this Committee and the Senate shall see that they are now properly before the this General Assembly.
In discussing this resolution I desire to say that I do so as one most earnestly interested in the temperance cause. I protest against any argument that assumes that opposition in this resolution means opposition to temperance reform.
I know, sir there are persons who, believing no way to exist by which temperance
reform can be brought about except the method proposed in this resolution, do not seem
to have toleration sufficient to en able them to conceive how any man can be opposed,
to it and be sincere, and they are
The Senator from Vigo and myself are the only members of the Republican side of the Senate who voted against this resolution in the last Senate. I do not know how it has been with the Senator, but I have had some very unpleasant things said to me and about me on account of that vote and subsequent expressions of my views, by a few people who somehow have not been able to realize that it is within the bounds of possibility that their ideas of the proper method of furthering the interests of temperance reform may not correct.
There are some people who, from the very poverty of their ideas, must answer an argument by misrepresentation, personal abuse or slander, or say nothing at all. Such individuals are prone to attach themselves to any moral reform that has attracted public attention. They try, by unusual zeal, to put themselves in the lead. They are to be known by the vehemence with which they denounce any one who differs from them in regard to methods; and in this they never distinguish between friend and foe.
They are zealous, but not "according to knowledge;" sincere, but mistake sincerity for wisdom; honest, maybe, but if so belonging to that class of whom Tupper says:
Much of unconscious evil is done
By the honest wrestler for
truth.
On motion by Mr. GRAHAM the Committee arose, reported progress, and asked leave to sit again Monday at 2 o'clock, p.m.
The report was concurred in by the Senate.
The Senate adjourned till Monday at half past 10 o'clock.
The House was opened with prayer by Rev. Rufus D Black.
On motion by Mr. SHIVELY the reading of the Clerk's minutes of yesterday's proceedings was dispensed with.
Mr. SMITH, of Tippecanoe, moved that when the House adjourn to-day it be until 2 o'clock Monday.
Mr. WILEY moved to amend by saying 10 o'clock on Monday. The yeas and nays being demanded the vote resulted yeas, 44; nays, 49; so the motion to amend was rejected.
Mr. HOWLAND made an ineffectual motion to amend by saying until 10 o'clock to-morrow.
The question being on the original motion, the yeas and nays were demanded by Mr.
Jewett and Mr. Wilson, of Kosciusko, and being ordered and taken, resulted yeas.
So the House agreed to adjourn from to-day till Monday at 2 p, m.
The SPEAKER announced the special order for the hour, the resolution of respect on the death of the Hon. Henry C. Meredith, late Representative, from Wayne County.
On motion by Mr. MERING the consideration of the resolution was deferred until Tuesday, January 30, at 3 p m.
Mr. BRYANT, by consent, introduced a bill [H. B. 360] to define the Twentieth and creating the Forty-third Judicial Circuit, which, was passed the second reading.
On motion by Mr. JEWETT the House then resolved itself into a
Mr. STEWART said he did not intend to detain the House at any length by discussing the question under consideration. As a member of the Committee it will be expected that I say something on the question. It has been under discussion by members on this floor and by the people of the State for many months. As Representatives we are each to discharge our duty in this matter in the light in which we may discern the question of the legality of the pending amendments and believing as I do that every member of this House has made up bis mind on the question, and that the conviction Is firmly fixed, I do not feel called upon to debate the question at length. In my opinion, if the Senate had on yesterday reached a final vote and the House had done the same the result would not have been any different from what it will be when the final vote is taken. I can better serve my constituents by voting correctly on this question than by consuming the valuable time of the House in useless debate. It is a question, however, that each member must settle for himself, and I will patiently hear any member who feels called upon to express himself in regard to the legality of the pending amendments. The people are much more interested in how we shall vote than they are in what we shall say before we vote. That certain amendments to the Constitution were proposed and received a majority of the votes of members elected to each of the two Houses of the last General Assembly; of this there is no doubt, and that an exact copy of these amendments can be procured there is no doubt. I think the proper entery has been made on the journal. The object of entering the resolutions on the journal in that they may be identified. There is no pretense such that the identical resolution can be offered to the General Assembly. The public is as well informed of the identity of these resolutions as though they had been entered in on the journals with every "i" dotted and every "t" crossed. It is not dangerous to submit any question to the people. In this matter we enact no law, we simply prepare the way for the legal voters of the State to determine whether or not they desire certain amendments to the Constitution. I believe, as a lawyer, that the amendments can be legally submitted to the people, and of right ought to be so submitted.
Mr. MOODY said: This is a deliberative body. It is not a caucus nor a political
Convention It exercises the highest power and occupies the most responsible position
that it is possible to confer upon man. It is one of the results of a great experiment
that was begun upon this continent over a century ago, under circumstances that
astonished the civilized world. We stand here to-day as a great inquest upon every
fundamental element which carried into practice gave us this Government. We have no
governments in this country except the law. We have no law except that made under
prescribed forms. The first prescribed form is the Constitution, and our Constitution
is the result of the deliberative judgment of the representatives of the people
assembled in Convention over fifty years ago. Thirty years ago a Convention was called
and gave us our present Constitution. The first obligation taken at the bar of this
House by every member thereto is to support the Constitution. This support means more
than tacit assent thereto. It means more than mere
The Committee rose, reported progress and asked leave to sit again at 2 o'clock.
The report was concurred in by the House.
The House took a recess for dinner.
The House reassembled at 2 o'clock, and immediately resolved itself into a
Mr. MOODY (continuing his speech) said: The present Constitution requires that "if such proposed amendment be agreed to, it shall be entered upon the journal." Looking over the journals, the proposed amendments are not to be found there. No entry of them is to be found. The fact that they are not to be found there entered is prima facie evidence that they were not agreed to. The only evidence of their passage provided for-namely, their entry on the journal-is not found. Mr. Moody continued at some length, citing authorities, reading from the Constitution, etc.
Mr. WILEY said: I have no desire in the decision of this question other than to do my duty under the Constitution as I understand it and voice the will of the people, whose servant I am. The question under consideration is not free from doubt. If it were free from doubt we would not be discussing it. It seems to me that my duty is marked out very plain. I would be the last person who would undertake to amend or change the original law of the land did I believe that the essential steps were not constitutionally taken. In a Government like ours the people are the arbiters of all power. I am glad that I live in a country where the people can speak and the voice of the people shall be the sovereign law. The question is: Are there any amendments which were proposed in the last General Assembly and presented to this General Assembly for our consideration? I will admit that different tribunals in different States have made different decisions on questions similar to the one we are now discussing. The case in Iowa which that Supreme Court recently decided, was not similar to that in Indiana. The journals of the two Houses of the Iowa Legislature do not show that the amendments passed the two Houses of one General Assembly, and hence the Courts held that the next General Assembly could not assume jurisdiction over the same. If that was the case in Indiana, it would be very different with us. But the journals of the two Houses of the Fifty-second General Assembly show that the amendments did not pass the two Houses two years ago. This was not the case in Iowa, and hence the Court held that the subsequent Legislature could not take jurisdiction of the question. The journal is only to keep a record of the action of the House. No gentleman will attempt to say that all the proceedings must be spread at length upon the journals. There is another fact. Bills and resolutions must be numbered; no two bills or resolutions can have the same number. I want to say to the gentlemen here to-day that every bill and resolution passed two years ago can be traced by any member of this HOuse, and there is no doubt about it. I find by referring to the journal that four joint resolutions were passed by the last General Assembly. In the Senate there were two, and in the House I find that on page 1,016 of the journal the gentleman from Fayette [Mr. Huston] introduced House joint resolution number seven. I find that by tracing it through the journal that it was properly acted upon by the House, and that the Clerk informed the Senate of the passage of the resolution. I find by reference to the Senate journal it was reported to the Senate, and that it passed that body, receiving a majority of the votes of the members; that it was returned to this House, where it received a majority of the votes of the members of this House on its final passage, and that the same was properly signed by the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate. I turn to the published acts of the Assembly of 1881, and I find there certain laws and certain joint resolutions that were agreed to by that General Assembly and among them is House joint resolution number seven. M. W. continued at some length.
Mr. Speaker BYNUM said: I trust that the members of this House will pardon me for
violating those rules which under proper consideration might have required me to
remain silent. I do not know that I would have violated those rules had it not been
that the House resolved itself into a
What led to the formation of the Constitution of 1852? Under the Constitution of
1816 there was no clause providing for its own amendment. And members well know that
this provision was the most important that was proposed in that Convention. Several
propositions were proposed, but it was decided that this was the safest manner
proposed for the amendment of the Constitution. The father of that provision was
Robert Dale Owe[n?] who was one of the most energetic and active members of the
Convention. I am not here to dispute the right of the people to change their form of
government, but I am here to say the people of a sovereign State have no right to
change their organic law except in the manner laid down in the Constitution. The
question is simply narrowed down as to how the provisions of the Constitution are
construed. Gentlemen do not claim that they found the resolution itself on the
journal, but they found a description of a resolution corresponding in number to the
resolution No. 7 . The word "entered" means to go into. We have heard that this
question has been passed upon by two Governors; that it was passed upon in the case of
the Wabash and Erie Canal, and we all respect the decisions of these Governors, but
their decisions are of little weight in comparison with the decisions of the Supreme
Court of two States. Their decisions are not binding upon this Legislature. In order
to fin d decisions that are binding we should go
On motion by Mr. Shively, the Committee rose, reported progress, and asked leave to sit again at 2 o'clock Monday.
Then the House adjourned, under an older adopted this forenoon, till-Monday at 2 o'clock p. m.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR commanded order and announced prayers. Senators standing.
Mr. WILLAKD moved to dispense with the reading of the Secretary's minutes of Saturday's proceedings.
Mr. BROWN and Mr. BUNDAY objecting-the journal has been read but once this session.
Mr. WILLARD withdrew his motion.
The journal was lead and approved.
Petitions praying for the submission at a special election, of a Constitutional
amendment prohibiting the manufacture or sale of intoxicating liquors as a beverage,
were presented by Messrs. Benz, Bichowsky, Bundy, Ernest, Faulkner, Fleming, Fletcher,
Foulk, Graham, Henry, Hoover, Lindley, Richardson, Sayer, Smith of Delaware, White,
Willard and Yancey. All of which were referred to the
Mr. FLETCHER presented a remonstrance against the repeal of the State Board of Health
act. Which was referred to the
Mr. CAMPBELL presented the following:
DEAR SIR-We had supposed when Mr. Winterbotham published
his notice of contest of Major Calkins' election as Representative to Congress
from this District that we should have the opportunity to prove before Congress
the falsity of his charges against us. But as he has abandoned that contest and
contented himself with denouncing us before the body of which you are a member,
we meet him there.
Please state to the Senate for us that any and all charges that we have terrorized, or bulldozed, as the phrase is, or intimidated any of our workmen into voting for or against anybody at any election. National, State or municipal, are malignant falsehoods. In this denial we include all statements that we have threatened dismissal from our works to any one on account of his political course; that we hate paid any one in any way for his vote, or that we have prevented the free exercise of the suffrage of any of our twenty-two hundred employes.
We will add that, like American citizens generally, our views on National and State questions have been freely and frankly expressed, and will continue to be so expressed-a right, we suppose, our falsifier claims for himself-but the charge he makes against us of intimidating our workmen, or any other citizens, to compel them to vote as we do, is a wicked and groundless calumny and insulting to the freemen who work for us and vote as independently as we do.
We ask therefore, that a Select Committee of five fair-minded and impartial Senators be appointed by your presiding officer, the Lieutenant Governor, a majority of whom shall be Democrats, to visit our works, and we pledge that they shall be given the largest liberty to probe this matter to the fullest extent.
Mr. CAMPBELL said: I presume that this petition will properly be referred to the
If it should be shown that after the election hundreds of dollars were paid or offered as the purchase price of false affidavits, I want that fact reported, and by whom and when all the facts are shown honestly, candidly and thoroughly, I want to sit here with the Senators upon this floor, forgetting that we are Democrats and Republicans, forgetting for the time that we are friends to aught else but our great Commonwealth, and remembering that the elective franchise is our great bulwark of safety, and must be shielded from every weakening influence, whether it be armed foe, autocratic employer or monied demagogue, and in the light of truth and love of right devise the best means for the protection of all and against all.
Mr. BROWN stated the character of the information he had received in support of the
statement he made on the floor some time ago, to be that the proprietors of these
manufacturing establishments had collected their employes together in groups or bands
of from ten to thirty and had marched them to the polls to vote such tickets as their
bosses provided for them. He had seen and read a large package of such affidavits. It
had been a matter stated in the public press throughout the State, and the Senator
from St. Joseph [Mr. Campbell] will not deny that the gates of these establishments
were shut to any Democratic Committee or to any Democratic conveyance to everybody
except Republican agents, but the conveyances of these establishments were famished in
charge of those men. He doubted if the Senator will deny that for he had seen it sworn
to more than twenty times. He did not believe that there was a particle of doubt but
that fraud and crime enough could be traced to Mr. Calkins or agents to show his
election was procured by bribery and fraud. Even that would not seat Mr. Winterbotham,
who would have to run the race over again, who was too old to engage in such a contest
again, and because abandoning the contest is now hunted down by poltroons with not
one-tenth the brains of that good old citizen. He hoped the
On motion by Mr SPANN the motion to refer to the Committee on Elections was amended by empowering the Committee to send for persons and papers necessary to a full investigation of the matter.
The motion to refer, as amended, was agreed to.
The House concurrent resolutions in relation to pensioning soldiers of the late War according to injuries received in the service and not according to rank, instructing and requesting Indiana Congressmen to favor such a law, coming up in regular order, on motion by Mr. Foulke the Senate concurred therein.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time and severally referred to appropriate Committees, unless otherwise stated:
By Mr. YOUCHE a bill [S. 172] defining the Thirty-first and Thirty-ninth Judicial Circuits of Indiana, [Lake, Porter and Starke to constitute the Thirty-first, and Carroll, White and Pulaski to constitute the Thirty-ninth Judicial Circuit.]
By Mr. VOYLES [S. 173] supplemental to the fee and salary act of March 31, 1879, [making it unlawful to charge fees not authorized by law, plainly specified, nor for services not actually rendered; to stop and punish the charging of constructive fees. It makes no change in the present scale of fees, and does not attempt the grading of salaries, but provides for the removal of officers who have offended by charging constructive fees or been guilty of dishonesty in the discharge of their duty, the County Commissioners being power to fill the vacancies caused by such removals.]
On motion of Mr. GRAHAM 150 copies of the bill were ordered printed.
By Mr. COMPTON [
By Mr. FAULKNER [S. 175] to require the Treasurer of State to make quarterly statements to the Auditor of State, and account for interest received by him for deposit. [Requiring the Treasurer of State to account quarterly to the Auditor of State for all interest received or deposits of State money in banks or elsewhere, under penalty of a fine of $1,000 for failure to do so.]
By Mr. FLETCHER [S. 176] to regulate the sale of medicines and poisons in the State
of Indiana. [A Board of Pharmacy to be created, to consist of five, vacancies to be
filled by the Governor. Terms of office-One, two, three and four years from the first
election. To examine applicants for registration, issue certificates to pharmacists or
assistant pharmacists to dispense drugs and
By Mr. MAY [S. 177] to authorize Judges of the Circuit Court to appoint Master Commissioners, and repealing all laws in relation thereto. [To perform the duties heretofore required of Masters in Chancery.]
By Mr. McCULLOUGH [S. 178] supplementary to the act of February 16, 1852, to establish public libraries. [Trustees may request the town authorities to assess a tax to support and replenish any library of the value of $750 and over, not exceeding three-fourths of a mill on the $100 valuation.]
Then came a recess for dinner.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR took the chair and announced the special order to be the
consideration of the resolution and reports from the
Thereupon the Senate resolved itself into a
Mr. RISTINE contended that the enrolled resolution is the best evidence of what was done by the last General Assembly, and being such, furnishes all, and more than an entry on the journals could supply. In 1872 the Legislature found an amendment to the Constitution in the same condition as the present, except there was no political bias or prejudice to warp the judgment, and under such circumstances the amendment was passed by the vote of every member of each House, save one. The action then taken upon this legal question when it was new in this State, and when it received close attention, was the same as that adopted by the Supreme Court of Kansas and in accord with the long list of authorities which have been cited. That amendment was ratified by the people and is to-day a part of our Constitution, and by no one has it ever been called into question. What higher authority can there be than this?-the method which has heretofore obtained in amending the Constitution.
Mr. MARVIN should vote for the minority report for the reason if the joint resolution No. 7 is not before the Senate properly, it ought to be. He knew that two years ago it was reported from the House to the Senate; that it passed this Senate by 26 votes, and that it is now upon the statute books. He should not, by his vote, allow the neglect of employes of the Senate, ignorantly or intentionally, to deprive his constituency of that which they want. He should vote for the minority report for the reason that 3,000 or 4,000 voters of his District have petitioned for an amendment to the Constitution that shall prohibit the manufacture or sale of ardent spirits as a beverage. The place of a representative of the people is a very sacred trust. This is a representative Government, and representing 12,000 votes he held it makes no difference what his ideas or his desires of a law or proposition are, if his people desired a law it is his duty to vote for it. He is a Democrat and believes in the great Democratic principle that the representative should vote the will of his constituency for those measure which bring the greatest good to the greatest number, and that is another reason why he should vote for this amendment and if an opportunity offers he would vote to submit to the people for ratification at the next general election.
Mr. McCLURE was very sorry that these proposed amendments are not found correctly
spread upon the journals of the two Houses according to the requirements of the
Constitution. Though standing to-day as he did two years ago in the other branch of
the General Assembly, opposed to these Constitutional amendments, he had listened with
interested to the arguments of Senators, and had been greatly edified by the legal
disquisitions. The question upon which the decision of this subject hinges is on the
rendition or definition of the word "shall" in the Constitution. In our simplicity in
the use of the English language, when we who have heretofore engaged in legislation,
employed or used the word "shall" in the laws, we consider that term imperative,
obligatory, etc., etc. Endeavoring to sit as a Juror, having a part in the decision of
this question, his present convictions are that giving a true construction to the
Constitution, these amendments are not properly before the Legislature, and though
open to conviction even to the last words said on this subject, he expected to support
the majority report of the
Mr. HENRY'S excuse for saying anything upon this question was its importance, attracting as it does most earnest attention from all parts of the State, a question fraught with great interest not only upon the immediate point involved, but upon the effect it will have hereafter in this State, upon what shall constitute a sufficient transaction as to the mode and manner of submitting Constitutional amendments. He intended to give his views in a few words. The Constitutional provision of Article 15, Sections 1 and 2 is directory and not mandatory. The only other provision of the kind in the Constitution is where it requires when a bill is vetoed that the objections of the Governor shall be entered at large upon the journals. There is not much of a difference between the two, but the difference is significant. The same question being discussed now was presented to the Legislature in 1872. That was no fool Legislature. An examination of the journals and the Brevier Reports will show the question was fully, fairly and candidly discussed and decided according to law: and it is scarcely worth while to discuss that proposition much longer. From all over the State of Indiana there have come up petitions from over 42,900 voters asking that these amendments be submitted to a vote of the people, and not only that but that they shall be submitted at a special election.
Mr. McINTOSH said at the time he was nominated to represent the Counties of Greene and Davies in the Senate he promised, at the request of Democratic friends, that he would vote to agree to the Constitutional amendments. He repelled the insinuation that an effort has been made by Democratic Senators, either in or out of caucus, to control the Democratic vote in the Senate. As far as the legal question is concerned, the lawyers on both sides of the Senate stand as they do upon the main question-a singular commentary upon the judgment and conscience of Senators. Every Senator who believes this amendment is not legally before this Legislature didn't want the amendment passed, and every Senator who says, by supporting the minority report, that he believes this proposition is before the Legislature is in favor of the passage of the Constitutional amendments. He proposed to give the doubt in favor of the people upon this proposition. He read from the Brevier Reports, volume 20, what his able and honorable predecessor said upon this very proposition two years ago, and he should follow him.
Mr. BELL said: There is a plain duty before us to be performed. How shall we do it?
The Constitution of the State of Indiana defines our power-it defines our duty. By
virtue of that instrument we are here, and by virtue of that instrument alone. We have
neither a legal nor moral right to disregard its plain provisions. I want to say in
the outset that I am glad I belong to that portion of the people and to that school of
politicians who believe in a strict construction of all Constitutional provisions. In
this sort of construction and in this position alone is safety. By
There have been some strange positions taken here by lawyers-startling positions to
me because destructive of all those principles which underlie Constitutional
government I regard all Constitutional provisions in the nature of all limitations and
restrictions, limiting and not conferring enlarged powers. I submit to lawyers if that
be not the correct rule; if that is not the theory of the Constitutional government?
Then I have said if there be no room for construction there is no office for
construction to perform. Will you allow me to call attention to authority on that
subject. Authorities in this line seem strangely to have escaped the command of my
brethren on the other side. An author, known and revered wherever the common law
system is enforced and whereever the English language is spoken or read, a profound
jurist, a learned lawyer and a pure man, one whose words have great weight in every
tribunal where they are quoted; a life-long Republican, though not a partisan; one
whose views and judgment can not be said to be warped by politics or prejudice. I
refer to Judge Cooley, of Michigan, at whose feet I have sat and drank from the
never-failing fountain of learning that flowed from his lips and mind. I read from
Cooley' Constitutional Limitations, page 68. And I want to call especial attention of
some of my Democratic brethren to this, who seem to think that because of pledges
given when this question was not before them and their constituency, they may
disregard some questions as important
Now, what does our Constitution say? It says proposed amendments shall be entered on the journals of the two Houses, and the yeas and nays shall be entered, and they shall be referred to a succeeding General Assembly. Is there room for construction here? Can there be any? Let me read from another eminent writer on Constitutional law. I read from Segwick on Constitutions, 377. Also first Peters, 46, 64 Reports of the Supreme Court of the United States. As I have said Constitutional provisions are restricting and limiting. We must regard a Constitution as having been framed in careful and measured terms and guarded words. I am going to talk after awhile about statutes mandatory and the rules that govern their construction, but I will show that such a rule will not apply to the construction of a Constitution. The reason is apparent. Statutes are enacted carelessly and without a close regard to the language that is used in them. Let me read from what Cooley says on the subject. [Mr. B. read] Now, it is not for us to inquire what one of the provisions in the Constitution is essential or what one is important, or what is more essential or more important than another. It is enough for us to know that power which was above, behind and beyond us introduced a provision in the Constitution. We have no power to say whether it be for the best or the worst, it is for us to obey. Our Constitution says amendments proposed to it shall be entered with the yeas and nays upon the journals, and shall be referred to the next General Assembly. These are conditions precedent. It is true the Senator from Madison [Mr. Henry] says this is not true-that they are not conditions precedent, but I want to say no lawyer will stake his reputation unmixed with politics on such a statement as this; and no lawyer ought to make it mixed with politics without having his cheek mantled with the blush of shame. I have no right to charge the Senator with insincerity, but I don't think he meant what he said himself-he is too good a lawyer for that. The whole thing in a nut-shell is whether we have authority to pass upon these amendments. Before we act upon them at all the precedent steps must be taken; and the question is: Have they been taken? I heard the Senator from Henry [Mr. Bundy] say that this provision of the Constitution was merely directory and not mandatory. But what sort of authority did he back it up with? The Senator found, where a Court held somewhere, upon a statute which provided a Commissioner "shall" do certain acts, that that word was directory and not mandatory.
Mr. BUNDY (interposing): I found that three of the States of this Union having a Constitution prescribing that all laws "shall" be in a certain form, the word was held to be directory.
Mr. BELL (resuming): I am coming to that in a moment, but I want to show how the
Senator attempted to throw dust in the eyes of those attempting to consider these
things. What lawyer does not know that with construction of statutes of a remedial
nature and character the Courts sometimes, in order to give effect to an act already
done under that statute, will hold the word "shall" to be directory, and not
mandatory; but I want to say, as a lawyer, that when I have made this statement I have
stated the only case in which a Court was ever justified in doing that thing, and even
Courts that have done that, have been severely criticized by Courts of the highest
standing in the country. But some Courts in construing statutes have gone as far, when
an act is already past, as to hold that the word "shall" is directory and not
mandatory, and in no other case where either a Court or Legislature was ever justified
in holding that the word "shall," when used in reference to acts done under the
Constitution, should or could be held to be directory merely. Even in statutes where
the public are interested, the word "may" is invariable construed as "shall" by the
Courts. The rules is, "may" may be construed as synonymous with shall, etc. [Mr. B
reads.] This is the rule, and yet Senators-grave and reverend Senators, learned
Senators in the law-get up and have us apply a construction of a provision of the
organic law, with the same sort of rules and reasonings that are applied in the
construction of remedial statutes about road viewers, and such trivial cases. Lawyers
influenced by politics smarting under the party lash, eager to get some party
advantage, will come and make such statements as
We are asked to solve the doubt in favor of the proposition that these amendments are now before us, and that this provision was directory and not mandatory; and I heard a strange statement fall from the lips of the learned Senator from Wayne (Mr. Foulke) when he said it was the province of a wise Judge to extend his jurisdiction. It has always been the province of a tyrant to extend his jurisdiction, and it has always been a fight of the people to prevent that son of thing from the days of Runnymede down to this time; and for a man, I know to be familiar with the legal as well as with the general history of the country, It was somewhat shocking; to my mind. And I heard the Senator from Henry [Mr. Bundy] say if there was a doubt we ought to solve the doubt in favor of the proposed amendments and the regularity of the proceedings. These gentlemen have read the books too much not to know that is not the rule to apply here. That is a rule to apply to Courts when it comes to construe statutes, And where if the statute is not clearly unconstitutional the Court will not hold it unconstitutional. Why is that? But when we come to pass upon these amendments, whether or not the Constitution has been complied with, we are bound by legal rules to solve the doubt the other way, and if there be any doubt about the regularity of the proceedings, the rule is we should solve the doubt against it. I am not making the bare statement as other Senators did, without authority, I will read again from Cooley, page 66 The Senator from Delaware [Mr. Smith] said let us throw aside our convictions a little while, and solve the doubt that way. I will not be found throwing aside my convictions. [Mr. B. reads.] It is the duty of every Senator, if he has the least doubt, to solve it as against the proceeding and favor those who uphold the Constitution which he has sworn to support. It has become common to sneer at some of the gravest things-Constitutional things. During and since the War they were swept out of the way with a sneer by the Republicans, and under the guise of the law of necessity, many Constitutional provisions; laws were violated, and we have learned to disregard those solemn Constitutional limitations, i by the enforcement of which only ' can human liberty and Constitutional freedom too be preserved.! I haven't much patience with it. Let me call your attention to what this author says about the danger of this kind of construction. I will devote myself a little while to some legal propositions and then attempt to pay my respects to some other positions taken by gentlemen on the other side. [Mr. B. Reads] I commend these words of sound sense to members of the Committee. The Senator from Wayne, [Mr. Foulke] gave us several illustrations I which to my mind are just as fallacious. He said I we Constitution provides in an amendment recently adopted that the Legislature shall enact a law providing for registration. Had he looked into the authorities he would see that the language used is directory. That it should not be disregarded is patent and plain.
The Senator from Henry [Mr. Bundy] and the Senator from Wayne [Mr. Foulke] said it
was sufficient if the essential requirements of the Constitution had been complied
with. Who is to determine that? The Constitution says these amendments shall be
entered-spread upon the journals-with the yeas and nays thereon. Is it for the Senator
from Wayne or Henry or Madison to say what is essential or what is not? Why can't you
dispense spreading the yeas and nays on the journals? By what authority does the
Senator from Wayne say, one is essential and the other is not? He says if is more
important, the Legislature shall agree to the amendments than that they shall nave
been entered on the journals. I don't know upon what meat he feeds that he can stand
up here and say what is more or less important in a Constitutional requirement. I know
no rule by which I am to determine whether the one is more or less important than the
other. It is enough for me to know that I find the provision there. The Senator from
Wayne says you can take the journals and the enrolled resolution and find the proposed
amendment was and is; and he went so far as to say you might resort to secondary
evidence. I must differ with the Senator there. He said that if a leaf had bee a torn
from the journals you could resort to secondary evidence. That may be true; but let us
suppose the primary evidence was gone-that it never had been entered there. It does
not follow you can go to secondary evidence If that be true, you can call some man in
who kepi tally with its pencil and marked who voted for and against the measure, is
the logic of the argument of the Senator from Wayne. I say you can do no such thing.
The Constitution has provided the kind of evidence that will establish the fact that
an amendment was proposed in the preceding Legislature, If it can not be found in the
journals, you have no right to go elsewhere. If you go elsewhere, you may introduce
parole evidence; you can't determine where to stop if you leave the moorings of the
Constitution. Let us look at the reason for requiring these things to be entered on
the journals. Attention has been called very fully to that feature, that the
amendments to the Constitution need not be proposed even by joint resolutions. As a
matter of fact, two that are said to be pending now were proposed by concurrent
resolution. There is no method of authenticating concurrent resolution, unless it be
entered upon the journals. There has some stress been laid upon the fact that joint,
resolutions are authenticated by the signatures of the presiding officers of the two
Houses. Only one of them I believe, is a joint resolution. The other two are
concurrent, and there can be no doubt but that the framers of the Constitution
intended that these proposed amendments should be spread at length upon the journals,
in order that they might be thus preserved: not only that the succeeding General
Assembly might know just what had passed, but that the people themselves might know
the exact tones of the proposed amendments. The law provided before the passage of the
present Constitution, as it provides now, tor the publication of the journals and the
deposit of a certain number of them in each County, so that such amendments as were
entered on the journals could be brought to the notice of
The changing of a word might change the whole meaning of a Constitutional amendment, therefore the framers of the Constitution provided that these proposed amendments should be entered on the journals of the two Houses-I believe at large. We all know a mere concurrent resolution might be substituted-another one for the one that passed. I submit to the Senator from Clinton [Mr. Marvin] that if the Constitution requires proposed amendments thereto shall be entered upon the journals of the two Houses and it has not been done since the Constitutional provision has not been complied with I want, him to say to me how he can, in view of these facts, vote for the minority report.
Mr. MARVIN: I am not a lawyer. The Constitution does not use the word "spread," it is the word "entered." Now the number of the House resolution, No. 7, with the yeas and nays on its passage are entered on the Journals. I know I voted on the resolution, but, by neglect, careless or intentional of the clerks of the Senate, it is not there, but I don't intend that shall deprive me and my constituents of the right to vote on those amendments.
Mr. BELL: Then the Senator is going to take the bit in his mouth?
Mr. MARVIN: Yes. sir, I am. [Laughter ]
Mr. BELL: That may be satisfactory to the Senator, but not to me.
Mr. MARVIN: It is between my conscience, my God and myself.
Mr. BELL (resuming): Then my friend wants this amendment to pass this way improperly passed. Everyone honestly desiring such amendments in the Constitution ought to want to have it done so regularly and so properly that there can be no mistake about if. I want to make a prediction. I predict if this thing goes on in its present shape, be agreed to by the General Assembly, be submitted and be ratified by a majority of the people, then the Senator will find it will be overturned by any honest Court which comes to pass upon it. Then we will be without any amendments or any law at all regulating the liquor traffic. I ask the Senator to make a mark there.
Mr. MARVIN (interposing): Then I want the responsibility to lie where it should.
Mr. BELL; (resuming): That won't answer. I don't see how the Senator can justify his conscience and his reputation for sincerity that way. That will be a poor excuse. It will hardly compensate for the injury that will follow. If the Senator wanes to engraft a prohibitory amendment upon the Constitution he ought to do it regularity. One or two years should not be of much consequence, if he is in earnest.
Much has been said about the right of the people to vote upon this question-about submission. I have heard some the other side some talk about the right of the people to have this thing submitted. They might as well resolve mat they are in favor of having four and four added together to make eight. Everybody is in favor of submission. Everybody has to be. The Constitution provides for submission, but it provides that certain things shall first be done before submission. Of course any one who is loyal to the Constitution after an amendment shall be properly presented, properly agreed to, properly entered on the records and properly referred to the next General Assembly, and by that body agreed to and submitted to the people for their ratification or rejection, then it follows as night follows day that there shall be submission. I want to know of some of our Democratic friends who have been contemplating voting for submission, if the don"t have to agree to amendments first. How can they justify their consciences? Agreement comes first. It is our duty to submit amendments after they are agreed to; but unless agreed to there can be no such thing as submission.
A good deal has been said about what is Democratic upon this subject. I want to call attention of Democrats briefly to the history of this subject. Let us go back more than a quarter of a century in political history and see the position the Democratic party held then. [Mr. B. read from the Democratic platforms adopted in 1856, 1866, 1868, 1870, 1874, 1876, and 1882] That is what the Democratic doctrine has been and what Democratic doctrine is.
I forgot to mention one thing-the position the Senator from Wayne took, that if any of these amendments were joint resolutions they were properly before us, but if concurrent resolutions they are not. Oh, most lame and impotent conclusion! One is a joint resolution-all the rest are concurrent.
There is another matter that escaped my memory. That is, when the present amendment proposition clause was offered in the Constitutional Convention originally, it provided that all proposed amendments to the Constitution should be published for a given length of time in the newspapers of the State, and this provision proposed by Robert Dale Owen substituted the entering upon the journals of the two Houses in lieu of the pending provision for publication in the newspapers, showing conclusively that by the substitution of the one for the other that it was the purpose and intent of the framers of the Constitution, by causing these propositions to amend the Constitution to be entered on the journals-to be spread upon the journals-to thereby provide a means of publication to the people to inform them of the nature and character of the pending amendments. That is another light which will aid us in the construction of this clause.
We have witnessed some strange sights in the discussion f this question. The Senator from Rush [Mr. Spann] made a dangerous argument in support of the view that these amendments are now pending, and especially the position in which the Senator put himself He could not be provoked into saying upon the floor of the Senate what, opinion he entertained upon this subject.
The Senator from Wabash [Mr. Sayre] is honest, but he don't understand the tricky of the heathen Chinee. [Laughter], I say to him that his own party will help to vote these amendments down. The Senator from Delaware [Mr. Smith] won't dare, I think, get up and say that he favors prohibition. If he did say it I know enough about his constituency to venture the assertion that there are not two Republicans out of ten of them who favor prohibition as a matter of principle.
I am a true temperance man, and I am not ashamed of any of my positions upon the subject; but for one, in some respects, I am ashamed of my own political organization upon this question. In my humble judgment had the Democratic party taken a position in accordance with its teachings and traditions at the beginning of the campaign, which it finally took before the election, in my judgment the party would have Carried Indiana by over 25,000 majority. There is no need of this political cowardice. It finds no place in my composition-I don't like it amongst my friends or foes. The Democratic party, grand as it is, true as it is and has been to the principles of liberty and human rights has occasionally been led away from its mooring to worship false gods, aid every time its curses have returned to damn us. We will not retain the fruits of our success unless we cut from principle boldly and without cowardice. I would like to read what Cooley says about allowing popular influence to control.
I am opposed to this amendment in all its stages. I am opposed to it, as I am opposed to all sumptuary legislation. I don't believe it is within the province of a government to to regulate what a man shall eat, what he shall drink or wherewithal he shall be clothed. I don't believe men can be made good by legislation. If they could I would draft a bill this way: Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State or Indiana, That all men shall be good, true and virtuous, and we would have done with all law. But you can't make people good by legislation. No law can be enforced that is not backed up and indorsed by public opinion. We have now a temperance law fifty years in advance of us, and it was passed by a Democratic General Assembly. The Democratic party is the only party which has ever put on the statute books enactments which were really in advance on the temperance question. They have all come from and through the Democratic party. And if you will enforce our present law upon the subject of the liquor traffic you will have taken a step fifty years in advance in the way of temperance. There will be no drunkenness if the present law is enforced. It prohibits the selling of intoxicating liquors to an intoxicated person or to a person in the habit of becoming intoxicated. It prohibits the selling to minors. But it is not enforced. Our temperance law is not enforced anywhere in this country. And why is it not enforced? Because public sentiment has not backed it up and enforced it. Enforce the law you have and you will take a long step in advance. And these temperance politicians want to put in the Constitution one that will have still less popular indorsement. It would make frauds of our people-they will simply evade the law. All human experience has taught this. I don't mean that I am not in favor of astringent law in reference to intoxicating liquors I think drunkenness is a crime that ought to be punished. I think we must take humanity as we find it. The Senator from Jackson [Mr. Brown] the other day described what would be the method of obtaining drinks under this proposed prohibitory amendment. I was amused at bis recital, but wondered that the Senator did not refer to the number of Government saloon keepers this amendment would provide for. You would find it would be more profitable to be a Government saloon keeper than to be the owner of a National Bank. This amendment would not prohibit, it would put the liquor traffic into the hands of a favored few. This thing is a mere sentiment. If the people want to prohibit this is not the kind of an amendment that will do it.
These are a few of my reasons for opposing this scheme. I am sincere in this, and the great body of my party, I believe, are sincere. Some of them have been led away by this fallacy and fraud. It is cheating ourselves to talk about submission in the abstract, because it comes after agreement; it must come after agreement and in no other way. I am in favor of killing this thing at the start. Killing it not scotching it. I am opposed to it in all its shapes and forms. Our Republican friends would like to see this matter defeated by us. They would like, if it is not defeated, to have the proposition for submission at a general election defeated, and then not have the amendments come before the people at all. Why, the Senator from Rush [Mr. Spann] I believe he would consent to most anything.
Mr. SPANN (interrupting): I am in favor of anything to beat the Democratic party. [Laughter ]
Mr. BELL (resuming): That's it. That is the size of it. It is simply a ruse-an attempt to get political advantage. They know it is a fraud, a delusion and a snare. And if my friend thought there was any danger of the prohibition amendment passing there is no man who would work harder to defeat it than he. I venture the assertion there are not six Republican Senators who will rise and say they are in favor of prohibition as an abstract proposition. I doubt if there are three. They don't favor it as a party or as a principle. They want to mislead somebody. It is not everything the people have a right to have submitted to them, they haven't said so in the Constitution. They have said certain propositions receiving the agreement of two succeeding General Assemblies shall be submitted for their ratification or rejection, I don't think everything should be submitted. Suppose I were to propose an amendment that some bright morning all property should be divided up equally. I think that would be popular. I believe I would be in favor of that proposition, for I would come out ahead. I think that amendment would be carried. But who would say such an amendment should be submitted? Or that we would have the right to submit ii? That is an extreme case, but putting an extreme case illustrates a principle. So I say about this amendment. It involves a principle that is odious and repugnant to our form of government, and to all the teachings of the Democratic party. I was opposed to it two years ago, and I am opposed to it now; I am opposed to it in all its stages. And the people now are opposed to it. You mark that now. The party that couples itself with this amendment is going to defeat as it ought to.
The Senator from Madison [ Mr. Henry] says we want the Dutch vote. If he means the German liberal vote, I want to say, yes, we do want it. We want the vote of every man who believe in individual freedom and justice, and I don't care whether he be German, Irish, Swede, or of what nationality, we need him in the ranks of the Democratic party, and expect to so conduct ourselves as to keep him there.
Coming back to the discussion of the amendment before us, I submit that the
Constitution has provided all the means and the only means by which it can be amended.
Those means have not been complied with in this case, and until they are we have no
jurisdiction over this
The majority report was concurred in upon a division-affirmative 23: negative, 21.
On motion by Mr. BELL the Committee rose and through its Chairman reported this action to the Senate.
Mr. BROWN moved that the Senate concur in the report of the
The motion was agreed to by yeas, 25; nays, 23, as follows:
Ayes-Messrs. Bell, Benz, Bichowski, Brown, Compton, Davidson, Duncan, Faulkner, Fletcher, Hill, Hilligas, Howard. Hutchinson, Johnson of Dearborn, Johnson of Tippecanoe, May, McClure, McCullough, Null, Rahm, Richardson, Smith of Jay, Van Vorhis, Voyles and Youche-25.
Nays Messrs. Adkison, Bundy, Campbell, Ernest, Fleming, Foulke, Graham. Henry, Hoover, Keiser, Lockridge, Lindley, Macartney, Magee, Marvin. McIntosh, Overstreet, Ristine, Sayre. Smith of Delaware, Spann, White and Yancey-23.
Mr. WILLARD, when his name was called, said: Upon this question I am paired with the Senator from Noble [Mr. Hostetter.] I don't know how he would vote upon this purely legal question, but judging from his request I suppose it is my duty to refrain from voting, which I do.
The vote was then announced as above recorded. So the Senate concurred in the report
of the majority of the
Mr. BELL moved to reconsider the vote just taken, and lay that motion on the table.
The latter motion was agreed to.
Then the Senate adjourned till 10 to-morrow.
The SPEAKER commanded order, and announced prayer by Rev. Mr. Pellet, of the California Street M. E. Church.
By Mr McCLELLAND [H. R. 301] an act denning the Thirty-first and Thirty-ninth Circuit. It passed to a second reading.
Mr. GORDON moved that the House now go into a
The motion was carried, and Mr. Jewett took the chair.
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, said: Being the author of the resolution which resulted in
the several reports from the
If I could I would like to vote for submission. If the prohibition amendment was in proper condition to be submitted I would be glad to submit It. Mr. Williams continued at some length.
Mr SHIVELY said: If I should have consulted my physical condition to-day I am sure I would have remained silent. I take it, Mr. Chairman, that th subject for discussion is a narrow one-a plain one indeed. The whole question hinges upon the construction we pine upon twelve words in the Constitution. Gentlemen have contended here that these amendments are invalid because of the failure of the Clerk two years ago to enter them upon the journal. The gentleman from Marion (Mr. Bynam) held that the word "enter" meant but one thing and that was that they should be entered in full. I have endeavored in the little time I have given to this subject to find, if I could, what is the legal definition of the word 'enter." [Mr. Shively here read legal authority, showing that the word had a double signification, and that it did not necessarily mean to spread at large.] Gentlemen have referred to the Iowa decision. It has been referred to often by almost every member on the opposite side of this House. But I undertake to say that the Constitution itself settles this question, and let us not go abroad for light upon it, [Here Mr. Shiveley read certain portions of the Constitution.] When the framers of the Constitution meant that anything should be entered at large, they said so, leaving no room for doubt. I undertake to say that this reading puts at rest forever the rightful construction of this language. If they meant it should be spread at large, why did they not say so? Gentlemen have spoken of the wisdom and learning of the Constitutional framers and I join with them in such praise. I undertake to say that they understood the meaning of the word "entry," and that when they meant it should be entered at large they carefully expressed it so I would call attention to the decision of the Supreme Court of Kansas, and the gentlemen on the other side have been very quiet about that decision. [Mr. Shiveley spoke at some length, citing authorities, etc.
Mr. PRICE said: I desire to make a few remarks to show plainly to the legal voters of
my County why I vote as I shall on the reports under consideration. The Constitution
should be supreme and above every party tie. The members on the other side of the
House come pledged by their State platform to agree to the amendments
Mr. WILSON, of Kosciusko, said: I do not believe that the framers of the Constitution used words of doubtful meaning. I believe that when they made that fifteenth article of the Constitution they studied every word that entered into it. It has been claimed here by gentlemen this afternoon that this is simply a political question, and that prohibition is a child of Republican birth, and that It has not off its swaddling clothes. But I want them to show me n full-grown man of Democratic origin. They chum the consistent position upon this proposition. It is said that consistency is a jewel, but I do not admit that it is a jewel in this instance. The Republican party never crosses a stream until it comes to it. But we find the Democratic party now constructing pontoons to cross a silt-lip, before it has crime to it. In reference to the Wabash and Erie Canal amendment the gentleman from Knox (Mr Williams) said it was all right though it was not Constitutionally passed, simply because the people indorsed it. What kind of logic is that? The gentleman on the other side know that if they submit these amendments they will lose one faction of their party, and if they do not submit them they will lose another faction.
Mr. GIBSON said: In the outset I had decided not to say a word. I admit that some
gentlemen have made very able arguments on this question, arguments that would have
sounded very well before a Court. I have said to myself what a benighted body this
Legislature would have be without any Constitutional lawyer in it. In my opinion a
model Legislature would be a Legislature without a lawyer in it. I acknowledge that
there have been very able discussions on both sides of this question. The only
question before us is whether this provision of the Constitution is mandatory or
directory. You roust go back then to the decisions of the Court to see for yourself
whether or not this question is mandatory or directory. Is it strange mat these
gentlemen who have registered their oath in heaven are all men that are against the
legality of the Constitutional amendments? In my opinion if there had been no Iowa
decision, there would have been no reference of this matter to the
I have always been taught that if you could find me a case, as a precedent in your own State, it was worth a dozen in any other. I believe that if it had been a convenient resolution it would have been necessary to have spread it at large upon the journals, because a concurrent resolution is not signed by the presiding officers of the two Houses. The amendment to the Constitution passed two years ago was a joint resolution. It was signed by the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House, and filed in the office of the Secretary of State, when that was done it was all that was necessary to bring it before this House. The Supreme Court of Indiana decided that if the amendments are signed by the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate the Court does not examine the record to see whether or not all the steps were taken. The gentlemen on the opposite side of this question avoid this decision. They go to Iowa for a decision, and that not a unanimous decision. They also avoid the Kansas decision which in my judgment is the best of all.
MR. SUTTON-I regard the question now before the House of sufficient importance to command its most serious consideration. We are to decide by our votes a simple proposition, and yet, notwithstanding, it is in itself unpretentious, it involves principle which confers upon it such weight and seriousness that to ascertain the right and maintain it when found, demands the exercise of qualities of head and heart, which vitalize conscience, strengthen judgment, adorn the representative and extort approval.
Fortunately the question now before the House is, in so far as the Constitution is concerned, placed above partisanism. The Constitution knows no party-under its broad shield all parties find protection. The real question before the House is, Shall the Constitution be obeyed?
Sir, It is the Constitution that brings us here; it is that instrument that clothes this body with power to enact and repeal laws. We are in our representative capacity creatures of the Constitution, nor can any voice be heard in this hall, nor any vote be recorded upon any matter within the entire range of legislation, until the representative has taken an oath to obey the Constitution, I for one am glad that it provides for its own defense. It is the fundamental law, the foundation upon which the Governmental superstructure is built. It is a Constution of the people, by the people and for the people. Like all Constitution, it has one grand purpose in view, stability. Conscitutions are wisely conservative: as a general proposition, they are the result of research, of patient though, cool deliberation, and compromise. They state fundamental truths, map out lines of policy within which the people who live under them and are protected by them may exercise all their inalienable rights, maintain their independence and urge forward all their enterprises of progress and prosperity.
Constitutions wisely provide for their own amendments or abrogation. If a new Constitution is to be framed the old Constitution distinctly declares what shall be
To amend a Constitution is, to all intents and purposes, to the extent that the amendment adds to or takes from the instrument, making a new Constitution-creating a fundamental law upon which other laws of indefinite sweep, for good or evil, may be based. Admitting this proposition, and I challenge contradiction, what is the position of the amendments upon which the last Legislature deliberated?
For myself I have no desire to evade the question nor belittle its serious
significance. I am not unmindful that it has awakened widespread concern and that
gentlemen of accredited erudition have arrived at antagonistic conclusions. But it has
been my business, as a representative of a constituency, loyal to the Constitution, to
ascertain what it demands when amendments are proposed. Permit me to read so much of
Section I of Article 16 of the Constitution as bears directly upon the question under
discussion: "Any amendment or amendments to this Constitution may be proposed in
either branch of the General Assembly, and if the same shall be agreed to by a
majority of the members elected to
Mr. Chairman, it is not my prerogative to arraign the last General Assembly. It may have performed its duties as best it could with the ability it possessed, but in so far as it dealt the Constitutional amendments upon which it deliberated, and doubtless voted, it committed one mistake, provided it was the intention to refer said amendments to this-the next General Assembly. It was a sin of omission for which this House can furnish no atonement. The Constitution commanded the last General Assembly, if it agreed to certain amendments to the Constitution, that it should, "with the yeas and nays thereon, be entered on their journals." This was not done. There is no such record-no commanding testimony. The journals of the last General Assembly are defective. Hearsay-rumor-common report-oral testimony does not answer the Constitutional requirement.
The last General Assembly disregarded the command. The letter and the spirit of the Constitution were cloven down together.
Sir, I am not a student of subterfuge, nor the votary of chicanery. It is no part of my duty to obscure the mistakes of the last General Assembly, nor declare by my vote that a glaring departure from an explicit mandate of the Constitution is of no consequence. I prefer to obey the Constitution, and take all the consequences of compliance with its mandatory provisions, Choosing the Constitution for my authority, my defense and guide, I have no hesitancy in declaring that the Constitutional amendments, which were doubtless acted upon by the last General Assembly, are not before this House and can not be Constitutionally brought before this body. Why? Because the Constitutional injunction, by virtue of which the amendments could be referred to this body, was disregarded.
I hold that the Constitution can not be unconstitutionally amended. I maintain that in such matters the partisan ought to take a back seat, and that patriotism should come to the front. Here loyalty to the Constitution should be enthroned. Here the great truth that the Constitution is the supreme law, should be recognized in all its majesty and power. Here, instead of seeking to dwarf its authority, there should be displayed on all sides a purpose to magnify its influence, if this is done, if gentleman can be persuaded to listen to the simple declarations of the Constitution, there can be little doubt as to results. When the Constitution says certain things shall be done, what member of this House will be willing to go upon the record by his vote, declaring that they need not be done?
I am aware that much has been said about giving the people a chance to vote upon the amendments. Sir, if I were to indulge in boasting, it should be my chief glory to declare that in all things I am one of the people.
not of corporations nor cabals, money and monopoly, but of the people, and when I plead for the letter and the spirit of the Constitution, I am, with whatever ability I can command, championing the cause of the people. Strike down the Constitution, weaken it in any of its provisions, and you not only mar its symmetry but you dwarf its protecting power. All the rights and privileges of the people center in the Constitution in standing by the Constitution, entering my earnest protest against any infraction of its decrees, I am in the broadest and highest conception of the term. the friend of the people. When the people of Indiana learn, as they will learn, that the last General Assembly disobeyed the Constitution they will be in no mood to approve of such dereliction of duty. The people demand, when their Constitution is amended, that it shall be done constitutionally. They want no unconstitutional laws. Nor do they demand unconstitutional amendments. While the people of Indiana are a matter of fact people they are intelligent, discriminating and conservative. It is no compliment to Indiana to intimate, here or elsewhere, that her people rather than wait, would prefer to see the Constitution violated. Such a stigma is undeserved. Loyalty to the Constitution is one of the resplendent virtues of our people, and should this General Assembly, by its vote, defy its power, the people of Indiana, with a sterner voice than has hitherto marked their indignation, will rectify the wrong.
Mr. Chairman, I see in this amendment question but one course to pursue, and I felicitate myself, that in deciding to take that course, I am sustained by the Constitution, by my convictions and judgment, and I am equally gratified to say that the more I have examined the subject the more firmly I am intrenched in the conclusion that the amendments which were before the last General Assembly have not been Constitutionally referred to this body for future action, and I am persuaded that no benefits can accrue to the State by a violation of its fundamental law. I do not pretend to be endowed with any special gift of prescience, but to my perceptions only embarrassments complications and vexations can result from deliberate violations of the Constitutions. Here, in our capacity of law makers, no example
to law should be tolerated. If this General Assembly shall say by its vote that a plain declaration of the Constitution can be set aside, what hope have we that the laws which we enact shall be treated with greater respect and reverence? A statute is of less consequence than the Constitution. If law makers can ibid an excuse for violating the Constitution, which they are sworn to obey, what guarantee remains that the people, whose servants we are, will not treat with like disdain the laws we enact?
There comes to us, sir, on every wind that blows complaints of a growing disregard of law. We are told that Judges are corrupt and that Jurors are bribed. I could, without drawing largely on my memory, introduce instances of judicial debauchery well calculated to humiliate any one possessed of a high sense of honor and faith in the capabilities and possibilities of human nature. Nor do these shameful recitals include only Courts and Juries-they embrace Legislatures and Congress, and are so terribly authenticated that their demoralizing influence is felt far and wide. Is it not well, therefore, for this General Assembly to ask wherefore this depravity, this far-reaching contamination of the very fountains of public thought?
Disregard of law, disregard of obligations, treating with contempt Constitutions and
oaths, seeking to obscure rather than emblazon defects and departures from the
straight and narrow way of duty, listening to clamor rather than conscience and
Constitutions, and instead of mending ways doing that which expedites disintegration
and danger I speak for myself on this floor. I am not opposed to amending the
Constitution Indiana, though the Constitution as it is, in my opinion, meets all the
requirements which, wisdom and prudence can demand. But, if it is to be amended, I for
one stand here to declare that in so far as I can influence action it shall be
Constitutionally amended. I will strike no blow at any of its requirements and
commands. My fealty to the Constitution shall not be satisfied by adhering to certain
provisions, while that as of little or no value other provisions which stand in my
way. I shall cast no vote designed to obscure the fatal mistakes of the last General
Assembly.
Mr. Chairman, In conclusion I plead for thoughtful, prudent, conservative and cautious action. Let not sensational and partisan clamor direct our votes. Having faith in the Constitution of our State and in the wisdom of those who made it, I can not for an instant be led to believe that it is necessary to violate it in order to perpetuate its existence. If our opponents have raised a tempest it then becomes our duty to direct the storm so that justice may be done To all and the rights of the people be preserved and their liberties protected under the Constitution.
Mr. ANTRIM, was of the opinion that there was no irregularity in the proceedings of the last Legislature on the question of the Constitutional amendments. While He believed that every article of the Constitution should be strictly complied with, he did not think it was necessary to add any provision to the Constitution and then insist on compliance therewith. He did not think the word "enter" was a strange one to Courts and lawyers, citing examples from the statuses and other sources to show that the word didn't necessarily mean to spread at large; that in many cases it would be impossible to give the word such an interpretation.
Mr. STERRITT said: Whatever my personal desire may be regarding any of the amendments I deem it my first duty to known avid do what is required of me by the Constitution. That the amendments are Constitutional before this Assembly can not be doubted by carefully considering the journal of the Fifty-second General Assembly and Article 16 of the Constitution, and believing that, he should so vote, thus doing his duty under the Constitution to his people.
Mr. WILSON, of Marion, moved that the Committee rise report progress, and ask leave to sit again to morrow at 9 a. m.
The motion was agreed to, and accordingly the Committee reported to the House this action.
The report was concurred in.
Then the House adjourn till 10 a. m.
After prayer by Lewis A. Pier, pastor of the Fourth Christian Church-
The Secretary's minutes of yesterday's proceedings were read and approved.
Mr. McINTOSH making an ineffectual motion to dispense with the further reading thereof.
Mr. SMITH, of Jay, presented a petition from citizens of Jay and Adams Counties.
Mr. McINTOSH presented a petition from the citizens of Green County praying for submission of the prohibitory amendments at a special election. [Laughter]
Mr. DUNCAN also presented two similar petitions; also by Mr. Keiser from White County; Mr. Hilligass from Huntington County; Mr. Spann presented a claim.
These were severally referred to appropriate Committees.
Numerous reports from Standing Committees were submitted and placed on the calendar, under the rules, for future action.
Mr. JOHNSON offered a joint resolution, proposing an amendment to Section 1, Article 16, of the Constitution, as follows:
"Any amendment or amendments to this may be proposed in either branch of the General Assembly, and if the same shall be agreed to by two-thirds of all the members elect to each of the two Houses, such proposed amendment or amendments shall, with the yeas and nays thereon, be entered and spread at full length on their journals and referred to the General Assembly to be chosen at the next general election; and if in the General Assembly so next chosen such proposed amendment or amendments shall be agreed to by two-thirds of all the members elect to each House, then it shall be the duty of the General Assembly to submit such amendment or amendments to the electors of the State at the next general election, and if a majority of such electors shall ratify the same, such amendment or amendments shall become a part of this Constitution."
Mr. BROWN: Of course we all know that there were some amendments proposed to the Constitution before the Legislature two years ago, and that the Senate yesterday adopted a report declaring they are not pending before the Senate; but until the House of Representatives make some disposition of them they are still awaiting the action of the General Assembly; and he made the point of order that no amendments should be proposed to the Constitution until the question as to whether any such amendments are pending entirely disposed of. He read Section 2, Article 16, of the Constitution.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: Do you think we are not to vote upon their final passage until others are disposed of?
Mr. BROWN: No. The Constitution says, 'shall not be proposed." That, goes to the introduction of the amendments themselves.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: Under the rule of the Senate this would be the first reading of the resolution. It would now go to a Committee, come back, be read the second time, and ordered engrossed for a third reading on a subsequent day.
Mr BUNDY: The point made by the Senator from Jackson [Mr. Brown] is that this is not in order because there are other proposed, amendments pending.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: I wish the Senator would withdraw his joint resolution without requiring the chair to make a decision on this matter.
Mr. JOHNSON: As there seems to be a doubt, and as the validity of the amendment itself may be questionable, I beg leave of the Senate to withdraw the resolution.
SEVERAL SENATORS: "Consent!" 'Consent!"
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: Leave is given.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time, and severally referred to appropriate Committees, unless otherwise stated:
By Mr BROWN [S. 179] to amend Section 8 of the act of June 7, 1852, concerning the
election and duties of the Clerks of Circuit and Supreme
By Mr. RA'HM [S. 180] in relation to claims against municipal corporations and the adjudication thereof, shall be referred, on request of one-third of the members of Council, to some Committee, and providing for appeals to Courts by claimant ]
Mr. BENZ called up the special order, being his bill [ S. 6] for the election and appointment of Supervisors of Highways [see pages 28,78 and 98 pf the Brevier Reports.] The question being on a substitution for the bill. [See page 98.]
Mr. WILLARD believed there was no piece of legislature enacted by the last Legislature that was so execrated as the road law. All parties are untied in Southern Indiana in demanding that the system of Road Supervisor shall be repealed and that we go back to the old system that the people understood. Senators now desire to tempt us with amendments. In Section 8, line 3, of the substitute, no one in exempted from working on the road over twenty-one years of age. Every industry is applying here for ceded legislation, and with the Senate give relief to all but the farming interest. The old law is well settled, has been satisfactory, is construed by the Courts, and the and the desire for the old law is universal in Southern Indiana, as compared with the new. He trusted all substitutes and amendments will be voted down and the demand for the old road law acceded to
Mr. FOULKE heard from all parts of his County the clamor give us back the old law. The people knew exactly the operations of the old law. Then it is said the Trustees are improper persons to take charge of the roads.
Mr CAMPBELL was satisfied this road bill is of as great importance as any measure that will come before the body. He moved a recommittal with instructions to report next Monday at 2 o'clock in order to give members time to more fully understand the merits of the propositions before the Senate.
On motion of Mr. VOYLES the motion to recommit was laid on the table.
Mr. McINTOSH traveled over his two Counties in the late canvass and was satisfied there were not in favor of the repeal of the present and the re-enactment of the old law. A certain odium attached to every man who had a place in the Legislature when the present law was passed. The author says this substitute is very like the old law. If it is like the old law let the Senator from Crawford [Mr. Benz] have the credit of it and have his bill passed.
Mr. McCLURE: If he felt instructed on one subject more man another it is to help restore the old law for the one working of roads, which has given so much satisfaction, and with which they have been so long familiar. Therefore he should vote for the bill of the Senator from Crawford [Mr. Benz] on its final passage.
Mr. BELL thought the lack of provision for furnishing money for work during the first year of the law more than any other feature brought odium upon it. It has many provisions which are improvements over the old law. Under the old law it was almost impossible to have good roads in his section. Although funds have been had under the new law but one year, there is quite an improvement in the roads in his County. The old law was defective in many respects. The substitute will probably do away with the particularly objectionable features of the present law. Two years ago he said if it were adopted and did not work well he would vote for its amendment when opportunity offered, and he was ready to redeem that promise now.
Mr. VOYLES opposed the eliding substitute. If there be any amendments desired they should be made to the original bill.
Mr. KEISER was not here to make a speech for home consumption. If farmers look to their own interests they will spend more on roads than on anything else but their own farms. It has been claimed that the cry is universal for the old Supervisor law. While there is dissatisfaction with the present law, he had yet to hear the first man who wants to go back to the old system under the old law. The people want a law which will give better roads than under the old law. He could not see where the great cry arises against the pending substitute. It makes some man responsible for the roads of the Township. Suppose it does cost a little more to have good roads, they ought to be had. Under the old law there certainly must have been a great waste of money. In his County every year they were credited with putting $11,000 on the roads. Under the old law hundreds of dollars were acredited for taxes and not hour's work done therefor. There ought to be a provision in every road law to prevent this. Abuses under the old road law have had a great deal to do with its inefficiency. He hoped the substitute [Mr. Henry's] would be adopted in place of the original bill and then amended.
Mr. HILLIGASS cited a, main objection to the present law viz., that the work is not
well or properly distributed throughout the Township. He objected to a superintendency
of the roads by the Township Trustee, as proposed in the pending substitution. That
would interfere with the present gravel road law. He also objected to the power of
removal by Trustees of Supervisors. On this subject the same objections lie to the
present law. And there is a demand that the present law be amended or repealed there
is no
Mr. HENRY replied to objections to his substitute. He believed with a few changes it is a systematic bill. He knew of no reason why a man above fifty years of age should not pay a road tax according to the value of the land owned by him. Under this bill the per capita tax and commutation is applied by the Supervisor in his own road district; and the bill No. 6 does not provide the same things. The two differ in this more than in any other one point. The section authorizing removal of Supervisors is a desirable feature.
Mr. LOCKRIDGE, seeing a lack of understanding of this important matter, moved to postpone the further consideration till Monday next at 2 o'clock.
The motion was agreed to-yeas, 24; nays, 25-the Lieutenant Governor giving the casting vote.
And then came a recess till 2 o'clock.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR called the Senate to order and introduced Mrs. Mary H. Hunt, of Boston Mass., who proceeded to address the Senate on the effects of alcohol on the human frame and tissues in favor of the passage of laws requiring Instruction relating thereto to be a part of curriculum in all schools sustained by public funds. When she bed spoken one hour and ten minutes, having concluded-
EXECUTIVE APPOINTMENTS. Mr. BUNDY called up a special order, being the
consideration of the question of confirming or rejecting the appointments of the
Governor for Superintendent and Trustees of the Benevolent
Mr. BROWN said, if the Senate should confirm these appointments now, and his bill [S. 1] for the reorganization of the Benevolent Institutions pass, of course it would render nugatory the official life of the appointees. The regular and sensible way is to let these appointees stand until the fate of this bill is seen. If the bill should be adopted the conduct of some Senators touching the confirmation of these appointments will be modified.
Mr. BUNDY, while willing to allow reasonable time for the Senate and the
Mr. BROWN moved to recommit the Governor's message to the
Mr. HENRY: Doesn't the time of the present incumbents expire on the first of February?
Mr. BROWN: Their term of office expires on the 1st day of February, but there will be no vacancy because the law requires incumbents to hold until their successors are chosen. He modified his motion so as to require the Committee to report next Monday.
Mr. HENRY could see no good reason for deferring action on these appointments. He favored immediate action. That would not prevent any action on Senate bill No. 1.
The motion to recommit with instructions was agreed to by yeas, 21; nays, 19.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time, and severally referred to appropriate Committees, unless otherwise stated:
By Mr. BICHOWSKY, by request, [S. 181] to provide for the regulation of the running at large of horses, cattle and mules in the various Counties of the State. [Boards of County Commissioners may prohibit by submitting the question to a decision of the voters of the County]
By Mr. BROWN [S. 182] concerning the Supreme Court and to repeal an act in relation to the Supreme Court of April 14, 1881. [The Supreme Court shall appoint five Commissioners of the Supreme Court to hold office for two years]
By Mr. FOULKE [S. 183] amending an act supplemental to the State Board of Health act of March 7, 1881, being 4,992 of the code. [To amend Section 7 and Section 10, by requiring deaths to be reported at such times as the Board of Health may direct instead of fifteen days after death as now required.
By Mr. CAMPBELL [S. 184] to amend a supplemental act to the Common School law, being Section 4,436 of the R. S. of 1881. [So that Township Trustees may act as a Board for regulation of studies without the vote of the President of Trustees of towns or cities.]
By Mr. JOHNSON [S. 185] by request, to amend a supplemental act to the Common School law, being Section 4,420 of the code. [The Governor, the Superintendent of Public Instruction, the Presidents of the State University, Purdue and Normal School, the Superintendents of Schools of the three largest cities in the State, and three County Superintendents to be elected at an annual meeting of all County Superintendents, to constitute a State Board of Education; the County Superintendents to hold one, two and three years each. The Superintendent of Public Instruction to be President.
By Mr. McINTOSH [S. 186] to amend Section 155 of the Common School act of March 6, 1865, being Section 4,422 of the code of 1881. [Authorizing issuance of life diplomas without examination to teachers who have attained eminent scholarship, professional ability and distinction as teachers.]
By Mr. RAHM [S. 187] to amend Sections 1 and 3 of the act for repair of free turnpike roads, being Sections 5,104 and 5,106 of the Revised Statutes of 1881 [To allow County Commissioners to make a small levy for the repair of free gravel roads, turnpikes, etc. He says Vanderburgh County has ninety miles of improved free gravel roads, costing $1,000,000, but under the present law the Commissioners have no right or power to keep the same in repair.]
By Mr. VOYLES [S. 188] to amend Sections 1 and 9 of an act concerning public offenses of April 14, 1881, being Section 2,117 of the code. [Prohibits the taking of fish in March, April, May, November and December]
By Mr. WILLARD [S. 189] to authorize railroad corporations to endorse and guarantee the bonds of any railroad organized under the laws of any adjoining State.
By Mr. FOULKE [S. 190] to legalize the proceedings of incorporated Turnpike Road Companies which have been operated for twenty years.
By Mr. CAMPBELL [S. 191] to amend Section 159-the Common School law-being Section 4,521 of the Revised Statutes of 1881. [To increase appropriations to defray the expenses of teachers in County Institutes.]
On motion by Mr. VOYLES his bill [S. 91] to change the name of the House of Refuge was read a second time with a report from a Committee favorable to its passage.
The question being on concurring in the report of the Committee-
The Senate concurred in the report by yeas, 22; nays, 11.
And then the Senate adjourned.
The session was opened with prayer by Representative Frazer, of Rush County.
The Clerk's minutes of yesterday's proceedings were being read, when-
On motion of Mr. STEWART, the further reading of the journal was dispensed with.
On motion of Mr. HEFFREN, the House resolved itself into a
Mr. WILSON, of Marion, thought that the members should divert themselves of party
prejudices, and approach this question with a judicial turn of mind. Every man who
entertains any doubt in his mind of the legality of the pending of the amendments must
give the Constitution the benefit of the doubt. Section 1 of Article 16, provides that
a proposed amendment must be entered upon the journal. It seems as though certain
members have read the Constitution leaving this section out. This section is to the
Constitution what Sampson's
Mr. SHAFFER said: I do not know that I should say anything on this question which is now before you. You have had this question discussed by some of the distinguished lawyers of this State and they have confined themselves very closely to the Constitution. Now, gentlemen, I am no lawyer, but I want to present the ideas I entertain on this question. I say to you, gentlemen, that when I made my canvass I was opposed to prohibition, but in favor of submission at a special election, which I believe is right and proper. I will so record my vote. I am a Democrat and have been a Democrat for fifty years. I do hope that they will give the people the amendments and let them pass their judgment upon them. I believe that the course that some Democrats in the Senate and some Democrats in the House are pursuing will defeat them two years from now. The great proportion of the people in my County declare that the amendments should be submitted to the people; the ladies especially in the Democratic houses desire that they should be submitted. These are the reasons why I, as a Democrat, believe that the amendments should be submitted. These amendments were discussed in the Legislature two years ago. They have been in the minds of the people for the last two years. The people are interested in the amendments and desire to have them passed and submitted.
Mr. DEEM regarded the objection to a considering the Constitutional amendments as entirely technical. If they have not been properly referred to this body then all the excitement and enthusiasm of the stupendous political struggle of last year was a gigantic farce and fraud. The alleged irregularity turns upon the word entered. The Clerk of the House made no mistake in this question when he made up the journal of last session, and his acts are sustained by a proper interpretation of the English language, and are endorsed by established precedent and the highest judicial authority. What more would the gentleman demand?
Mr. DAVIS voted against these proposed Constitutional amendments two years ago, believing then, as now, that it was never intended to advance the true interests of temperance reform. This question ought not be kept in suspense simply for its influence of future campaigns. He desired action on this question now, leaving the ultimate decision as to the Constitutionality to the Supreme Court.
Mr. GORDON said: I regret that Democratic members of the House have seen fit to take their position upon the ground, or upon the view that the decision of this question will affect the Democratic party. I have not allowed myself to look at the question of how it will affect the Democratic party in the future. I have tried to see how it will in the near or distant future affect the Constitution. I regret to hear a man say that if it requires you to violate your oath, why violate your oath. I am of the opinion that these amendments are not now pending before this Assembly. Every report before this House agreed to one thing, and what is that? It is that the provisions of the Constitution have not been strictly complied with. We are told that these amendments are sufficiently identified. Let us see if this is the case. The Constitution says that these amendments shall be entered upon the journal. This is for the purpose of identification by the next Legislature. Do the enrolled resolutions in the office of the Secretary of State prove anything? Are they competent to identify these resolutions? I say they are not. They amount to nothing, for the reason that they are not the kind of evidence the Constitution requires. If this Legislature may disregard one provision of the Constitution, may not another Legislature disregard another provision, and so on until no single provision will be of binding force?
Mr. MELLETT said: It seems to me that any discussion of this question is more in the nature of an obituary than anything else. The importance of the question has been alluded to by every gentleman who has undertaken to discuss it. It is a well-known fact to us all that for two years it has been the question above all others which has been talked about by the people of Indiana. It is of vital importance to the people of this State-to the people now living in the State and those who are to come after them. It is not necessary nor is it right that the merits of these amendments should be discussed now. It is simply whether they shall be further submitted to the people, from whence they originated, for further action thereon. I am one of the members who believe that these amendments are properly pending before this General Assembly for action thereon I believe with the gentleman from Clarke [Mr. Gibson] that it is not right, that it is not just, to destroy them at the present time. If true, as a gentlemen have suggested, that the organic law of any people, of any Nation, should be supreme, it ought to be such as could not be changed or torn down upon any mere freak, pretext or pretence. But while this is true, it is not less dangerous to disregard the fact that the power is given to the people to change this Constitution. The question for us now to determine, the question for us to decide in this House, regardless of what may have been done anywhere else in regard to the amendments were agreed to and adopted under the circumstances under which they were that they were doomed to die. I believe that the judgment was passed upon them long before the meeting of this Assembly. These amendments are fatally entangled in a party web. Mr. Mellett, after some further remarks, yielded the floor to
Mr. Copeland, who moved that the Committee arise, report progress and ask leave to sit again at 2 o'clock.
The motion was agreed to, and, accordingly, the Chairman [Mr. Jewett] reported as the Committee directed, and the report was concurred in by the House.
Then came a recess until 2 o'clock.
Mr. JEWETT, from the
Mr. Smith moved that the House resolve itself into a
The motion was agreed to, and accordingly the House resolved itself into a
Mr. MELLETT resumed the discussion of the question where he left off at the noon recess. At the conclusion of Mr. Mellett's remarks-
Mr. GIBSON moved that the Committee recommend that the House take a vote on the adoption of the reports on next Tuesday at 10 a. m.
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. SMITH of Tippecanoe, said: I have no desire to set myself right before my
constituents. I have confidence in them and I am sure that they have confidence in me.
To speak of the Consti
Mr. MOCK discussed the question from a legal standpoint. It is not a question of whether prohibition is right or wrong, nor whether the Republican or Democratic party is right or wrong. Any person really in favor of prohibition should not desire the question submitted to the people if it can not be done Constitutionally. A great deal has been said about what is directory and what is mandatory, but Section 1, Article 16 of the Constitution points out the particular way in which that instrument may be amended. For himself he would say that no amendments to the Constitution are before this General Assembly. Were we to pass them and the people ratify them, a decision of the Supreme Court would set them aside
Mr. ADAMS regarded this discussion as having taken a wide range. He held legislative construction of such a question to be paramount to any judicial decision on the subject. You can tell just as well that amendments were passed two years ago as you can tell what las were passed then. No clerical error can or ought to defeat the will of the people.
Mr. WRIGHT believed the contents of the joint resolution proposing amendments to the Constitution should be considered, and then did it receive the required vote in the General Assembly. The directory or mandatory questions do not come into the discussion. To enter upon the journal does not mean spreading at large on the journals. If the framers of the Constitution meant enter in full, why did they not say "enter at large?" Can any one tell why the legal and executive construction of this question should be overthrown? Who dare say such precedents are likely to work harm to the people of Indiana? If these amendments are stifled the people will consider it a shame. They are fairly before the General Assembly, and he should, so vote.
Mr. SHOCKNEY insisted we are here to carry out the will of those we represent. The people of the State are demanding that this child shall not be stifled in its infancy. Will gentlemen, because of a mere technicality, say they shall not have a voice on this question? Constitutional and legal questions can not be settled by a strict party vote. The people should have the right to say whether these proposed amendments shall become a part of the Constitution or not. The one question pending is will we submit them or not. When he had concluded-
Mr. WILSON, of Marion, moved that the Committee rise, report progress and ask leave to bit again to morrow morning.
The motion was agreed to Accordingly-
Mr. JEWETT, Chairman thereof, reported as directed by the
The House concurred in the report.
And then came an adjournment until 10 o'clock to-morrow under the rules.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR called the session to order and directed the reading of the Secretary's minutes of yesterday's proceedings.
On motion of Mr. MAGEE the leading thereof was dispensed with.
Mr Foulke's bill [S. 2] to enable Turnpike Companies in this State to connect with turnpike roads operated in an adjoining State, was read the third time,
Mr. FOULKE explained that it provides where a turnpike road outside of the State runs up to the State line, any turnpike in this State within two miles, may construct a road to connect with the road in the other State. An instance in his own County desired such an enabling act, and that is the only case known where the bill would apply.
Mr. MARVIN received a letter from a man owning the land through which this contemplated road would run-if there be no compulsion about it he would not object.
The bill passed me Senate by yeas, 40; nays, 0,
Mr. Brown's bill [S. 1] for the better management of the Benevolent Institutions of the State [see pages 87 add 105 of the Brevier Report]-being read the third time-
Mr. WILLARD demanded, the previous question.
The Senate seconded the demand for the previous question-yeas, 25; nays, 22.
Under the operations thereof the bill passed the Senate by yeas. 27; nays, 20.
Mr. BROWN moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill passed, and moved to lay the motion to reconsider on the table. The latter motion was agreed to by yeas, 28; nays, 19.
Pending the roll call-
Mr SPANN, in explanation of his vote, when his name was called, said; There is an important section in this bill put there by an amendment offered by myself, and because of that amendment I had made up my mind to vote for the bill, that amendment tailing away a great part of the objectionable features the bill otherwise would have. But I voted against my own amendment and that bill because there was placed upon the Senate a gag rule [the previous question]. Simply because toe members of the other side have the brute force-a majority-they stopped my mouth and that of other Senators on this side- And I voted against the bill because I am opposed to having the previous question put as a gag to discussion upon any bill, and especially anything that affects the people as this bill does. I admire the generosity of the Senior from Jackson [Mr. Brown], who sits in his chair and did not move the previous question, but that it was left for the Senator from Lawrence [Mr. Willard], who has been made the tool of the Senator from Jackson to apply the gag rule and move the previous question. I vote "no"
Mr. WILLARD, when his name was called said: I vote "yea" for the reason that this is a political question, and I so give notice to the other side of the House that I am the tool of no man, but as a member of the Democratic party on this floor I do not propose that when a political question has been agreed upon by the Democratic party to stand upon the floor and have the other side waste day after day in discussing measure whenever a vote is taken, and for that reason I made the motion for the previous question, and I stand by it. I made the same motion four years ago on another bill on this question which passed through the other House. I stood by that action then and was returned to this Senate by the unanimous vote of my constituents-Democrats, Republicans and Greenbackers. I believe that it is a right of the majority upon the floor to control its own action without factious opposition from the minority. For that reason I vote "yea."
Mr. YANCEY, when his name was called, in explanation of his vote said: I am another
member on this floor sent here by Republicans, Democrats and Greenbackers. The
reputation of the Democracy proves true-the members of that party are afraid of free
and open and fair discussion of any question that affects the vital Interests of the
people of the State. We have bad ample evidence of that fact from. the beginning of
this session of the General Assembly. The Republicans and Greenbackers were subjects
of mis
The vote was then announced as above recorded.
So the motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
Mr. Smith of Jay's bill [S. 89] to amend Section 4,501 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, was read the third time.
Mr. SMITH explained that because there is some doubt about the term of schools, this bill is introduced by request, to prevent any litigation. There is no very great change in the bill. If the teacher's license expires during the term of school it shall not stop the school.
Mr. HENRY opposed the bill. A teacher unfit, whose license only run a week, might complete a term for which employed, though it run a year. If a teacher can not renew his license there is no need for his being allowed to complete the term.
The bill passed by yeas, 33; nays, 13.
Mr. Ristine's bill [S. 22] to amend Section 5,097 of the code of 1881, being read the third time. See page 39 of the Brevier Reports-
Mr. RISTINE insisted this act has been a great advantage to Counties. This bill proposes to allow a tax of 1 1/2 per cent. for the repair and construction of good roads. The present law is a dead letter in many Counties for the want of more funds.
Mr. MARVIN'S constituents objected. Under the present law over $9,000,000 in bonds can be issued by County Commissioners. There should be a limit to this thing. He opposed putting $20,000 more of this kind of burden on his constituency.
Mr. GRAHAM also objected to this proposed increase of tax for road construction purposes. The roads constructed under the law of 1877 are most of them worn out. Unless there be a fund to keep gravel roads in repair there had better be no gravel roads at all. One hundred thousand dollars is sufficient for any County to use for such a purpose. The curse of to-day in Indiana is special taxes. It makes tax outrageous an burdensome. And there is great danger of the Counties being made primarily liable for the expense of such improvement. There is no good reason for increasing the liabilities of Counties one-half. Another objection is the County Commissioners have the right to locate these new roads.
Mr. HILLIGAS asked careful consideration of this bill. It is justice to limit by per centum the right to issue these construction bonds. Hence this bill ought to pass; there is justice in the proposition. It is the highest prerogative of people to encounter their own real estate in order to secure good road facilities.
Mr. HENRY also hoped the bill would pass, it being an equitable provision. Two years ago there was not a mile of free gravel roads in the County of Madison, while now there are roads complete and in process of construction to the amount of $90,000. So there can be no more built without an increase of taxation. There is nothing in the argument about increasing indebtedness.
Mr. MAGEE opposed the bill. The result would be some portions have bad, while other portions of the County have good roads. Probably no county in the State has better material for roads than Cass County. Another bad result would be that in five or six years the County finds herself indebted to a large amount, and worn-out roads. As a legal proposition the County can be held responsible for these bonds in many instances. The plan is not a fair and equitable one. It is better to proceed carefully and cautiously in this matter. If the people want gravel roads and have the right kind of spirit, they will form corporations and build the said roads under the laws of the State.
Mr. RISTINE replied to objections: The bill requires no County to build a single road or to increase its indebtedness. The Courts have already passed upon the main features of this law.
The bill finally passed the Senate by yeas, 31; nays, 12.
Then came a recess till 2 o'clock.
Mr. Bell's bill [S. 5] authorizing pay to Supreme Court Commissioners-see page 28 of the Brevier Reports-being read the third time-
The bill passed the Senate by yeas, 34; nays, 6.
Mr. Duncan's bill [S. 113] to amend Section 1,467 of the code of 1881 being read the third time-
Mr DUNCAN explained the bill confined changes of venue before Justices to one from the Justice and one from the Township. Under the present law in criminal cases as many changes may be taken as the parties see fit to swear to, which often becomes a means of defense with a view to wear out the prosecution without giving a chance for trial.
Mr. BROWN saw no necessity for this bill, understanding there is a decision which declares that but one change of venue from a Justice is allowable.
Mr. FOULKE also favored the bill, but doubted whether it would accomplish the desire of the author as to criminal cases.
The bill passed-yeas 39, nays, 0.
The bill [H. R. 212] to fix the terms of Courts in the Thirty-third Judicial
Circuit affecting the Counties of Whitley and Kosciusko, was read the first time.
Referred to the
T The Senate resumed the consideration of Mr. Voyles' bill [S. 91] to change the name of the House of Refuge pending at the adjournment yesterday afternoon, the question being on Mr. Voyles'amendment to make as Trustees, Lewis Jordan, Levi Barnett and Hamet M. Helms
Mr. SPANN moved to amend the amendment by inserting the name of Finley Bigger, of Rush County, in place of Hamet M. Helms for the reason that his gentleman is a Democrat pure and undefiled. If we have to accept the inevitable, as we must, he desired to see this name inserted. If Democrats displace Republicans he wanted to get a good, honest Democrat in at least one position.
Mr. BROWN conceded the gentleman named was worthy and competent, but all have to take their chances.
The amendment to the amendment was rejected by yeas, 22; nays, 25.
The amendment [Mr. Voyles'] was agreed to by yeas, 26; nays, 19.
Pending the roll-call-
Mr. SPANN, when his name was called, in explanation of his vote said: The law as
it now stands gives the Governor of the State the power to appoint these Trustees,
while this bill leaves that power in the hands of the Governor only when there shall
be a vacancy after the bill shall have passed and become a law. I shall vote against
this amendment fixing the three names in the blank, for the reason I can not
understand, and wish the Senator from Washington, or any other Senator, would tell
me the reason or necess
Mr. BROWN made the point of order that the Senator is not giving reasons explanatory of his vote, but discussion the merits of the bill.
The Presiding officer [Mr. Bundy in the Chair] would not undertake to decide.
Mr. SPANN (resuming]: I am trying to explain that I am willing to vote for this amendment if the Senator will show me it is not a damnable outrage, or if he will show me there is a necessity. I say there is no necessity except a political necessity. Therefore, I vote "no."
The vote was then announced as above recorded. So the names were inserted.
Mr. FOULKE moved to amend. Apart from its political character, which he deplored, the bill contains some excellent provisions. The provisions of the present law allowing parents to send their incorrigible children to the House of Refuge is open to abuse. One of his amendments proposes to change the bill to the present law, making warrants for Trustees' pay paid on the order of the Governor [without casting any reflection on the Superintendent, but because the principle is right.] In Section 3, line 2, he moved to amend by making the subordinates appointed by the Governor on recommendation of the Superintendent, as the present law provides. The other amendment adds to Section 11 a proviso, saving commitment from being void for want of strict compliance with the form prescribed. The last amendment is to require a record to be kept of the boy after discharge, in the words recommended by the Trustees of said House of Refuge in their last report. He suggested other amendments, but made no motion in reference to these suggestions.
Mr. VOYLES did not think any of these pro posed amendments were either necessary or essential.
The PRESIDING OFFICER [Mr. Bundy in the Chair] stated the question to be on the first amendment the money to be drawn on the warrant of the Governor for pay of Trustees.
Mr, BROWN opposed this first amendment.
Mr. BELL: The warrant can not be drawn for more than the law allows, and as a matter of convenience it should remain as in the bill.
The first amendment was rejected by yeas, 14; nays 32.
The second amendment adding the words "not to exceed the number approved by the Governor" as in the present law-referring to the number of subordinates-was also rejected by yeas, 15; nays, 4.
The third amendment adding to the eleventh section the words "Provided that no commitment shall be void for failure to comply with this provision," was agreed to.
The last amendment, requested by the Board of Trustees, requiring a record of the conduct of boys after leaving the Institution to be kept, coming up-
Mr. BELL thought the less record kept of a boy after he gets out the better it will be for the boy in after years.
Mr. HILLIGASS also thought each a record might come up to plague the boy in after life.
Mr. FOULKE withdrew the amendment.
Mr. SPANN moved to amend so that this bill shall not take effect till after the terms of present Trustees expire. He offered this amendment to learn what was the reason of this proposed change
Mr. BENZ: Because there is a Republican over there, and we want to kick him out. [Laughter ]
Mr SPANN considered this a frank and honest confession. Two of the Democratic Trustees' terms expire in November. Why then do Senators want to turn out one of their number? Has there been any dishonesty discovered? Why is it? He hoped gentlemen would be as frank in answering as the Senator from Crawford [Mr. Benz].
Mr. BROWN said this was carrying out a great Democratic principle-rotation in office-a short official life for each individual-the public offices to be distributed so as to give the largest number of persons official engagement. He demanded the previous question.
The demand was seconded by the Senate-yeas, 27; nays. 15.
Under the operations of the previous question the amendment was rejected by yeas, 18; nays, 2[6?]; and the bill was ordered engrossed for the third reacting.
Pending the consideration cf the above bill-
Mr. McCULLOUGH from the
Mr. BELL said the return shows a personal service, but there is said to be some sort of an excuse for the witness not appearing. The Committee propose to instruct the Doorkeeper if certain, papers be in the witness' hand and are produced and there be a real necessity for the witness to remain away, to so permit. There is no desire to act harshly, but simply to have the power to bring the witness and papers here.
The report of the Committee was concurred in, and-
The PRESIDING OFFICER [Mr. Bundy] said: The resolution is adopted [Mr Bell, sotto voce-"and the attachment is ordered issued"-] and the attachment is ordered issued.
The Senate adjourned till to-morrow.
The SPEAKER took the chair at 10 o'clock and called the House to order.
The session was opened with prayer by Representative Brazelton, of Jennings County.
On motion by Mr. JEWETT the general appropriation bill for 1883-4 and 1884-5,
introduced yesterday from the
Mr. HEFFREN moved that the House resolve itself in to a
The motion was agreed to, and accordingly the House resolved itself into a Committee
(Mr. Jewett in the Chair), the question being on concurrence in the Patten and Jewett
minority report from the
Mr. BEST thought that in the further discussion of the question before the Committee,
it would be almost impossible for any member to offer anything new. The ground had
been fully covered. He entered into a lengthy argument citing
Mr. HANSON thought that in the discussion of he question much time had been unnecessarily consumed in a vain effort to envelop the real issue before the House in a tissue of misleading statements calculated to draw the attention from the main question. This is not the first time in our brief history when a great party has attempted to stifle the voice of the people and prevent their will from crystallising into the organic law by the 'stop thief" cry of violating the Constitution. Has any one attempted to have any amendment inserted in the Constitution without the concurrence of the people at a popular election? I regard the provision that the amendments with the yeas and nays shall b^ entered on the Journals as mandatory. It means what it says. And I only insist that gentlemen on the opposite side who have insisted so strenuously upon a literal construction of the Constitution, shall he compelled to swallow the same medicine they hive prescribed for us. Believing, as I do, that both the letter and spirit of the Constitution have been complied with, and that these amendments are now properly before the General Assembly to be acted on as the Constitution requires, I deem it my highest duty as well as pleasure to cast my vote in such manner as to carry from these hails to the people, in whose voice and will reside the ultimate and exclusive right to create or change the fundamental law of our State, the amendment proposed by our last General Assembly to be finally passed upon by a popular vote.
On motion, the Committee arose and reported progress, and asked to sit again: at 2 o'clock. The report was concurred in by the House.
Then came a recess until 2 o'clock.
Mr. HEFFREN moved that the House now proceed with the business on the Speaker's table.
The motion was agreed to.
Senate Joint Resolution No. 1 was taken up, read the first time, and, on motion by
Mr. Jewett, referred to the
The bill [S. 1] for a reorganization of the Benevolent Institutions was taken up, read the first time and passed to the second reading.
On motion, the House resolved itself into
Mr HOWLAND did sot desire to make any lengthy remarks on the question. He thought we have had entirely too much said already, and believed that not a vote would, be changed if this discussion was to be continued until the end of the session. He thought that the framers of the Constitution so constructed it and made it so plain that any one could understand its meaning; that the amendments must be entered on the journal in full with the yeas and nays thereon, there can be no doubt. Every member who voted for that Constitution voted for it with that understanding. He believed that it was so construed thirty years ago, and he so construed it now.
Mr. CAMPBELL had been sitting here as a Juror to decide a case which, in his opinion, should not have occupied the time of the House one hour. On the assembling of this House every member thereof was furnished a copy of the journal of the proceedings of the House of the last General Assembly. In that journal every man can find sufficient evidence to satisfy any reasonable man that the House of the last General Assembly received petitions from a respectable number of legal voters of the State, asking that certain amendments to the Constitution be passed upon by that body and submitted to the people; and we can find in that journal, in my mind, reasonable evidence that that House, in good faith, complied with the request of the people; that the amendments were properly passed by that Legislature, were signed by the presiding officers of the two Houses, and were filed in the office of the State Librarian and a certified copy of the same filed in the office of the Secretary of State, he did not believe any member on the floor doubts. In the fall of these facts it is surprising that any member of this House, who was a member of the last General Assembly, should oppose the proposition that those amendments are properly before this House. Mr Owen, in the Constitutional Convention,said, "We do not propose that the organic law shall be in the power, of the Legislature" What are we doing now but taking the organic law of the State in our hands? We were sent here with an understanding that those amendments were pending, and that we were to vote for or against them according to our own sentiment and the sentiment of the people who sent us here.
Mr. KNOWLES had always been in favor of short prayers and short services at funerals. He considered the amendments legally before the House for its action thereon.
Mr. HOLLER said: Were I capable of discussing this question from a legal standpoint, I should consider it useless to do so at this stage of the discussion. I desire that my position upon this important question shall be known. We are to-day discussing the legality of a question which, if it was adopted by the Senate and this House, would strike down one of the greatest evils existing in our Nation. Sir, as Representatives of the citizens of the great State of Indiana, I believe it is our duty to support every legal measure that, will have a tendency to elevate our fellow-man. For this reason I stand here to-day in favor of submitting these amendments to the people. I know that there are many Democrats in the County of St Joseph who are desirous that these amendments shall be submitted to the people.
Mr. PETERS said: The question before this Legislature for the last four days has
been, are there any Constitutional amendments legally pending before this General
Assembly for its action thereon? The Senate has already decided that there are no
such amendments legally before us, and I think it decided wisely. I take it that the
Constitution means what it says In the section providing for its own amendment. If
the framers of the Constitution had thought that the entering of the title to
amendment would be sufficient evidence to identify such amendment after two years
had passed, they would have said so, or they would not have said that the
amendments, with the yeas and nays thereon, shall be entered w the journal. We will
admit for the sake of argument that the word "enter" is susceptible of a definition
that would admit an amendment by its title, and will gentlemen who hold this view
turn with me to
Mr. THOMAS believed that certain amendments to the Constitution were proposed two years ago, and so far as he could see, those proposed amendments were now legally pending before this House for its action thereon. He thought that as they were acted upon by the last Legislature they necessarily came before this General Assembly for its occurrence or rejection. He believed that every man in the State understood that the said amendments have been pending for he last year, and he would vote to submit the amendments to the people.
Mr. FLEECE came here to represent the people of Hendricks County, a County in which there has not been a saloon for twenty years. He stood pledged to his people and to God to vote to submit these amendments. It is every one's duty to keep his pledges. No political party has a right to bind the conscience of any man on the question of the Constitutional amendments.
Mr. HENDERSON believed the proposed Constitutional amendments were honestly and fairly before this General Assembly. The people not only of this but of other States are anxiously awaiting to see what kind of medicine this General Assembly will administer and the result of the administration. So far powerful sedatives and poisonous doses have been given upon the one side in the way of technicalities and formalities, and upon the other side good and wholesome food mingled with the pure and sparkling waters that have a tendency to invigorate and make them strong; and to-day, though dead in the Senate, we find they still live in the House and have power, backed up by the people of the great State of Indiana in their sovereign capacity. If the very letter of the Constitution must be complied with, it would cut off almost any possible chance for an amendment to the Constitution; therefore a liberal construction must be had to carry out the spirit and intention of that instrument. If we do not give the people the rights guaranteed to them by that Constitution, we take an advanced step toward centralization and revolution, which, if not checkmated by the people, may result in the destruction of this, the grandest and most noble Republic of all the Nations of the world.
Mr. McMULLEN said: The discussion of the question before the Committee has taken a wide range. He was here to defend the Constitution as it is, which we must all do until it is changed. He liked the Constitution because it is the Democratic law of this great Commonwealth. Our government is a Democratic-Republic forms neither purely Democratic nor purely Republican; but the fundamental law of our State-the Constitution-has more Democracy in it than any other, being even endorsed by the direct, vote of the people.
In the Constitution, Article 16. we have the will of the people clearly and fully expressed. They have said in no uncertain language what their will is. They have said their will is, when the Constitution is to be amended you shall amend it thus and so, and by the report which we seek to have this Committee recommend to the House for adoption, we say the people will, must and shall be obeyed; that if their fundamental law is to be amended, it shall be amended as they direct though the heavens fall. When the people sent you here to represent them they sent you here to represent them under, by and according to the Constitution. They have said you shall amend the Constitution thus and so, and you say they did not mean that we will do it another way. In effect you say they did not mean what they said and do that to all in the name of the people. No tyrant ever oppressed his people but what he did it in the name of liberty. You talk long and loud and cry out for the rights of the people and at the same time are trampling under foot the will of the people expressed to you by the highest and most sacred way known to a free people, viz. by their written Constitutional law. He believed these amendments are not properly before this General Assembly, and therefore would vote against their submission.
Mr. HEFFREN moved that the Committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again next Tuesday at 10 o'clock.
The motion was agreed to, and-
The House concurred in the report of the Committee.
And then the House adjourned until to-morrow.
On motion of Mr. MAGEE the reading of the Secretary's minutes of yesterday's proceedings was dispensed with.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time and severally referred to appropriate Committees, unless otherwise stated:
By Mr. BUNDY [S. 192] to legalize the incorporation of the town of Cadiz, in Henry County, and the acts of all officers thereof, which was read the first time, and, on his further motion, under a dispensation of the Constitutional provision, pressed to its third reading, and passed by yeas, 43; nays, 2.
By Mr. VAN VORHIS [S. 193] to amend Section 1 of the act of January 9, 1852,
concerning the qualification of Justices-Section 1,418 of the Codes of
1881-authorizing but three in each Township and one for each incorporated town or city
in addition thereto. He thought this bill would affect none other than this city and
this Township. There are now seven or eight or nine Justices and hanger on hunting up
litigation. This bill simply reduces the number for cities from two to one. The
present law allows two to each incorporated city. He moved its reference to the
The motion was agreed to.
By Mr. CAMPBELL a bill [S. 194] to amend Section 34 of the Common School law-being Section 4,425 of the Revised Statutes of 1881. [Applicants for teachers' license shall pay the County Superintendent fifty cents as a County Institute fund.]
By Mr. BENZ [S. 195] to amend an act authorizing aid to plank, gravel and other roads, being Sections 4,045 and 4,053 inclusive of the Revised Statutes of 1881. [Not exceeding 2 per centum of taxables, and makes action on the part of the County Commissioners peremptory to the extent of ordering an election whenever a petition from twenty-five taxpayers is filed with the Board. The bill also provides that similar action shall be taken by the authorities of incorporated towns.
Messrs. Bell, Adkison, Yancey, Fletcher and Bichowsky presented remonstrances against the repeal of the Board of Health act.
Mr. Voyles presented a petition in favor of a stock law.
They were appropriately referred, to Committees.
Numerous reports from Standing Committees were submitted and placed on the files for future action.
On motion of Mr. WHITE, his bill [S. 74] to authorize any Hydraulic of Manufacturing Company to erect a dam across the St. Joseph River, in Elkhart County, was, under a dispensation of the rules, yeas 49, nays 3, read the second time by title only, considered as engrossed, read the third time and passed by yeas, 46; nays, 1.
Mr. WHITE, explaining: It is purely a local matter, affecting only the town of Elkhart, and its provisions will interfere with no rights, and will not cause any overflow of land, and not infringe on the rights of Manufacturing Companies.
By Mr. BELL [S. 196] to amend Sections 9. 38, 47 and 76 of the act dividing the State into Judicial Circuits, of March 6, 1873. [Franklin, Fayette and Union Counties to constitute the Thirty seventh Circuit. It also affects Decatur and Rush Counties.]
By Mr. MAGEE [S. 197] to amend the act dividing the State into Judicial Circuits of March 6, ' 1878. [Affecting the Thirty-ninth Circuit-White and Carroll Counties] He said it was simply adding one week to each term of the White County Courts, in favor of which he presented a petition signed by attorneys and County officers of White County. He moved to suspend the Constitutional rule that the bill be pressed to its final vote now.
Mr. YOUCHE opposed the motion. The bill ought to be considered by the
The motion was agreed to yeas, 38; nays, 7. The bill was read the second time by title only, considered as engrossed, and being read the third time.
Mr. YOUCHE said: The people should have all Court facilities required, and would not oppose this bill did he not fear it would do injustice to surrounding Counties. He deprecated the pressing of bills to the final vote as soon as introduced and without consideration by a Committee.
Mr. MAGEE did not think this bill would injuriously affect adjoining Circuits. It is intended to give relief to White County. There was a bill prepared and is in possession of a Senator to create an additional Circuit out of Starke and Pulaski Counties which, together, do not produce fifty cases of litigation annually, in order that some Republican have a place on the bench provided for him.
Mr. YOUCHE: Does not the Senator know that Starke and Pulaski are reliably Democratic, by from 500 to 700 majority?
Mr. MAGEE: Unfortunately, I do not. They sometimes wobble.
Mr. KEISER knew the County of White needs more time, and the reference of this bill to a Committee would not be of any use because it can net be improved.
Mr. CAMPBELL thought this bill should be considered by a Committee before the final vote on it.
Mr. FOULKE made an ineffectual motion to postpone this further consideration of this bill till 10 o'clock to-morrow.
The bill passed the Senate by yeas, 30; nays, 14.
Then came a recess till 2 o'clock.
Mr. FOULKE introduced a bill [S. 198] to pay the Principal Secretary of the last Senate $200 for making an index of the last Senate journal, which was read the first time and passed to the second reading.
Mr. DUNCAN offered a resolution discharging the Principal Doorkeeper with a view of obtaining the services of an efficient Doorkeeper who can run said office with seven assistants as required by law, and therefore at far less expense to the people, and that the Senate proceed at once to select a suitable and competent person to such office. He demanded the previous question.
The demand for the previous question was seconded by yeas, 23; nays, 18, and under its operations-
The resolution was agreed to by yeas, 23; nays, 21- as follows:
YEAS-Messrs. Adkinson, Benz, Bichowski, Campbell, Duncan,
Fleming, Foulke, Graham, Henry, Keiser, Lockridge, Lindley, Macartney,
McIntosh, Overstreet, Ristine, Sayre, Smith of Delaware, Spann, Van Vorhis,
White, Yancey and Youche-23.
NAYS-Messrs. Compton, Davidson, Ernest, Faulkner,
Fletcher, Hill, Hilligass, Hoover, Hutchinson, Johnston of Dearborn, Johnson
of Tippecanoe, Marvin, May, McClure, McCullough, Null, Rahm, Richardson, Smith
of Jay, Voyles and Willard-21.
Pending the roll call-
Mr. McINTOSH, when his name was called, said, I would like to explain. Senators will remember that about four days after the passage of a resolution authorizing the appointment of five additional assistants to the Doorkeeper offered a resolution requiring the discharge of all not authorized by law. A great portion, probably one-half, of my Democratic colleagues voted to lay my resolution on the table, and most of my Republican friends voted with them, and my Democratic friends seemed well pleased to have the Republicans vote with them. I thought, and still think that fifty Senators require no more Doorkeepers than 100 members in the other House, and I have been all the time in favor of going back to the number limited by the statutes, and as it seems that can't be done in no other way-a desperate case requires desperate means-I vote "aye."
The vote was announced as above recorded.
And so the resolution was adopted.
Mr. DUNCAN moved to reconsider the vote just taken and lay the motion to reconsider on the table.
The latter motion was agreed to by yeas, 24; nays, 23.
Mr. DUNCAN offered a resolution that Richard Huncheon be declared Doorkeeper of the Senate.
Mr. MARVIN raised the point of order that the resolution is not in order.
Mr. DUNCAN said the resolution just adopted required a selection now.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR decided the point of order not well taken.
Mr. MARVIN made the point of order a Doorkeeper can not be elected by a resolution.
Mr. HILLIGASS moved to amend the resolution by substituting the name of Captain Charles A. Edmonds, the Assistant Doorkeeper. He said, from the commencement of the session, it was understood there has been some objection to the Doorkeeper. Being a new member he has known but little of the past customs of the Senate or the employes necessary for the body. But action has been taken. We are now without a Doorkeeper, and in offering this amendment he came before the Senate representing in that motion a worthy man and a soldier a gentleman who comes with an empty sleeve, having lost an arm in defense of his country; and he proposed to put the Republican side of the Senate on their mettle as to the adoption of the amendment. He demanded the previous question.
The Senate seconded the demand, and under the operation thereof the amendment was agreed to by yeas, 25; nays, 21, as follows:
YEAS- Bell, Compton, Davidson, Ernest, Faulkner, Hill,
Hilligass, Hoover, Hutchinson, Johnston of Dearborn, Johnson of Tippecanoe,
Macartney, Magee, Marvin, May, McClure, McCullough, McIntosh, Null, Rahm,
Richardson, Smith of Jay, Voyles, White and Willard-25.
NAYS-Messrs. Adkison, Benz, Bichowsky, Brown, Bundy,
Campbell, Duncan, Fleming, Fletcher, Foulke, Graham, Henry, Keiser, Lockridge,
Lindley, Overstreet, Ristine, Sayre, Smith of Delaware, Spann, Van Vorhis,
Yancey and Youche-23.
And so Mr. Edmonds was elected as Doorkeeper of the Senate.
The resolution, as amended, was adopted without a division.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR requested the Senator from Brown [Mr. Duncan] to step in one of the Court rooms and bring in one of the Judges-the first one you can find.
Judge Norton: If the Criminal Court, soon appearing, Mr. Edmonds was sworn into office. [Applause.]
Mr. Foulke offered a concurrent resolution recommending Senators and requesting Representatives in Congress from Indiana to urge the passage of an amendment to the Constitution that the right of suffrage shall not be abridged on account of sex.
It was referred to the
Mr. FOULKE offered a resolution requiring the
Mr. BELL and Mr. SAYRE, members of the
Mr. FOULKE thought the
Mr. BROWN knew of no Committee which has
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
The House concurrent resolution, in relation to the ceding of certain lands by the United States to this State, was laid on the table by concurrence in a Committee report.
Mr. FOULKE offered a joint resolution [S. -] proposing to Section 2, Article 2, of the Constitution an amendment abolishing all Qualification of voters on account of sex.
Mr. BROWN raised the point of order that while there is an amendment pending either before the Legislature or the people the Constitution provides no other proposition shall be made. Any member can make a proposition, but not while pending amendments are undisposed of.
Mr. FOULKE referred to the decision of the Senate that there are no Constitutional amendments pending, which is res adjudicata as far as this House is concerned.
Mr. BELL referred to the fact that the Senate composes but one-third in number of the General Assembly, and that Constitutional amendments are pending in the other branch of the Legislature.
Mr. VAN VORHIS considered the action of the other House has nothing to do with the action of this body in that matter.
Mr. BROWN insisted that it takes the Senate and House of Representatives to
constitute the General Assembly. He read Article 16, Section 1, of the Constitution,
then Section 2 of the same article. Then both branches must declare the action of
the General Assembly. The Constitutional amendments are presumably awaiting the
action of the General Assembly until both Houses decide otherwise. So long as the
question of their reference is undisposed of they are awaiting the action of the
General Assembly. The Senate has adopted a report from the
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: I want to hear the Senator from Madison [Mr. Henry] and the Senator from Wabash [Mr. Sayre] on this point.
Mr. HENRY was surprised at the position taken by the Senator from Jackson [Mr.
Brown]. We had the question referred to the
Mr. BROWN (interposing): Suppose the House of Representatives should agreed to these amendments. If it does they will come here, won't they? And suppose myself and four or five other Senators on this side change our minds and vote with you gentlemen on the other side (who have been so anxious to agree to them) and carry them, would they not be valid?
Mr. HENRY (resuming): They would not be valid. This Senate has by deliberate action, after four days' discussion, solemly said, and it is a matter of record, that they are not taken before us; and the Senator from Jackson will not take the position that any action of the Senate submitting them to the people would be legal, even were they ratified by the people. It is foolish to say the action of the other House can affect the action of this House on this question. The point of order is not well taken because the Senate has no official notice of what the House has done.
Mr. SAYRE thought the action of the Senate in this matter is final and binding for the remainder of the session. Suppose the House of Representatives never make a report to the Senate about Constitutional amendments, are we thereby to be precluded from taking action on any amendments to the Constitution that may be proposed? The point of order, evidentally, is not well taken.
Mr. FOULKE: According to the position of the Senator from Jackson [Mr. Brown] we
can not submit to the people the present proposed amendments to the Constitution
because they are not pending before us, and we can not introduce any new amendments
because the present amendments are pending before us. Those two statements can not
stand together. The adjudication of the Senate is binding on the Senate during the
session as to any like matter that may subsequently arise. The majority report of
the
Mr. BROWN (interposing): Can it be said that the General Assembly of the State of Indiana has decided that these amendments are not pending until the House of Representatives has concurred with the decision of the Senate?
Mr. FOULKE (resuming): Possibly not, but it can be said that the Senate has decided they are not pending before either House.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: I have my mind made up, but I do not want to decide the
point. If the Senate wants to hear my opinion I will give it. [Several Senators-"Go
on." "Let us have it."] I think the amendments are pending before the General
Assembly, and the Constitution says you can not introduce additional amendments, if
any are pending. You can not introduce these in the House to-day. If you have the
right to introduce them here you have the right in the House. If the House passes
them and the Senate agrees, I think they would be before the people. Of course it is
a question I would rather not decide. I would rather it would go to the
Mr. BROWN: If I do that I admit the introduction of this amendment.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: The Committee can report it is not proper.
Mr. BROWN: The Chair sustains my point of order and I don't like to give up the verdict after gaining my case.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: I would like the Senator to do it.
Mr. BROWN: I have no objection to referring the point of order to the
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: No, let the resolution go.
Mr. BROWN: The resolution would, then be before the Senate.
Mr. FOULKE, to relieve the embarrassment, asked leave to withdraw the resolution for the present.
SEVERAL SENATORS-"Consent," "Consent."
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time, and referred to appropriate Committees unless otherwise stated:
By Mr. BELL [S. 199] supplemental to the act for the regulation of the Indiana Militia. [A lengthy bill containing nearly eighty sections- said to be read by the Clerk in four minutes.]
By Mr. BENZ [S. 200] to revive the act authorizing the assessment of lands tor the building of plank, McAdam and gravel roads, of May 14, 1869.
By Mr. BICHOWSKY [S. 201] to prohibit the running at large of sheep and swine in the State of Indiana, unless in care of a herdsman or herds- men.
By Mr. DUNCAN [S. 202] to pay Matthew M. Campbell, of Bloomington, for teaching and other duties. 1^6,662.]
By Mr. FOULKE [S. 203] to authorize the Trustees of the Institution for the Deaf and Dumb to sell a strip off the south side of the premises now occupied by said Institution, upon such terms as may be agreed to by the said Trustees.
By Mr. FOULKE [S. 204] to amend the fee and salary act of May 12, 1875, being Section 5,985 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, [relating to Constables' fee for transportation of criminals ]
By Mr. H1LL1GASS [S. 205] to allow turnpike and gravel road companies organized under the act of March 6, 1855, to extend their charters upon petition to County Commissioners in Counties where a vote has been or may be taken hereafter on the question of purchasing the toll roads resulted against the purchase.
By Mr. JOHNSON [S. 206] requiring County Auditors to advertise the amount of school funds not loaned out at certain periods quarterly.
By Mr. KEISER [S. 207] to define the Thirty-first and -- Judicial Circuits [Lake and Porter the Thirty-first and Pulaski and Starke the -- Judicial Circuit]
By Mr. MAGEE [S. 208] to repeal Section 8 of the act of March 9, 1875, being Section 2,911 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, regulating the issuing and taking up of tickets and coupons of tickets by common carriers, and defining the right of holders thereof. Approved March 9. 1875.
By Mr. SMITH, of Delaware, [S. 209] to amend Section 5 963 of the code of 1881. [Requiring Notary's seal to contain name of County, date on which commission expires, with me nature of his office.]
By Mr. VAN VORHIS [S. 210] by request relating to the use and carrying of concealed weapons, and permits therefor.
It provides as follows:
Section 1. Persons in cities shall apply to the Mayor, and outside to the Township trustee, for permits to buy and carry weapons. Affidavit may be required, showing purpose for which weapon is intended.
Sec 2. On presentation of such permit any person may sell to the holder named in it the weapon specified. Seller indorse date of sale and return permit to o nicer issuing it, who must record it.
Sec. 3. Officers, travelers, custodians, and others intrusted with care of property or life, may be permitted to carry.
Sec, 4. No permit to any habitual drinker, or person of known quarrelsome disposition, or of unsound mind, or under twenty-one years of age nor to any person who has been convicted of any breach of the peace or crime against property or person. 4
Sec. 5. Any dealer in weapons selling, bartering, giving or loaning to any person not holding such permit is liable to fine of not less than $10, nor more than $1,000.
Sec. 6. Any person not a dealer is prohibited from selling or loaning to any habitual drinker, person of a quarrelsome disposition, or who has been convicted of breaches of the peace, etc., is of unsound mind, or under twenty-one years of age, and providing a penalty of from $10 to $1,000, to which may be added imprisonment in Jail not exceeding six months
Sec. 7. Duty of Grand Juries and Coroners when investigating any unlawful or accidental use of deadly weapon to ascertain from whom procured, and if the person is responsible under this act to cause an indictment to be presented.
Sec. 8. Permitting person furnishing the weapon to appear before the Grand Jury or Coroner, if he desires, and purge himself of blame in the matter.
Sec 9. Prohibits any person from furnishing a deadly weapon to any one intoxicated or under the influence of unlawful passion, or who intends to commit an unlawful act, whether such person has permit or not-providing penalties.
Sec. 10 Any person furnishing a deadly weapon with full knowledge that it is to be used for an unlawful purpose to be charged as an accessory to the crime or misdemeanor committed.
Sec. 11. Weapons found on persons arrested for crime or misdemeanor who have no permits, confiscated and sold to persons having permits.
Sec. 12. Provisions of the act made to apply to the sale, bartering or lending of toy pistols.
By Mr. VOYLES [S. 111] concerning certain neighborhood roads-leading from public highways to Church or school for ten years shall not be closed up.
And then the Senate adjourned till to-morrow.
On motion by Mr. Green the reading of the Clerk's minutes was dispensed with.
on the following described bills, were concurred in, unless otherwise stated:
Mr. Huston's [H. R. 88] concerning Joint Stock Telephone Companies organized under the laws of any other State with certain amendments.
Mr. McClelland's [H. R 174] to amend Sections 260 and 284 and repeal Section 268 of
the code of 1881, concerning public offices-so as to punish only the one who bribes
another-having been returned from the
Mr. Adams' [H. R. 245] concerning elections and the contest thereof that, the bill pass.
Mr. Jewett's [H. R. l56] concerning taxation being-Section 6,458 of the code of 1881-with certain amendments.
Mr. Copeland's [H. R. 112] providing for the punishment for putting up false lights or doing anything whereby a vessel is lost or destroyed, with the recommendation that it lie on the table.
Mr. Sutton's [H. R. 185] concerning husband and wife, that the same do pass.
Mr. Mauck's [H. R. 167] to amend Section 2,101 of the Revised Statutes, with the recommendation that it be indefinitely postponed.
Mr. Antrim's [H. R. 243] to amend Section 15 of an act regulating prosecution in cases of bastardy, and providing for the support of illegitimate children, with recommendations that it be indefinitely postponed. The report was concurred in.
[Mr. Sutton's [H. R 185] concerning husband and wife, was read the second time and ordered engrossed]
Mr. Nave's [H R. 232] to regulate the costs rendered upon judgment, with a recommendation that it be indefinitely postponed.
Mr. Wilson's, of Marion, [H. R. 71] to amend Section 1,040 of the civil procedure act, with amendment.
Mr. Copeland's [H. R. 111] to make it murder in the first degree for any one to wantonly place any obstruction on a railroad, or displace anything whereby the death of another may occur, with recommendation that it be indefinitely postponed.
Mr. Chittenden's [H. R. 14] to repeal the sixty-seventh section of the criminal procedure act, with recommendation that the bill be indefinitely post poised,
Mr. Wilson's, of Marion, [H. R. 241] in relation to the satisfaction of a mortgage, recording the same, etc., with certain amendments. The bill was ordered engrossed.
Mr. Shively's [H. R 103] concerning the liens of mechanics, laboring men and others, that the bill pass. It was ordered engrossed.
Mr. AIKEN, by consent, introduced a bill [H R. 313] to authorize the Governor,
Lieutenant Governor, Secretary of Slate and Auditor of State to appoint a Fee and
Salary Commission, prescribing the duties of said Commission, providing for per diem
and mileage of members, [to consist of one Representative of each Congressional
District and one from the State at large, making fourteen in all, seven of whom are to
be Republicans and seven Democrats. The Commissioners are to have authority to submit
a series of interrogatories to the various County officers and compel answers as to
their emoluments and the expenses of their offices, and are then to frame a bill from
the inform
Mr. Jewett's bill [H. R. 39] proposing the reduction of the number of Grand Jurors
from twelve to six, and amending the provisions as to the duties and oath of Grand
Jurors, being returned from the
Mr. Williams, of Knox, moved that the further consideration of the bill be indefinitely postponed, pending which-
The House took recess until 2 o'clock.
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, was of the opinion that the Grand Jury was one of the grandest institutions we have for the protection of public morals; and that the Grand Jury of to-day is a great improvement in its modified form over the Grand Jury of former days. He felt that if the bill passed it would make it almost impossible to punish certain classes of crime, such as disturbing meeting, gambling, etc. Such lawbreakers do not desire to go before a Grand Jury, but avoid it whenever possible He believed that there would be a rime of chaos and confusion if this grand system was to be broken down.
Mr. MELLETT was not one of those who would underate the work of the Grand Jury. He believed that it was a necessity, however much its privileges may have been abused. He believed that the Grand Jury now compel feel to lake cognizance of offenses that it would be better if it were not compelled to observe. He believed that certain crimes and misdemeanors could only be reached in this way. He would deprecate the practice of Grand Juries sitting for weeks to examine into old. offenses, perhaps years old.
Mr. WILEY thought the Grand Jury stood as a great bulwark and a great defense between the people and the violators of the law. He was opposed to the provisions of the bill, and hoped that the motion to indefinitely postpone would be agreed to. He had received a communication from a party living in the County from which the petition was sent that accompanies the bill, and he was led to believe that the petition had been circulated and sent here in the interest of a class who desired to avoid the law by securing the passage of the bill.
Mr. GIBSON thought that the title of the bill should be made to read a bill to protect saloon-keepers and other violators of the laws. He had papers In his possession that stated that the petition had been circulated in the interest of the saloon-keepers of the County from which the petitions originated. He did not consider the abuse of a law sufficient ground for its repeal. He hoped that the bill would be indefinitely postponed.
Mr. STEWART desired that the motion to indefinitely postpone would be agreed to. He thought that there was a class of misdemeanors that could only be reached through the Grand Jury. He did not believe any man, be he ever so good a citizen and respecter of the law, would voluntarily go before a Justice of the Peace, as would be necessary in case the bill became a law, and make affidavit against the son of a neighbor for some misdemeanor committed by that son. He thought that the jurisdiction of the Grand Jury should be left unchanged.
Mr. JEWETT desired to disclaim any personal interest in the bill, although it had been ascribed to him He introduced the bill in the interest of economy and for the purpose of protecting citizens from being housed up before the Grand Jury. He would say to the gentleman from Benton [Mr. Wiley] that he had, unintentionally no doubt, done a great injustice, by his reflections on the petitioners, a great injustice to as good men as live in the State of Indiana. It was the prostitution of the Grand Jury for political purposes in the County of Jefferson that caused the petition to be sent here, and the petition was signed by some very worthy citizens. He considered the provisions of the bill to be in the interest of the people, but not in the interest of the Prosecuting Attorneys of the State.
Mr HEFFREN said, in explanation of his vote, that he was not in favor of the motion to postpone indefinitely. He thought the bill was one step toward progress and reform, which the Democratic party promised the people last fall.
The motion to indefinitely postpone was agreed to-yeas, 59; nays, 29.
Mr. Eley's bill [H. R. 154] providing for the election and qualification of Justices of the Peace was reported back from the Judiciary Committee, with recommendation that the bill do pass. The report was concurred in.
Mr. ADAMS, from the
Mr. ADAMS, from the same Committee, reported back Mr. Heffren's bill [H. R. 237] to amend Section 95 of an act concerning public offense, with the recommendation that it be indefinitely postponed.
Mr HEFFREN said this bill was to amend the Sunday law. He thought the members of the House knew that the deliverer of milk, bread and ice, telegraph operators, printers and others of necessity worked on Sunday, and the bill was to prevent them from malicious prosecution.
Mr. SMITH war of the opinion that the simple fact of its being a violation of the law was all that secured this much needed day of peace and rest to a certain class of our citizens. He feared that under the provisions of the bill before the House men would work seven days instead of six. He did not entertain the idea that it was necessary for a bootblack to work on Sunday, or that it was necessary for a man to shave on that day. He thought it was only the part of humanity that these needed protections should be thrown around the Sabbath in order that its blessing might continue undiminished.
Mr ADAMS read the present exceptions to the Sunday law, and was of the opinion they did away with the provisions of the bill now under consideration. He did not think that because a druggist should be allowed the privilege of selling medicine on Sunday that he should also be given the privilege of disposing of his entire stock of goods.
Mr. MOCK did not favor the indefinite postponement of the bill. If the provisions of the bill were too broad it ought to be amended and then passed.
Mr. HEFFREN believed that the car of progress which the gentleman from Tippecanoe
[Mr Smith] told us about the other day in such glowing language, is still rolling
on; and that tradition and prejudice should be forgot; en in the light of our
present civilization. A mankind becomes enlightened the old notions will be left in
the rear. He believed in respecting the Sabbath, but certain things were now
regarded as necessities, and necessity knows no law. It is time that these old fogy
notions take a back seat. Men should take a new view of these matters That man does
best who obeys the dictates of his conscience best. He move i that the bill be
recommitted to the
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. Gibson, from the
On motion by Mr. Gibson-yeas, 78; nays, 0 the Constitutional rules were suspended, the bill read the second time by title only, the third lime by sections, and passed the House by yeas, 81; nays, 0.
Mr. Patten, from the
Mr. Spann's bill [H. R. 201] to provide for the organization of Saving Banks, was
reported back from the
Mr. Hanson's bill [H. R. 24] to provide for a general system of Common Schools, was reported back, with the recommendation that it be indefinitely postponed. The report was concurred in.
Mr. Shockney's bill [H. R. 138] to amend the Common School law was returned from
the
Mr. McHenry, from the
The following described bills were indefinitely postponed by concurrence in such recommendation in Committee reports:
Mr. Chandler's [H. R. 233] to regulate judgments rendered Rail Companies.
Mr. Hanson's [H. R. 166] to amend Section 95 of the public offense act.
Mr. Helm's [H. R. 125] to amend Section 33 of the County Superintendent act.
The House adjourned till 10 a. m. to-morrow.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR called the Senate to order at 10 o'clock.
Prayer by Rev. John Baltzley.
The Secretary's minutes of yesterday's proceedings were read until stopped by
Mr HILLIGASS, who said: I desire to state that the journal is not right as to recording my vote on the resolution offered by the Senator from Brown [Mr. Duncan]. I am recorded as voting for the resolution, when in fact I think every Senator will recognize the fact that I voted against every proposition that came up on removal of the Doorkeeper until the final vote selecting Mr. Edmonds. I ask to have the journal corrected so as to show I voted against the resolution.
Mr. SPANN thought it right and proper for the Senator to explain his vote on the floor so as to put himself right before the Senate and the world, but it is not right or proper to correct the journal, to which he objected.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: I think the record ought to Si-and unless there is unanimous consent, to the change.
Mr. VAN VORHIS: I have no doubt but that the Senator intended to vote as he says; bull must say the record shows just as he voted. I way watching particularly that vote, and know whereof I speak when I say the Senator voted as the journal shows. And I was surprised. I think it due that the Senator's explanation should be made, and that his explanation that he intended to vote otherwise should go upon the journals of the Senate.
Mr. HILLIGASS: I think the Senator from Marion [Mr. Van Vorhis] is mistaken, I certainly knew what I was doing at that time, and if a response when my name was called led him to believe I was voting for the resolution, it came from somebody else than myself, I ask as a matter of justice to myself that the journal be corrected and I hope no Senator will object. I would not desire to have any Senator wrong upon the record.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: Let us see if we can't fix it this way: we can't well go behind the returns we acted upon, but if the Senate will give consent let the Senator [Mr. Hilligass] change his vote, in the event it would not change the result. I don't think any man has any right to change the result Or let him make a statement in writing and put it on the record. The Senator for Marion,[Mr. Van Vorhis] said he voted the the other way. I can't recollect.
Mr. VOYLES: The journal ought to speak the truth.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: If the Senator voted "no" the journal ought to say that; but the journal ought not to say he voted "yes" when he voted "no."
Mr. VOYLES: I am satisfied the Senator from Marion [Mr. Van Vorhis] is in error.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: The best testimony would be the return made to the officer of the Senate.
Mr. BELL cited a precedent where there was a bill reported as passed on the last day
of a session in which a bill could be passed, where a Senator was recorded as having
voted for the bill-and a house bill too-who came in the next morning insisting he had
not voted for the bill. After thorough discussion and presentation of authorities the
record was changed his vote was placed against the bill and the law failed for that
reason. While this proposed change may make s particular difference, I think it is
within the power of the Senate, in every case, to have the record speak the truth. I
will take a brother Senator's word about what his vote was, because a man who would
make the statement that he is improperly recorded, when such was not the truth, would
not be fit for any gentleman to associate with in a Legislative or any other body.
Unless it is apparent the Senator is mistaken his statement ought to be received as
true. I would not care a fig for this except for the precedent. Now if the Senate
itself does not have full control of the journal-if it may not at any time before its
final approval of the journal, without question from any source, make the journal
speak the exact truth, then this Senate is at the mercy of some inefficient, careless
or corruptt Clerk. I don't mean to say we have such a Clerk, but to point out the
danger if we should have one and this right should not be extended. It would be
entirely wrong to question our power over the journal-until it is finally approved, to
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: Then you have the Secretary of the Senate.
Mr. BELL: I acknowledge the force to a certain extent of the fact that we have a roll-call made by a Secretary of the Senate. I don't want it to go unquestioned, because it may have some weight in determining the fact, but it has nothing of conclusiveness about it at all. We all know when there is any confusion or noise in the Chamber, how easy it if for the Clerk to make a mistake in his record Pie is but a finger, so to speak, on the right hand of the Senate, and no mistake of any Clerk can effect the right of the Senate to correct its journal. Here is a matter of fact for us to determine. We have the right to make the journal speak the exact truth, we might institute an investigation into the facts if it were a matter of sufficient importance. I speak only because of the Importance of acting so as not to set a bad precedent.
Mr. VAN VORHIS: I do not want to be understood in any sense as calling into question the word of the Senator from Huntington [Mr. Hilligass]. I think that under the excitement of the moment for he was considerably excited, that he does not know just exactly how he did vote, but that he voted as he now says is a mistake. I have no question he is honest in his belief he voted as he now states, but I was so situated when that vote was being taken, and watching the vote particularly to hear that gentlemen on that side were voting "aye" on that question, and I heard an affirmative response in answer to the call of Senator Hilligass' name, and was surprised when it was announced. There are other gentlemen on this side of the House who observed just exactly the same thing. Of course, what the Senator from Allen and Whitley [Mr. Bell] says about the record speaking the exact truth, there is no question about that; but the question is, what is the truth? I have no objection, if not taken as a precedent, that the Senator shall have the right to record his vote as he now says he intended to vote. But that he voted as recorded I thought it was due to the Clerk I should state as I have stated.
Mr. BROWN, without stating anything as to what is right or wrong on this question, hoped the Senator from Rush [Mr. Spann] would withdraw his objection, and allow the journal to be corrected as desired by the Senator from Huntington [Mr. Hilligass], and we agree that it will not be taken as a precedent. We do this now for the purpose of allowing a brother Senator to stand on the record as he desires.
Mr. SPANN withdrew his objection.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: By unanimous consent, Senator Hilligass changes his vote on the roll call.
Mr. HENRY: There is another correction. On the point of order made by the Senator from Clinton [Mr. Marvin] that no Doorkeeper could be elected by a resolution. He waived that and therefore the journal misstates the point of order.
Mr. DUNCAN: The first point of order raised by the Senator from Clinton [Mr Marvin] was that my resolution was not in order. The Chair decided I had leave to introduce the resolution because the Senate had just declared it would proceed at once to the election of a Doorkeeper. Then the Senator from Clinton raised the point of order that we could not elect an officer of the Senate by a resolution.
Mr. BROWN: That is the newspaper report, also.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: I recollect it the way Senator Duncan has it.
Mr. HENRY: There was a ruling only on the one question.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: I think that is the way it was.
Mr. MARVIN: I did not waive any point I made.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: The Senator raised a point that the Doorkeeper could not be elected by a resolution, but it was not acted upon. I don't think I passed on that question. The question is: Shall the min lies stand, as far as read and corrected, as the minutes of me Senate? It is so ordered. The Secretary has made a mark on the Journal up to where it is read and approved, and the Committee will have to examine the balance of it.
Mr. YANCEY, by consent, introduced a bill [S. 212] concerning Common Schools within the limits of a town of not exceeding 1,000 inhabitants shall not become a municipal corporation for school purposes until an ordinance therefor be adopted] which was read the first time.
Mr. ADKISON presented a remonstrance from Miami County, against the passage of any bill to regulate or control pharmacy.
Mr. JOHNSON presented a petition from Dearborn County, on the subject of public health, asking the repeal of said act.
These petitions were referred, to appropriate Committees.
A report from the
Mr. VAN VORHIS asked and obtained consent to consider the report now. He explained that the Committee recommended amending the bill so that the number of Justices in a Township shall not exceed two with one additional for each incorporated town and city in the Township, and that they be required to reside and hold Court in the Township, town or city for which they are elected or appointed. It will give the city of Indianapolis the same number as now, but will require them to reside and hold Court in the town or city where elected or appointed.
On his further motion the Constitutional rule was set aside yeas, 37; nays, 1-the bill read the second time by title only, the Committee amendment agreed to, the bill considered as engrossed, read the third time and passed the Senate by yeas, 37; nays, 1.
coming up in the order of the day, many were submitted, all of which were placed upon the calendar to come up for consideration in the order of bills on the second reading.
The Senate took a recess till 2 o'clock.
Mr. FOULKE offered a resolution for a Select Committee of Three to take into consideration a reapportionment of the school fund, with power to report a bill,
It was adopted, and the Committee. Messrs. Foulke, Johnson and Bichowsky, was appointed by the Chair.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time, and severally referred to appropriate Committees, unless otherwise stated:
By Mr. FLEMING (by request) [S. 213]: To enable Counties to more readily obtain
judgments
By Mr. FOULKE [S. 214] appropriating $1,500 to create and enlarge libraries in the State Prisons (North and South) and the Reformatory Institute for Women, [to be expended in equal proportion for each under the direction of the Ex-Convict Aid Society.]
By Mr. RISTINE [S. 215] to amend Section 1 of and act concerning the opening, vacation and change of highways so as to give County Commissioners jurisdiction over the laying out and changing of roads and highways, approved March 5, 1859, being Section 5,105 of the Revised Statutes of 1881. [to amend Section 15, in relation to the petition and voting in change or location of highways] Mr. R says: The act of 1867 amend the law of 1852, when it should have amended the law of 1859. This is to reinstate the section as it is in the Revised Statutes of 1876.
By Mr. FOULKE [S. 216] for the promotion of good behavior of persons convicted of crime, and for the maintenance of better discipline in Prisons, [Any inmate of either of the Penitentiaries or the Reformatory for Women obeying the rules and laboring with diligence and fidelity shall have deducted five days from the period of his sentence for each month, and a portion of his earnings not exceeding one-tenth of the price of convict labor. After one full year as above, the deduction shall be seven days each month. After two years, nine days each month. After three or more years, the deduction shall be ten days for each month. For every violation of the rules and discipline, or for want of fidelity and care in the performance f work, the convict shall not only foreit all gained time and earnings for the month in which the delinquency occurred, but, according to the aggravated nature or frequency of his offense, the Board may deduct a portion or all of his previously earned time or money, or both of them.]
Mr. Youche's bill [S. 28] to regulate interest on school funds, was read the second time and laid on the table by concurrence in a Committee report.
Mr. Smith's, of Delaware, bill [S. 58-see page 39 of the Brevier Reports] to regulate weights and measures was read the second time.
Mr. RISTINE understands the act proposed to be amended by this bill is void and not in the Revised Statutes of 1881, consequently, it can not be amended now.
Mr. SMITH was understood to say he found it in the code.
Mr. DAVIDSON recollected the bill was voted down in the Senate two years ago when he made some remarks on the Question.
Mr. HILLIGASS moved to insert "68" instead of "70" pounds with reference to the weight of corn.
Mr. SMITH stated the object of this bill was to make the legal weight of corn seventy pounds in order to conform to the custom of neighboring States. There is no loss to the farmer, because the difference is always taken from them in price.
Mr. MARVIN did not know of a warehouse dealer but desired the change made to seventy pounds.
Mr. WHITE believed his people preferred the standard as the law now provides.
Mr. HILLIGASS also preferred the standard should remain as the law now fixes it. Men in the business are the only ones favoring a change. Farmers are not.
Mr. DUNCAN believed only warehouse-men are clamoring for this change. It was not the farmers He favored sixty-eight pounds to the bushel in the in few it of his own corn-raising district.
Mr. MARVIN, as one farmer and as a Senator, should favor the proposed increase.
Mr. GRAHAM was sure the price would correspond with the number of pounds to the bushel, and to secure uniformity he favored the bill as introduced.
Mr. SMITH stated it to be the universal desire of both trading men and farmers that seventy pounds should be the legal standard, to correspond with adjoining States, as they are accustomed to doing now.
Mr KEISER, having no expression from his people, would favor the present standard and oppose a change. The yeas and nays were ordered on the adoption of the amendment (Mr. Hilligass'), and being ordered and taken, resulted-yeas, 21; nays, 1.
No quorum voting-
Mr. Willard demanded a call of the Senate, which discovered 29 Senators present and answering to their names.
An ineffective motion was made to adjourn.
After a time-no other Senator appearing-
The Senate adjourned.
The SPEAKER called the House to order and announced prayer by Rev. Mr. Moore, of the Third Christian Church. The reading of the Clerk's minutes of yesterday's proceedings was dispensed with.
Mr. Stucker's bill [H. R. 186] to amend Section 33 of an act providing for the
election of County Superintendent of Schools, by providing that elections shall
hereafter be by popular vote, coming up with amendments, recommended by the
Mr. SMITH moved to strike from the bill all after the enacting clause. He belived that the present mode of electing County Superintendents was a just and good one and should be continued. He considered the Township Trustees representative men of fair intelligence, and was not in accord with the statement that they were not refined men. He did not wish to cast any reflection on the electors of the State in his advocacy of the present mode of electing County Superintendents. Should this q question be made a political matter and the nomination of County Superintendent be left to a political Convention, he feared that the nominee would as often be selected because of the geographical position he held in the County as because of his fitness for the place to be filled. He looked upon politics as the science of Government and not a dirty pool as some persons ex- pressed it. A few years back he had been an opposer of the system that he now favored.
Mr. MELLET desired that his amendment should not prevail. He would hate to see
anything done by this General Assembly that would weaken or in any way destroy the
effectiveness of the County Superintendent system; but he believed that this being an
office of the people should be filled by the people. He was not one of those men who
feared to leave the filling of any office in the hands of the people. He did no con-
sider it a political office, and felt that if it was placed in the hands of the people
it would often be filled better than many of the offices are to
Mr SHOCKNEY insisted that the people ought to nave this right of selecting County Superintendents since they had to hear the expenses of the office. He believed that the bill should be adopted and that the amendment should be rejected.
Mr. SHIVELY considered the power of a County Superintendent almost unlimited, and that in many respects the County Superintendent was an autocrat. It is an office, in his opinion, that should be filled by the people. He thought, that the bill should prevail, and that the amendment should be rejected.
Mr. STUCKER could not see any reason why the election of County Superintendents should not be in the hands of the people, as are all other officers of the State. He believed that the office was as far in politics as it could be if the present bill should become a law.
The motion to strike out was laid on the table.
A motion by Mr. SMITH to change she time of election from November to April 1884, and
a motion by Mr. GREENE to recommit the bill with the amendments of the Committee to
the
A motion by Mr. GORDON that no County Superintendent would be eligible to that office for more than four years in any period of eight years, was agreed to by yeas, 50, nays, 33.
Mr. JEWETT offered an amendment that no County Superintendent should be allowed for more than 120 days services in any period of twelve months.
Mr. Jewett thought 120 days sufficient for the performance of the actual services of any County Superintendent in the State. If 120 days was not sufficient time for the performance of his duties, Mr. Jewett would favor granting more days than expressed in his amendment.
Mr. SHOCKNEY staled that under the law as it now exists, and as the provisions of the present bill will leave it, the work of the County Superintendent could not be performed in the time allowed by the amendment offered by Mr. Jewett. He believed that the work could not be done in less than 200 days.
Mr. HEFFREN did not favor the amendment. He believed that if the time of a Superintendent was to be limited the result would be some foolish fellow would be elected to the office, who would not be competent to fill the position and that the office would not be accepted by a competent person. Tacking on these amendments, he thought would eventually kill the bill by making it so ineffectual that its friends would vote against it. He moved to lay the amendment on the table.
The motion was agreed to by yeas, 52; nays, 36.
A motion by Mr. HANSON to limit the time of service to 150 days, was laid on the table by yeas, 46; nays, 35.
Mr. STEWART moved that the bill with all amendments be recommended to a Special Committee of Three, who should incorporate all amendments and report, the bill so amended to the House not later than Tuesday next.
Pending these motions the House took a recess until 2 o'clock.
The motion to lay the bill on the table was lost by yeas, 35; nays, 42.
The question now recurred on the motion of Mr Stewart that the bill with amendments be referred to a Special Committee of Three, who should incorporate the amendments and report the same back to the House no later than next Tuesday. The motion was agreed to, and the Speaker made the Committee to consist of Messrs. Stewart, Wilson of Marion, and Shockney.
Mr. HEFFREN'S amendment to the Rules, providing that no member should, be allowed to speak longer than five minutes on motions, resolutions and amendments, except the mover of the motion, resolution, or amendment who should have five minutes to close the discussion, was now called up and adopted.
by concurrence in Committee recommendations, to-wit:
Mr. Heffren's [H. R. 44] to repeal the act protecting sheep husbandry.
Mr. Spann's [H. R. 242] to amend Section 2,117 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, concerning public offenses and their punishment.
Mr. Cabbage's bill [H. R. 20] to encourage protection of breeders of fine stock.
Mr. Antrim's bill [H. R. 16] to regulate the interest on the school fund was
reported back from the
Mr. WILSON, of Marion, understood that about 95 per cent. of the school fund had been loaned at the present rate-8 per cent. He was creditably informed by persons of financial foresight that there would be no difficulty in loaning this fund for the next two years at the present rate of interest-8 per cent.
Mr. GORDON could see no reason why the interest should be reduced below 8 per cent. We should look to the interest of the school fund and not to the interest of persons who desired to borrow this money. He believed with the gentleman from Marion [Mr. Wilson] that there would be an appreciation instead of a deprecation of the desire for school fund in the next two years, He had been informed that there had been a decrease in the length of the school terms in this State, and if this bill should prevail there would of necessity be further decrease in the length of the school terms. He could see no reason why we should strike off one-fourth of the interest of the school fund.
Mr. MOODY did not propose to enter into a discussion with gentlemen on this floor as to whether all the school fund in the State can or can not be loaded at the present rate of interest. He did not think that extortion was right, nor that, if every dollar of the school fund of the State could be loaned at 10 per cent. to the already burdened taxpayers of our State who hold this money, that it would be just for us to compel them to do so. On an examination of the records in the Recorder's office of the State the gentleman will find that this large and magnificent fund is loaned to small land owners of moderate means, who of all men should be protected from usury and extortion. These funds are loaned in small amounts ranging from $300 to $600. Every man making a loan of this fund must pay the interest in advance, pay for an abstract of title costing him from $3 to $5 pay for a mortgage and the recording thereof, which amounts in the aggregate to about $6 or $8. We do not think it right to say that corporations and individuals may contract for and receive the highest rate of interest their money will command, but we have made the legal rate 6 per cent., why then should we say this fund shall not be loaned for less than 8 per cent? He thought the fund should be loaned at 6 per cent.
Mr. SMITH stated that he could commence where the gentleman from DeKalb [Mr.
Moody] left off. He then read from a report which he had in his possession showing
the amount of school
Mr. HEFFREN favored a 6 per cent. rate, but if the House will not agree to that he would favor a 7 per cent. rate. He moved that the amendment be laid on the table.
The motion was agreed to-yeas, 62; nays, 14.
Mr. HANSON made an ineffectual motion-yeas, 29; nays, 42-to indefinitely postpone the further consideration of the bill.
The bill passed to the second reading.
Mr. CRITTENDEN, by consent, introduced a bill [H. R. 305] to create a State Inspector of gas meters. The bill was read the first time and passed to the second reading.
The following described bills were indefinitely postponed by concurrence in Committee reports so recommending:
Mr. Wilson's, of Marion, [H. R. 73] to amend Section 58 of the general city incorporation act.
Mr. Brooks' [H. R. 217] supplemental to the act authorizing cities and towns to open, widen, etc., streets, alleys, etc.
Mr. Cabbage's [H. R. 40] to regulate coal screens and define the size thereof.
The following described Senate bills were read the first time and passed to the second reading, unless otherwise stated:
[S. 1] for the better management of the Benevolent Institutions of the State.
Mr. PATTON moved to strike therefrom Section 5, which requires a competent woman physician to have charge of the female deparment in the Hospital for the Insane.
On motion by Mr. FRAZER, the bill was referred to the
The bill [S. 193] regulating the number of Justices of the Peace.
The bill [S. 2] to enable turnpikes to connect with roads of an adjoining State.
The bill [S. 5] to pay Code Commissioners.
The gravel road construction bill [S. 22].
The Justices' change of venue bill [S. 113].
The Westfield town legalizing bill [S. 29].
The teacher's license bill [S. 89].
The telephone message bill [S. 32].
And the House adjourned.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR took the Chair at 10 o'clock, and commanding order, directed the reading of the Senate journal of yesterday's proceedings.
Mr. HENRY moved to dispense with the reading of the Secretary's minutes.
The motion was agreed to.
On motion it was ordered that when the Senate adjourn, it adjourn till Monday next at 2 o'clock p. m.
The motion was agreed to.
And then-
On motion, the Senate adjourned, under the order just adopted, till Monday, the 5th inst. at 2 o'clock p. m.
have recommended the indefinite postponement of the following described bills:
Mn Adkison's [S. 4.] authoring Boards of County Commissioners to construct gravel and macadamized or payed roads. See page 25 of the Brevier Reports.
Mr. Foul&e's [S. 31] to amend Section 1 of an act entitled "an act supplemental to an act to establish Public Libraries," approved February 16, 1852, defining the duties of Township Trustees in relation to libraries, approved March 14, 1879, and numbered Section 3,805 of the Revised Statutes of 1881. See page 29 of the Brevier Reports.
Mr. Overstreet's [S. 35] to amend Section 1 of an act concerning taxation of lands in cities, approved April 16, 1881, and repealing conflicting laws.
Mr. Ristine's [S. 37] to amend Section 67 of an act concerning proceedings in criminal cases. See page 30 of the Brevier Reports.
Mr. Voyles' [S. 40] to amend Sections 24 and 27 of an act concerning roads and highways, approved April 15, 1881.
Mr. White's [S. 60] concerning proceedings in criminal cases, repealing Section 67, Revised Statutes, 1640, of an act concerning proceedings in criminal cases, approved April 19, 1881, and reviving all acts repealed by said section.
Mr, Magee's [S. 64] authorizing County Commissioners to purchase real estate for holding fairs, repealing Section -- Revised Statutes 5,802. See page 39 of the Brevier Reports.
Mr. Johnson's [S. 71] providing cancelment of debts secured by mortgage on real declaring an emergency.
Mr. Brown's [S. 96] legalizing the proceedings and contracts of Board of County Commissioners in purchase, sale or exchange of property in certain cases.
Mr. Adkinson's [S. 97] bill concerning roads and highways-to amand Section 27 of said act-relating to working out road tax.
Mr. Rahm's [S. 122] to amend Section 19 of the Savings Bank act, approved May 12, 1869, concerning investments, not more than 60 per cent. to be invested.
Mr. Foulke'a [S. 127] to amend Section 34 of the general Common School act of March 6, 1865, being Section 4,425 of the Code of 1881-relating to teachers' license.
Mr. Null's [S. 158] prescribing that all legal notices shall be published in the paper having largest circulation in the County, and mode of ascertaining this,
Mr. Benz'a '[195] to amend Sections 4,045 and 4,654 inclusive, of the Code of 1881. >
have recommended that the following described bills be laid on the tabled:
Mr. Youche's [S. 28] to regulate the interest on school and other trust lands and repealing co conflicting laws, and declaring an emergency. See pages 27, 87 and 88 of the Brevier Reports.
Mr. Brown's [S. 43] to amend Section 30 of an act fixing the fees and salaries of officers named therein, approved March 12, 1875, and declaring an emergency. See page 35 of the Brevier Reports.]
Mr. Ristine's [S. 55] to amend Sections 86, 95, 97, 158, 159, 160, 164, 165, 176, 207 and 215, and repealing Sections 106, 157, 162 and 169 of an act entitled "An act providing for the settlement of decedents' estates, approved April 14, l881."-See page 39 of the Brevier Reports.
Mr. Youche's [S. 63] amending Section 15 of an act concerning the corporation of Railroad Companies, approved May 11, 1852.
Mr. Van Vorhis' [S. 81] to amend Section 30
Mr. Fleming's [S. 86] amending Section
Mr. Johnson's [S. 103] to provide that laborers and mechanics shall be entitled to a fixed lien upon property, both real and personal, of the employer.
Mr. Youche's [S. 120] to amend Section 219 of
the act of March 29, 1881, concerning taxation, so as to require a suit set aside a
tax title to be commenced within five years after the date of the tax sale.-See page
Mr. Fletcher's [S. 137] defining rape and prescribing punishment therefor.-See page
Mr. Hilligass' [S. 147] to amend Section 4,369 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, being Section 8 of the general Common School law. School fund to be loaned at 6 per cent. per annum.
Mr. Henry's [S. 171] giving Sheriffs authority to administer oath, and fixing fees, and declaring an emergency.
Mr. Campbell's [S. 191] to increase appropriations to defray expenses of teachers in County institutes.
Mr. Campbell's [S. 194] fifty-cent fee from applicants for teacher's license for a County Institute fund.
The following described bills have been laid on the table by concurring in the reports from Committees so recommending:
Mr. Davidson's [S. 11] to amend Sections 79 and 92 of an act concerning proceedings in criminal cases, approved April 19, 1881.
Mr. Hilligass' [S. 16] to amend Sections 1,781 and 1,782 of an act concerning proceedings in criminal cases, approved April 19, 1881.
Mr. Benz's [S. 99] to make it a misdemeanor to defraud a hotel, inn-keeper or boarding house, unless credit is given by express agreement.
Mr. Youche's [S. 112] to amend Section 618-Section 1,403 of the Revised Statutes of 1881-relating to Master Commissioners.
The SPEAKER demanded order and announced prayer by the Rev. Father O'Donoghue.
A demand by Mr. MELLETT for a call of the House was not agreed to.
By consent, Mr. BROWN, from the Special Committee to which was referred the bill [H. R. 191] to regulate the practice of medicines, midwifery and surgery, and providing remedies for the same, reported back said bill with a favorable recommendation.
Mr. GENUNG moved that 300 copies be printed. An amendment by Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, that it be made 500 copies was accepted and the motion agreed to.
Mr. Gordon's bill [H. R. 247] for the incorporation of towns was reported buds from
the
The report was concurred in.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time and severally passed to a second reading, unless otherwise stated:
Pending the order for the introduction of bills-
Mr. GILMAN offered a resolution that the
In explanation of his resolution Mr. GILMAN stated that the people had attempted to regulate this matter by law but the present law gave the publisher cf she present system of books used a monopoly, and the result is that the people pay 50 per cent. more for their school books than in the other States. He desired that the State should provide for the publishing of the system of books adopted by the Commission to be provided for ill the bill of the Committee.
The resolution was referred to the
Pending the order for the introduction of bills-
Mr. DAVIS offered a resolution that the
The resolution was referred to the
Pending the order for the introduction of bills-
Mr. HEFFREN offered a resolution that when the House adjourn it shall stand adjourned until next Monday at 10 a m.
The resolution was adopted.
Pending the order for the introduction of bills-
Mr. HEFFREN offered a resolution authorizing the Speaker to appoint two additional
members on the
It was adopted.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time and severally passed to the second reading, unless otherwise stated:
Mr. CHITTENDEN [H. R. 306] to amend Section 1 of an article to amend Section 1 of an act relating to the incorporation of cities and towns, [Provides for a prohibition of the playing of hand organs within city boundaries; a tax on vehicles owned or used within city limits.
By Mr. McCORMICK [H. R. 307] in relation to an act providing for the government; and discipline of State Prisons. [Providing that no contracts for Prison labor shall be let at less than the rate of sixty-five cents per day for each convict to be employed, and also prohibiting the employment of convicts outside of the Prison walls, but not effecting the validity of existing contracts, Prisoners shall be put to the kind of work they are acquainted with best. No contractor shall be allowed to work more than 300 convicts at one time.]
By Mr. McCORMICK [H. R. 308] concerning amending sections 1 and 2 of an act to incorporate the trustees of the Hartsville Academy. [Changing the name from Hartsville University.]
By Mr. WILEY [H. R. 309] to regulate and license the sale of intoxicating liquors, etc., the leading provisions of which are as follows:
Section 1 defines what "intoxicating liquors" are.
Section 2 prohibits any sale of intoxicating liquors by any person or persons except persons regularly licensed under provisions of the act.
Section 3; that any person who'is a resident over the age of twenty-one years may
procure license by paving County Treasurer $300, and presenting Treasurer's receipt to
County Auditor,
Section 4 provides for city and town license of $200.
Section 6 provides for execution at bond with at least two free-hold sureties, to be approved by Auditor, etc., conditioned for the payment of all fines and costs and damages occasioned by unlawful sales.
Section 7 provides penalty of $50 and imprisonment for violation of any provisions of act. Prevents any sale by any person, not excepting druggists, who have not procured a license under this act.
Section 8 keeps in force all laws relating to drunkenness, sale to minors, etc.
Section 9 prohibits employment of any minors in the sale of intoxicating liquors, and fixes penalty, etc.
Section 10 provides for action on bond for civil damages growing out of any unlawful sale.
Section 12 prohibits the keeping of gaming tables in any room or building where liquors are sold.
Section 13 requires persons engaged in sale of intoxicating liquors under this act to remove all screens, blinds, stained or painted glass, so as not to obscure place where sold.
The bill defines who are competent to receive license-any resident of a County where application is made; provides a license fee of $300, and that license shall not be issued for a longer or shorter period than one year; that an additional fee of $200 shall be charged in all incorporated cities and towns, such fees to be paid into the common school fund. Another section prohibiting the sale of intoxicating liquors by any person not having license as provided, fixes penalties, and provides that it shall be no defense for any such sale that the same was sold for medicinal, scientific, mechanical, culinary or sacramental purposes, or for any purpose whatever. This section does not permit any privileged class of persons (not even druggists) to sell without license). The bill also prohibits sale to minors, persons intoxicated or in the habit of becoming intoxicated.
By Mr. WILEY [H. R. 310] to regulate the fares to be charged on the sleeping, palace and parlor cars. [It makes the fare $1 for single, berth, $1.75 for a section, also twenty-five cents for each 100 miles for a seat in a palace car, and fifty cents for any distance over 100 miles. It also provides that tickets for this class of accommodation shall be on sale at all Stations where there is a population of 4,000 and over on the several lines passing through this State, and sets forth sufficient penalties for the non-observance of the rules and regulations presented.]
By Mr. WEAVER [H. R. 311] fixing the time for paying taxes in cities-third Monday in April and first Monday in November.
By Mr. Price [H. R. 312] in relation to the Board of Health.
By Mr. BROOKS [H. R.
By Mr. ROBINSON [H. R. 314] concerning attorneys employed by Boards of County Commissioners shall not appear before the Board in behalf of any other party-[making it unlawful for County Board Attorneys to appear as counsel or attorney for any litigant, petitioner or claimant before said Board.]
By Mr.
By Mr. MOODY [H. R. 316] to fix fees to be taxed in certain offices, and the
salaries of officers therein named [By it the salaries of State officers and Deputies
are fized as follows: Governor, $5,000; Private Secretary, $1,500; Secretary of State,
$2,000; Deputy, $1,500; Clerk, $700; Clerk of Printing Bureau, $1,200; Auditor,
$1,500; Deputy, $1,500; Insurance Clerk, 1,500 (old law $1,200;) Land Clerk, $1,500
(old law $1,200); Adjutant General, $1,200; Quartermaster General, $300; Treasurer of
State, $3,000; Deputy, $1,500; Watchman, $800; Attorney General, $2,500 and no other
compensation whatever; Superintendent of Public Instruction, $2,000; two Clerks, $900
each; Law Librarian,
Character of Service-Issuing Grand Jury subpenas, for each witness, present fee,
Copy of records and papers per 106 words, present fee, 10c; proposed fee, 5c; reduction, 50 per cent.
Entering orders per 100 words, present fee, 10c; proposed fee, 5c; reduction, 50 per cent.
Making complete record per 100 words, present fee, 10c; proposed fee, 5c, reduction, 50 per cent.
Order of sales per 100 words, present fee, 10c; proposed fee, 5c, reduction, 50 per cent.
For all transcripts, per 100 words, present fee, 10c; proposed fee, 5c, reduction, 50 per cent.
For each certificate and seal, present fee, 50c; proposed fee, 25c, reduction, 50 per cent.
For copies of deeds per 100 words, present fee, 10c; proposed fee, 5c, reduction, 50 per cent.
For issuing writ or citation, present fee, 40c; proposed fee, 25c, reduction, 37 per cent.
For recording wills per 100 words, present fee, 8c; proposed fee, 5c, reduction, 37 per cent.
For giving each notice required by law, present fee, 25c; proposed fee, 15c, reduction, 40 per cent.
For entertaining each estate on appearance docket, present fee, 20c; proposed fee, 10c, reduction, 50 per cent.
Character of Service - For taking bail, present compensation, 20c; proposed compensation, 10c; reduction, 50 per cent.
For taking recognizance, present compensation, 20c; proposed compensation, 10c; reduction, 50 per cent.
Commitments to Jail, present compensation, 20c; proposed compensation, 0c; reduction, 0.
Discharge from Jail, present compensation, 20c; proposed compensation, 0; reduction, 0.
For copies of subpenas and summons, present compensation, 25c; proposed compensation, 0; reduction, 0.
Actual mileage only allowed, and all constructive fees prohibited. The Sheriff receives 35 cents for subpenas; 10 cents per mile for taking prisoners to the State Prison instead of 15. The bailiff's per diem is increased from $2 to $2.50.
The County Auditor is to receive a salary, based upon the population. It is $1,200 for the first 10,000 inhabitants, $75 for each 1,000 up to 3,000, and $100 per thousand above the latter. He is also to receive $2 for licenses, instead of $1, as heretofore.
Salaries per year, present compensation, $1,200; proposed compensation, the same.
For each additional thousand, over basis up to 20,000, present compensation, $125; proposed compensation, $75; 40 per cent. reduction.
For copies of all records, deeds, and other writings, per 100 words, present compensation, 10c; proposed compensation, 5c; 50 per cent. reduction.
For each tax deed, present compensation, $1;
For taking and approving bonds, present compensation. $1; proposed compensation, 50c; 50 per cent reduction.
The salary of County Treasurers is fixed at $1,-00 , instead of $800, and they are allowed 1 per cent. for collection of current taxes and 6 per cent for delinquent. No change is made in the recorder's pay, and County Commissioners are to receive l, instead of $3 50, while Assessors and jurors get the same.
For publishing legal advertisements, per square, first insertion $1, and each subsequent insertion 75 cents. For delinquent lists, 40 cents for each insertion.
The bill also provides that each officer shall present to the person paying costs an itemized fee bill, showing the legal fee in each item charged, and shall file a duplicate of the same with the papers in each case.
For any overcharge the officer is liable to a fine of one hundred dollars, for five times the amount of the illegal fee, and may be removed from office on conviction.
By Mr MOODY [H. R. 317] to amend Sections 9 and 27 of an act concerning roads and highways approved April l5, 1881. The bill provides that the Township Superintendent shall, between the 10th and 15th days of April in each year, divide his Township into not less than three nor more than twelve Districts, and he shall appoint for each District a resident thereof as Road Master of said District. The bill amends Section 27, and provides that the County Commissioners shall annually, at their June session, levy the poll tax and the Auditors shall enter the same on the tax duplicates to be collected as other taxes are collected.
Provided, That all men owing road tax or poll tax, who shall apply to the Superintendent on or before the 1st day of June of each year, to work out on the roads such tax within the Road Master's District in which they may reside, such Road Superintendent shall procure from the County Auditor on or before July 15 thereafter the amount of said person's tax, and when the labor is performed under the direction of the Road Master the said Road Master shall give him a certificate of the same amount of the work done, which certificates shall be taken by the County Treasurer as payment of said tax.
By Mr. FISHER [H. R. 318] to amend Section 71 of the Justices' act, approved 1869. Mr. Fisher says his bill proposes to amend Section 71 of the Justices' act, in regard to replevy personal property from Constables when levy has been made. The way the law now stands the plaintiff can bring his action for trial of rights of property under Section 1,529 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, which is correct, but under Section 1,547 the plaintiff may replevy and run the Constable to a large bill of cost, and there is no law to protect him in such cases. The object of the bill is to have all such cases brought under the act to try the right of property.
By Mr. CERBER [H. R. 319] to amend Section 28, being Section 4,307 of the Revised Statutes of 1882 [So as to provide for the repairs and keeping in repair all drains and ditches, and giving all parties concerned a day in Court.]
By Mr. WOODLING [H. R. 320] to amend Section 9 of the drainage act of April 6, 1881.
By Mr. WOODLING [H. R. 321] to amend Sections 17, 25, 26 and 32 of the act regulating descents and apportionment of estates of May 17, 1880.
By Mr. TULEY [H. R. 322] to amend Section 1 of an act concerning the organization of voluntary Associations, approved February 26, 1875. [By grading the allowance for children in Orphans' Homes, viz., twenty-five cents a day up to the number of twenty; twenty cents between twenty and thirty in number, and fifteen cents for each child over the number of thirty.
By Mr. TULEY [H. R. 323] to fix the fees and compensation of County Recorders.
By Mr. JEWETT, by request, [H. R. 324] to authorize County Commissioners to grant an extension of the charter of Turnpike and Gravel Road Companies, organized under the act of March 6, 1865, in Counties where the question has been or may be submitted and resulted adversely.
By Mr. HELMS [H. R. 325] to amend Section 100 of the proceedings in criminal cases, act of April 19, 1881, [providing that all saloons in the State of Indiana shall close at 10 p. m and not open before 6 a. m., and providing that no intoxicating, spirituous, vinous or malt liquors shall be sold or given away on Sunday, Christmas or any legal holiday or Thanksgiving Day by proclamation of the Governor of the State or President of the United States; providing that for the first offense the violator shall be fined in any sum not less than $10 nor more than $50; for the second offense the license shall be revoked and the violate debarred from obtaining license for one year.]
By Mr. HANS0N [H. R. 326] to provide for the salaries of Circuit, Criminal and Superior Court Judges, $1,500.
By Mr. MAUCK [H. R. 327] concerning terms of Court in the Third Judicial Circuit, Harrison County.
By Mr. DEEM, by request of Mis, Rae [H. R. 328] to regulate the license for the sale of spirituous, vinous, malt and other intoxicating liquors. [It contemplates that saloon keepers shall be required to give bond in the sum of $5,000 and be required to pay $509 for a permit, and it provides further that cities and towns should have the right to collect an additional fee, not exceeding $50 for each license.
By Mr. THOMPSON [H. R. 329] to authorize the Auditor of State to issue patents in certain cases.
By Mr. THOMPSON [H. R. 330] supplemental to Article 18 of the Revised Code of 1881, relating to the creation of roads by County Commissioners [To amend certain sections of the law governing the duties of County Commissioners, Sections 5 813, 53, and 60, 63 and 500, 78 and 353, 76 and 68, 80 and 195, 333, 466.]
By Mr. ROBERTSON [H. R. 331] to regulate the charges for the transportation of freight by railroads and common carriers. [Provides that no railroad shall charge more in proportion for a short distance than they do for a long distance under the penally of being liable to judgment in the Circuit Court for double the amount of freight charged.]
By Mr. MOZIER [H R. 332] to amend Section 49 of an act covering forfeiture in criminal cases.
By Mr. McCORMICK [H. R. 333] to legacy the incorporation of the Shelbyville and Marietta Gravel Road Company.
By Mr. COPELAND [H. R. 334] to require Justices of the Peace to secure a sufficient trial.
By Mr. WILSON, of Kosciusko, [H. R. 335] to amend Sections 1 and 4 of an act of 1859 to provide for a State Treasury. [Section 1 provides that the State Treasurer snail take United States bonds for security from all banks, corporations or individuals with whom he may deposit any of the public money of the State. Section 4 provides that the State Treasurer shall give a build to the State of Indiana of seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars with. twenty-five or more freehold resident securists, and also twenty days' notice from the Governor of inefficiency of bond instead of thirty days.]
[Section 3 is an emergency clause.]
By Mr. FRAZER [H. K. 336] to amend Section 863 of the civil procedure act.
By Mr McCLELLAND, of Lawrence, [H. R 337] to authorize Railroad Companies to issue
bonds of
By Mr. WILSON, of Marion, [H. R. 338] to abolish the offices of City Treasurer in all cities having 60 000 inhabitants and over.
By Mr. WILSON, of Marion [H. R. 339] for the relief of Sarah May, wife of the late Edwin May, who was the architect of the new State House.
By Mr. HOWLAND [H. R. 340] to authorize incorporated towns to prevent stock from running at large.
By Mr. HOWLAND, by request, [H. R. 341] concerning tax sales, and to prevent extortions of claimants.
On motion the House took a recess till 2 o'clock p. m.
By Mr. HOWLAND [H. R. 342] establishing provisions respecting private corporations created before the present Constitution was adopted.
By Mr. HOLLAND [H. R 343] to regulate the rights of Railway Companies or their employes to run trains over any street or highway, or obstruct any street for any period longer than five minutes at any one time.
By Mr. McMULLEN[H. R. 344] concerning public offenses and their punishment.
By Mr McMULLEN, by request, [H. R. 345] to amend section 6,048 of an act in regard to filing schedules and claims.
By Mr. FERRITER [H R. 346] concerning the legalizing of advertisement in certain papers.
By Mr. GREEN, by request. [H. R. 347] to amend Sections 243 and 248 of the act concerning proceedings in civil cases.
By Mr. GREEN, by request, [H. R. 348] to amend Section 1 of an act regulating weights and measures.
By Mr. ADAMS, by request, [H.R. 349] to restrain and modify the duties of Township Trustee.
By Mr. STUCKER [H. R 350] to repeal Section 4 and amend several Sections of the decedents' estates act.
By Mr. SMITH, of Perry [H. R. 351] to provide for the removal of mill dams.
By Mr. McCLELLAND, of Porter, [H. R. 352] to authorize Road Superintendents to pay certain claims out of the road fund.
By Mr. McCLELLAND, of Porter, [H. R, 353] to regulate the running of railway trains through cities and towns.
By Mr. FRAZER [H. R. 354] to amend Section 14 of the Common School law.
By Mr. MUTZ [H. R. 355] concerning licenses for menageries, circuses, operas and other public entertainments.
By Mr. MUTZ [H. R. 356] to amend Section 10 of an act concerning drainage.
By. Mr. HOLLER [H. R. 357] to repeal an act concerning taxation of land and other property within the corporate limits of cities and towns
By Mr. SMITH, of Tippecanoe, [H. R. 358] to provide for the examination of teachers of the State in industrial drawing
By M. PRUITT [H. R. 359] relating to the lighting of cities and towns with the electric light or other storms of light
By Mr PRUITT, by request, [H. R. 360] to legalize the acts of Notaries Public whose commissions have expired
By Mr. SCHLOSS [H. R. 361] to amend Section 241 of an act concerning public offenses and their punishment.
By Mr. CABBAGE [H. R. 362] to regulate the transmission of messages by telephone. [Prohibits the use of obscene language but one witness necessary to convict ]
By Mr. KIRKPATRICK [H. R 363] to legalize the incorporation of the town of Brookston, in White County.
The following described House bills were read the second time and severally referred to appropriate Committees unless otherwise stated:
Mr. Shively's [H. R. 248] to amend Section 64 of an act concerning proceedings in criminal cases, being Section 1,637 of the Revised Statutes of 881.
Mr. Wiley's[H. R. 249] in relation to petitions for rehearing in the Supreme Court. [It provides that in case of petitions to the Supreme Court for relieving the Judge giving the original decision shall not have any voice in deciding as to the granting of the petition.]
Mr. Heffren's [H. R. 250] to amend Sections 25 and 26 of an act concerning decedents' estates, being Sections 2.489 and 2,490 of the Code of 1881.
Mr. Heffren's [H. R 251] to amend Section 1 of an act in regard to foreign Insurance Companies. [It does not materially change the provisions of the present law, except as to the advertisements of the semi-annual statements of the several Companies. In regard to these statements it directs the State Auditor to have them published "in one leading daily newspaper having the largest general circulation in Marion County, provided that not more than 1 per square shall be paid for each of such publications, the expenses thereof to be paid by the Company."]
Mr. Heffren's [H. R. 252] in relation to the joining of fences, etc.
Mr. Heffren's [H. R. 253] to amend Section 93 of an act concerning proceedings in criminal cases, being Section 1,666 of the Revised Statutes of 1881.
Mr. Wiley's [H. R. 254] to amend Section 8 of an act establishing a State Board of Health, being Section 4,993 of the Revised Statutes of 1881.
Mr. Sterritt's [H. R. 255] to provide for the election and qualification of Justices of the Peace, etc.
Mr. Graham's [H. R. 256] to provide a fund for the permanent endowment of the State University [by the interest from non-negotiable bonds, similar to the school fund revenue system now in vogue. A tax of 2 per cent. on the $100 of valuation is to be levied, this and each year until 1889, and the proceeds from this are to go toward the payment of the interest bearing debt of the State. As a recompense for this, non-negotiable bonds, payable in fifty years at 5 per cent. interest, which shall go to the University, are to be issued to the amount of the debt that is paid off with each succeeding year. The Auditor of State is further authorized to loan the proceeds from this tax assessment, if it can not be made available in any other way, at 6 per cent. interest for the benefit of the University.]
Mr. Graham's [H. R. 257] to amend Section 2 911 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, concerning the issuing and taking up of tickets and coupons on tickets, etc.
Mr. Price's [H. R. 258] to amend Section 387 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, concerning proceedings in civil cases.
Mr. Robinson's [H. R. 259] to repeal all laws for the protection of English sparrows.
Mr. Robinson's [H. R. 260] concerning Grand and Petit Juries.
Mr. Stucker's [H. R. 261] to repeal Sections 1 to 15, inclusive, of an act establishing a State Board of Health, being Sections 4 986 to 5,000, inclusive, of the Revised Statutes of 1881
Mr. Woodling's [H. R 262] to repeal an act establishing a State Board of Health.
Mr. Mellett's [H. R. 263] to amend Sections 64, 75, 78, 89, 93 and 106, concerning proceedings in criminal cases.
Mr. Moody's [H. R. 264] to regulate the incorporation of the town of Garrett, DeKalb County.
Mr. Fisher's [H. R. 265] to amend Section 5,795 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, authorizing Boards doing county business to declare water courses navigable.
Mr. Huston'8 [H. R. 266] to amend Section 2 of an act to provide more effectually for the support and care of pauper children.
Mr. Heffren's [H. R. 267] to amend Section 49 of an act, being section 1,622 of the Revised Statutes
of 1881, concerning proceedings in criminal cases.
Mr. Tuley's [H. R 268] to amend Section 251, being Section 6,519 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, concerning taxation.
Mr. Jewett's [H. R. 269] to amend Section 378. being Section 535 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, concerning proceedings io civil cases.
Mr. Genung's [H. R. 270] to legalize the incorporation of the town of Oakland, Gibson County.
Mr. Gilman's [H. R. 271] to quiet the title of land escheated in the State of Indiana.
Mr. Williams', of Knox, [H. R. 272] defining the offense of compelling or attempting to compel a person to marry, and fixing a penalty therefor.
Mr. Pettibone's [H. R. 273] to authorize the State of Indiana to issue 650 internal revenue improvement bonds of $1,000 each. [To provide for the issue of 610 bonds of $1,000 each, the money to be used in the drainage and reclamation of the Kankakee swamp lands. The bill provides for a State Board of Drainage, to consist of the Governor, the Attorney General and two competent persons to be appointed by the Governor-these persons to be residents or near the lands of the Kankakee Valley and interested in the drainage and reclamation of the same and providing the methods by which County Boards shall appraise and levy and collect the benefits for such improvements to repay the State for the money loaned.]
[This bill was made the special order for Wednesday next at 10 o'clock a. m.]
Mr. Whitsit's, by request, [H. R. 274] to amend Section 9, in relation to the laying out, widening and opening streets and highways. [Providing for the collection of unpaid assessments for street improvements.]
Mr. Whitsit's, by request, [H. R. 275] to regulate the indebtedness of cities having a population of over 16,000 inhabitants. [Authorizing the city of Indianapolis to impose an additional tax of not more than 10 cents on the 4100 for the purpose of establishing a sinking fund. The bill leaves the regular tax levy at the same amount as at present, 90 cents on the $100.]
Mr. Adam's [H. R. 276] to amend Section 10 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, concerning elections and the contest thereof.
Mr. Adam's [H. R. 277] to authorize Boards of County Commissioners to straighten and change the course of the channels of bodies of water, upon petition of persons living adjacent to such water course.
Mr. Stewart's [H. R. 278] to amend Sections 47 and 66 of the decedents' estate act, being Section 2,290 of the Revised Statutes of 1881.
Mr. Wilson's, of Marion, [H. R. 279] to amend Sections 4 and 7 of an act providing for the establishment of a State Bureau of Statistics-being Sections 5,720 and 5,722 of the Revised Statutes of 1881.
Mr. Smith's, of Perry, [H. R. 280] touching the duties of Township Trustee.
Mr. Williams', of Posey, [H. R. 281] concerning witnesses in certain criminal cases.
Mr. Shockney's [H. R. 282] requiring Judges of the Circuit, Criminal and Superior Courts to give Charges to Juries in writing.
Mr. Mutz's [H. R.283] to amend Sections 94, 95 and 164, and repeal Sections 157 and 158 of ta decedents'estates act.
Mr. Mutz's [H. R. 284] to repeal Section 4 and amend Sections 47, 66 and 16[5?] of an act for the settlement and distribution of decedents' estates.
Mr. Stephenson's [H. R. 285] fixing the time of holding Court in the Second Judicial Circuit.
Mr. Holler's [H. R. 286] to empower Manufacturing Companies to take and hold stock in corporations' furnishing water power.
Mr. Aiken's [H. R. 287] to amend Section 3 of an act concerning Grand and Petit Juries, being Section 1,387 of the Code of 1881.
Mr. Spain's [H. R. 288] to amend Section 1 of an act concerning taxation of property in cities and towns, being Section 3,261 of the Code of 1881.
Mr. Campbell's [H. R. 289] to amend Section 4 of an act concerning drainage of April 8, 1881.
Mr. Schloss's [H. R. 290] to repeal Section 105 of an act concerning taxation-being Section 6,373 of the Revised Statutes of 1881.
Mr. Schloss's [H. R. 291] for the relief of Lewis Calder.
Mr. Schloss's [H. R. 292] to provide for issuing bonds by boards of Commissioners in Counties to construct and repair Court Houses, Jails and other County buildings.
Mr. Shively's [H. R. 293] concerning Mutual Life Insurance Companies.
Mr. Heffren's [H. R. 294] to amend Section 115 of an act concerning public offenses-being Section 2,020 of the Revised Statutes of 1881.
Mr. Heffren's [H. R. 295] to amend Section 64 of an act concerning proceedings in criminal cases, being Section 1,637 of the Code of 1881.
Mr. Beeson's [H. R. 296] to regulate the presenting of claims to the General Assembly.
Mr. Green's [H. R. 297] to amend Section 8 of an act establishing a State Board of Health.
Mr. Gibson's [H. R. 298] to amend Section 214, being Section 6,485 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, concerning taxation.
Mr. Barr's [H. R. 299] compelling Railroad Companies to provide for the safety of persons and property in loading and unloading cars.
Mr. Bryant's [H. R. 300] defining the Twentieth Judicial Circuit, creating the Forty-third Judicial Circuit, fixing the time for holding Courts and providing for the appointment of a Judge and Prosecuting Attorney for the Forty-first Judicial Circuit.
Mr. MOODY offered a resolution that the vote of the House this forenoon authorizing
the Speaker to appoint two additional members of the
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, moved to lay this I resolution on the table.
The yeas and nays were demanded by Mr. Williams, of Knox, and others. Pending which-
On motion by Mr. PETTIBONE, 300 copies of his bill [H. R. 273] to authorize the issuance of 650 internal revenue bonds $1,000 each to be used for draining the Kankakee region, were ordered printed it having heretofore been made the special order for Wednesday at 10 o'clock.
Then the House adjourned,
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR took the chair and directed the reading of the minutes.
The Senate's journal of Saturday's proceedings was read and approved.
Mr. COMPTON presented a petition against the repeal of the State Board of Health act, from Clay County.
Mr. BICHOWSKY presented a petition from 200 citizens of Vigo County on the same subject; also on the subject o military affairs.
Mr. HOOVER presented a petition with 167 names on the same subject.
Mr. ADKISON presented letters and memorials on the same subject; also 127 names on a petition on military affairs.
Mr. WILLARD presented a petition from Lawrence County on the subject of roads.
Mr. DUNCAN presented a petition from Brown County with forty-nine signatures, asking that the State Health Board yet be not repealed.
Mr. COMPTON presented a petition from Clay County with 285 names, on the subject of Prison labor.
These papers were severally referred to appropriate Committees, only the first one being read.
The following described bills were introduced, read The first time and severally referred to appropriate Committees:
By Mr. RAHM [S. 217] to authorize the Willard Library, of Evansville, to sell and convey by deed certain real estate situated in Evansville.
By Mr. WILLARD [S. 218] to amend Sections 94, 95, J3S and 139 of the act of March 29, 1881, concerning taxation, being Sections 6 362 and 6,363, 6,407 and 6,408 of the Statutes of 1881, concerning listing of railroad tracks for taxation at not less than 812 000 per mile -'or e?ich mile of said track By
Mr. BELL [S. 219] to authorize and empower Gas Light and Water Works Companies to extend their mains and supply gas or water beyond the corporate limits of cities or towns rot exceeding five miles beyond the corporate limits. He said the view is to supply manufacturing Companies beyond the limits of towns and cities, and was there a full Senate he would move for a dispensation of the rules that the bill may be passed to the final reading now, but as the Senate was slim he moved its reference to a Special Committee of Three.
The motion was agreed to and the LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR made the Committee to consist of Messrs. Bell, Van Vorhis and Spann.
By Mr BELL [S. 220] to repeal Section 105 of the act concerning taxation of March 29, 1881, being Section 6,373 of the Revised Statutes of 1881. [relating to the taxation of Building, Loan Fund and Savings Associations.]
By Mr. WILLARD [S. 221] to amend the act to provide compensation to owners of animals killed by any Railroad Company in this State. being Section 4,025 of R. S. of 1881; also Section 4,026 to 4 032 of the said Revised Statutes of 1881. 1881.
Provides that in case any animal Is killed or injured on any unfenced railroad the owner shall have a right of action in the name of the State of Indiana on the relation of the owner, said action to be brought by the Prosecuting Attorney. On the action succeeding the railroad shall be not less than three nor more than five tinges the value of the stock killed, the Prosecuting Attorney to get one-quarter of the judgment, and the finding of an animal dead on the road to be presumptive proof that the animal was killed by the Railroad Company.
By Mr, SPANN [S. 222] to amend Section 1 of the act concerning drainage, being Section 4,273 of the Revised Statutes of 1881. [The Circuit Judge to appoint two Drainage Commissioners to serve three years.]
[By inserting near the middle of said section these words: "The County Surveyor, if he be a civil engineer, shall be ex officio a Commissioner of Drainage. If the County Surveyor be not a civil engineer, which fact shall be ascertained by the Judge aforesaid, said Judge shall appoint a competent surveyor, who shall be a civil engineer, to act as such Commissioner of Drainage, the term of office of the surveyor and civil engineer to expire upon the election and qualification of a County Surveyor as provided by law."]
By Mr SPANN [S. 223] to amend the drainage and reclamation of wet land act, being Section 4,305 of the Revised Statutes of 1881.
By Mr. FAULKNER [S. 224] to abolish the office of State Librarian and providing for the disposition of books, etc., belonging thereto and that the books shall be transferred to the State University.
By Mr. WILLARD [S. 225] to repeal the act authorizing aid to railroads by Counties and Townships, approved May 12, 1869, also the act approved March 17, 1869, being Sections 4,045 to 4,057 and 4,059 to 4,053, inclusive, of the Revised Statutes of 1881.
By Mr. WILLARD [S. 226] to repeal Sections 2 to 8, inclusive, of an act regulating the issuing and taking up of tickets and coupons of tickets by common carriers, approved March 5, 1875, being Sections 2,905 to 2,911, inclusive, of the Revised Statutes of 1881.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR announced the order to be consideration of Senate bills on the second reading.
Mr. SPANN, recognizing the importance of a quorum at least during the consideration of bills on the second reading, demanded a call of the Senate.
The demand was seconded and being ordered and taken discovered thirty-four Senators present and answering to their names.
On motion by Mr. HENRY further proceedings under the call were dispensed with.
The Senate proceeded to the consideration of the unfinished business Friday afternoon-being Mr. Smith's, of Delaware, bill, [S. 58] concerning weights and measures.
Mr. SMITH, of Delaware, has discovered the section sought to be amended has been
repealed, consequently he moved the bill and amendment pending be referred to the
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. Yancey's bill, [S. 62] to prohibit certain animals from running at large, was read the second time with a proposed Committee amendment, which was concurred in. The bill was ordered engrossed for the third reading.
On motion by Mr. BENZ his bill [S. 6] for the election of Supervisors of highways, the special order for 2:30 o'clock to-day, was postponed till to-morrow and made the special order for 2:30 p. m.
Mr. Van Vorhis' bill [S. 107] defining powers of attorney, and providing for recording the same, was read the second time with Committee amendments, which were concurred in. It was ordered engrossed for the third reading.
Mr. Hutchinson's bill [S. 50] concerning the
official term of the Directors of the Northern Prison, was read the second time with a
report from a majority of the
On motion by Mr. Benz it was passed over informally in the absence of the author of the proposed substituted bill.
Mr. Duncan's bill [S. 66] to amend Section 2 of the amended Common School law of March 6, 1865, and March 8, 1873-concerning Township Trustees-was read the second time with a Committee report favorable to its passage. The bill was ordered engrossed for the third reading.
Mr. Hilligass' bill [S. 147] to amend Section 4,369 of the 1881 Code, requiring school funds to be loaned at 6 per cent, was read the second time with a Committee report recommending that it lie on the table. The report was concurred in.
Mr. Ristine's bill [S. 37] to amend Section 67 of the criminal proceedings act-see page 30 of the Brevier Reports-was read the second time with a Committee report recommending indefinite postponement. The report was concurred in.
Mr. Marvin's bill [S. 139] to protect gravel and paved roads from heavy burdened wagons-see page 72 of the Brevier Reports-was read the second time with a favorable Committee report. The bill was ordered engrossed for the third reading.
Mr. White's bill [S. 135] to amend Section 34 of the Common School law of March 6, 1865, being Section 4,425 of the Revised Statutes of 1881-see page 72 of the Brevier Reports-was read the second time with a Committee report embracing an amendment. The report was concurred in.
Mr. Foulke's bill [S. 47] to amend Section 1 of the Public Library act approved March 7, 1881, being Section 4,524 of the Revised Statutes of 1881-see page 35 of the Brevier Reports-was read the second time with amendments in a Committee report. The report was concurred in; the bill was ordered engrossed.
Mr. Macartney's bill [S. 52] to amend
Sections 218, 227 and 228 of act approved March 29, 1881-see page
Mr. FLETCHER presented a proposition from James C. Ferguson to sell to the State for a Governor's residence the property on the southwest corner of Meridian and Michigan Streets, Indianapolis, 80x203 feet more or less, a three-story brick of twenty-two rooms and ball room, with two story brick barn and coach house, 20x65, for $70,000. Whereupon Mr. F. offered the following:
Resolved, by the Senate, the House concurring therein, That a Committee of five Senators and seven members of the House be appointed to inquire into and report to the Senate relative to said memorial.
The resolution was adopted.
The Senate adjourned till 10 a. m. to-morrow.
CORRECTION-Under the head of Saturday's Senate proceedings, where
it is stated that "reports from Committees have recommended the following described
bills be laid on the table, the bill S. 55 is one, but the author and title is
incorrect. It is Mr. May's bill [S. 55] to amend Sections 322 (60) of the Revised
Statutes of 1881, being an act concerning elections and contest thereof, approved
April 21, 1881, and declaring an emergency. * *
The Speaker commanded order and announced prayer by Rev. Oscar C. McCulloch, of Plymouth Church, Indianapolis.
On motion by Mr. HEFFREN the further reading of the Clerk's minutes of Saturday's proceedings were dispensed with.
The following Senate bills were taken from the Speaker's table, read the second time and severally referred to appropriate Committees, unless otherwise stated:
The bill [S. 113] to amend Section 1,407 of the Code of 1881, applying to changes of venue before Justices of the Peace. Approved June 9, 1852.
The bill [S. 5] concerning the publication of
the Revised Statutes. It was referred to the
The bill [S. 89] to amend Section 28 of an
act to provide for a general system of Common Schools. It was referred to the
The bill [S. 192] for an act to legalize the
incorporation of the town of Cadiz, Henry County. It was reported to the
The bill [197] to amend an act to amend an
act dividing the State into Judicial Circuits. It was
The bill [S. 2] to authorize turnpike
companies in this State to connect their roads with turnpike roads in other States. It
was referred to the
The bill [S. 74] to authorize any manufacutory or hydraulic company to erect a dam across the St. Joseph River in Elkhart County.
The bill [S. 22] to amend Section 5,097 of an
act approved March 381, entitled an act to amend Section 7 of an act approved March 3,
1877. It was referred to the
The following hills were passed to the third reading:
The bill [S. 29] to legalize the proceedings and records of the Trustees of the town of Westfield, Hamilton County.
The bills H. R '35, 55, 85, 57, 53, 74, 185, 5, 2, 22, 141, 3, 10, 13, 29, 30, 32, 83, 34, 66, 79, 80, 8l, 83, 89 and 91 were announced by the Speaker, by numbers only, as having passed to thy third reading.
The following described bills were reported luck from Committees with a recommendation that, further action be indefinitely postponed:
Mr. Frazer's bill [H. R. 235] to amend Section
Mr. Stucker's bill [H. R. 187] to amend Section
Mr. Heffren's bill [H. R. 41] to repeal the act protecting sheep husbandry, was reported back from the same Committee.
Mr. Mock's bill [H. R. 50] to provide for the appointment of a report of the Supreme Court, was reported back from the same Committee.
Mr. Helms' bill [H. R. 164] to amend Section '243 of an act concerning public
houses, was reported back from the
Mr. Antrim's bill [H. R 137] to amend Section 5 of an act; to amend an act providing
for a general system of Common schools, was reported back from the
Mr. Best's bill [H. R. 194] to amend Section 9 of an act to amend an act to provide
for a general system of Common Schools, was reported back from the
Mr. Mozier's bill [H. R 229] to protect hotels, inns and boarding houses from being
demanded, was reported back from the
Mr. Wiley's bill [H. R. 120] to repeal an act enabling owners of lands to drain and
retain the same, was reported back from the
Mr. GRAHAM, from the
Mr. HEFFREN offered a resolution [H. R. 45] that the Superintendent of Public Instruction be requested to submit to this House all information and correspondence with the Governor or other persons concerning the prosecution of County Superintendent Williams by him as said Superintendent of Public Instructions on account of the payment of the expert of said prosecution. The resolution was adopted.
Mr. Spain's bill [H. R. 202] to provide for the location and erection of an additional Asylum for the Insane, was returned with a favorable report thereon.
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, moved to amend by striking out the word "Evansville" wherever it occurs and insert the word''Vincennes" in lieu thereof.
Mr. JEWETT objected, upon the ground that the people of Evansville were entitled to a square vote upon the bill, and that amendments inserting the names of other cities ought not to be entertained. The Evansville people had originated the idea of locating a new Insane Asylum at their city, and were interesting themselves a good deal in behalf of the project. He did not know whether the House would accede to the proposition, but as the bill had been introduced in th interest of Evansville, he thought that other cities who might desire to secure a new Asylum should have a bill of Their own introduced, and not seek to embarrass the Evansville people, as now proposed. He moved to lay the motion upon the table.
Mr. Williams, of Knox, and Mr. Patton demanded the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays being ordered and taken discovered a quorum not present, and toe Speaker ordered a call of the House, which found sixty-seven members present and answering to their names.
The yeas and nays being called again, on the motion to lay on the table, the vote resulted yeas, 56; nays, 11.
So the motion was agreed to.
Mr. WILSON, of Kosciusko, moved to amend by striking out the word "Evansville" wherever it occurs and inserting in its place the word "Indianapolis."
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Posey, moved to lay the amendment on the table.
This motion was agreed to.
On motion by Mr. Jewett the bill was ordered engrossed for a third reading.
Mr. Mock's bill [H. R. 269] concerning elections, was reported back from the
Mr DEEM moved to indefinitely postpone the bill and amendments.
Mr. MOCK desired to say in reference to the bill that there had been a great deal of fraud in his County by voting double tickets and again there has been a great deal of fraud perpetuated by using stickers. The provisions of the bill were intended to prevent this. He thought that the bill and amendments ought to be adopted, It practically makes it illegal to vote for any one except the regular nominees whose names are upon the tickets of each party. The object of the bill is to render it impossible to scratch without writing in the name of the person other than the regular nominee for whom a vote is desired to be cast; and it proposes that when a printed sticker is used neither the candidate named or; the sticker nor the one whose name is pasted over are to get the benefit of the vote.
Mr. DEEM thought under the provision of the bill it would be necessary for every little town to place partisan nominees in the field at every town or municipal election. In his County these offices were not made a partisan manner, and he did not desire to see them become such.
Mr WILLIAMS thought it was a good bill, and that the gentleman on the floor last [Mr. Deem] did not understand the provisions of the bill. He thought that the bill ought not to b indefinitely postponed.
Mr HAM had examined the bill thoroughly, and in ought there was nothing objectionable in the bill.
Mr. SMITH, of Tippecanoe, was opposed to using stickers, but he feared that should
this bill
The House took a recess until 2 o'clok.
By consent Mr. Deem withdrew the motion to postpone Indefinitely, and on motion the
bill was referred to the
The SPEAKER announced the special order to be the general appropriation bill [H. R. 302]
Mr. JEWETT moved that the House resolve itself into a
The motion was agreed to and-
Accordingly the House of Representatives resolved itself into a
Mr, HEFFREN said it would be a waste of time tor the bill to be considered in a
The motion was agreed to and accordingly-
The Committee rose the Chairman reporting as the report was concurred in by the House.
On motion by Mr. HEFFREN the bill was taken up. The House agreeing to consider the same section by section.
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, moved to reduce the salary of the Adjutant General from $1,400 to $1,200, understanding there are fees and perquisites, appertaining to this office, which should be considered in fixing the salary.
Mr. WILSON, of Marion, considered $1,400 small enough salary for any capable man That officer has already been a saving to the State.
Mr. MOODY moved to make the salary $1,500.
Mr. FRAZER opposed anything below $1,400.
On motion the amendments were laid on the table by yeas, 48: nays, 47.
Mr. SMITH, of Tippecanoe, made a motion, which was laid on the table, for a contingent fund of $500 for the Attorney General.
Mr. GREEN moved that the night watchman of the State Library be paid $600 instead of $500, and be required to visit each office every hour during the night.
Mr JEWETT moved to amend the amendment by substituting $500 for $600.
This motion was agreed to.
The amendment as amended was adopted.
Mr. McMULLEN moved to increase the appropriation for the support of feeble minded children from $10,000 to $12,500.
It was agreed to.
Mr. ADAMS moved to increase the appropriation for the State University from $23,000 to $25,000, provided $5,000 of this amount be placed in the hands of the Board to be used for repair of the building.
Mr. JEWETT. The amount proposed by the Committee in this bill will cover current expenses, and if any additional amount is required it should be by special appropriation. The Committee does not believe $5,000 is needed for the repair of the buildings.
On motion by Mr. WILLIAMS, of Posey, the amendment was laid on the table.
Mr. SMITH of Tippecanoe, moved to increase the appropriation for Purdue University from $2,000 to $5,000. He said to make the appropriation $2,000 simply means to destroy the institution for the next two years. He did not represent the Purdue Institute. It should be represented by every man in this House. Each County in the State is entitled to send two students there free of all expense, except an incidental Janitor's fee. Twenty-five thousand dollars is necessary.
Mr. JEWETT did not think the Purdue University was well managed. It has a permanent endowment furs of $320,000. The interest from that, with the $2,000 proposed by the Committee in this bill, he thought was surely enough.
Mr. Heffren referred to a recent difficulty between the faculty and students.
Mr SMITH, of Tippecanoe, replied to objections urged to the conduct of the faculty. $23,000 has been voted to the State University, an old-established institution, while it is proposed to cutoff this young ward of the State with but $2,000. It is not fair to strangle it in its youth. He appealed to the friends of agriculture to rally to the support of Purdue University with liberal appropriation.
On motion by Mr. HEFFREN the amendment was laid on the table-yeas, 47; nays, 27.
Mr. GILMAN moved to make the appropriation $10,000. It was laid on the table.
Mr. HANSON moved to make it $20,000.
Mr. HOWLAND moved to make it $15,000.
The amendments were laid on the table-yeas, 41; nays, 39.
Mr. HOWLAND moved to insert $9,500 instead of $2,000.
Mr. WILEY moved to substitute $14,000 instead of $2,000 no part of this sum to be used while any restrictions are put upon the students by the faculty or Board of Trustees concerning their Greek Societies.
Mr. HOWLAND reminded the House that this is the one institution in the State designed for the education of farmers and mechanics, and those classes are entitled to some facilities for advancement.
Mr. HEFFREN would not vote for the bill if this heavy appropriation was tacked on it.
Mr. JEWETT would regard such an amendment in the light of a rider on this bill, and for that and other reasons he hoped the amendment would not prevail.
Mr. SMITH. of Tippecanoe, paid there had been attempts made to initiate members of this House into secret societies just for the purpose of defeating this appropriation.
Mr. WILS0N, of Marion, understood this institution has an income of about $18,000 on interest from the endowment fund, and this $2,000 appropriation will give it $20,000. There ought to be an institution of this kind maintained in this State. Two thousand dollars is too small. A medium between that and $20,000 is best.
The House adjourned.
The Senate met at 10 o'clock, the LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR in the Chair, who directed the reading of the Secretary's minutes of yesterday's proceedings after prayer.
On motion bv Mr. BUNDY the reading of the journal was dispensed with.
The following described bills w re introduced, read the first lime, and severally referred to appropriate Committees, unless otherwise stated:
By Mr. BUNDY [S. 227] to amend Sections 3. 4 and 12 of an act concerning drainage, approved April 8, 1681.
By Mr. JOHNSON [S. 228] for the incorporation of Mercantile and Commercial Companies. [Wholesale or retail or both ]
By Mr. HILLIGAS [S. 229] regulating the business of Express Companies in this State in the transportation of gold or silver coin or paper currency. Shall ascertain by actual count the amount and enter in a book the sum, and execute to the consignor a receipt specifying the exact amount, etc., etc.
By Mr. MAGEE [S. 230] to amend 4 025 of the Revised Statutes of l88i, concerning the killing of stock by railroads, action to be commenced within six mouths from time of killing.
By Mr. SMITH [S. 231] to amend Sections 1 and 2 of an act concerning the purchase by
County Boards of free roads, of April 9,
By Mr. SAYRE [S. 232] concerning the fees of Clerks in decedent estate claims.
By Mr. BELL [S. 233] to provide for holding terms or parts of terms of the Circuit Court where the Judge is sick or by any unavoidable cause incapacitated. [The Judge may appoint in writing a Judge pro tem.]
By Mr. BENZ [S 234] changing the Second Judicial Circuit attaching Perry County to the Third Judicial Circuit-Crawford, Harrison and Perry; the Second Circuit-Spencer and Warrick from and after the first Monday in next month.
By Mr. FOULKE [S. 235] to authorize Boards of County Commissioners in each County to construct a Jail for f ma^ie prisoners.
By Mr. HOOVER [S. 236] fixing commutations of terms of sentence, on account of good behaviour, of persons confined in State's Prisons.
By Mr. MACARTNEY [S. 237] to provide for transfer and reading of wills where title of real estate is changed by will.
By Mr. MAGEE; [S. 238] to amend Section 2 of the act authorizing cities and towns to construct and maintain water works of November 25, 1879 being Section 3,266 of the Revised Statutes of 1881. He said the only thing in it was to authorize the Condemnation of property after the works are erected. It affected no other city in the State but Logansport
By Mr. NULL [S. 239] to repeal Section 3 of an act concerning aliens, of April 18,
1881-being Section 2,967 of the Revised Statutes of 1881. [A similar bill has been
reported favorably by the
By Mr. VOYLES [S. 240] to amend Section 23 of an act concerning elections, of April 21, 1881, and the contest thereof. [All ballots shall be printed on plain white paper, without distinguishing marks, to be used in envelopes of plain white, sealed, 3 1/2 x 2 1/2 inches.
By Mr. BELL [S. 241] to prevent speculating in human lives under the guise of insurance.
By Mr. HILLIGASS [S. 242] to fix the term of city officers four years, to begin in ten days after election.
By Mr. BUNDY [S. 243] to prohibit diseased animals from being led, driven or rode into any public place
By Mr. VAN VORHIS [S. 244] to legalize certain records m the offices of Town Recorders in all cities of 50,COO and over by the last census [where a system of making and maintaining indexes of records of instruments required to be recorded has been adopted and pursued continuously for thirty years, shall be legal and continued in force.]
By Mr. FOULKE [S. 245] concerning the sale of intoxicating liquors. [The owners of
buildings to be liable severally or jointly with the seller or giver for damages
resulting from liquors obtained therein, with the knowledge that intoxicating liquors
are to be sold therein; and unlawful sale
Mr. BUNDY moved that the
On motion by Mr. BROWN this motion was laid on the table by yeas,
Mr. Bundy presented a petition praying for appropriations in favor of encouragement and support of the militia forces of the State. Like petitions were presented by Messrs. Rahm, Johnson, from Tippecanoe; Foulke, from Wayne County; Hutchinson, from Laporte County; Keiser, from Pulaski County; Van Vorhis, Marion County, and Mr. Campbell, from St. Joseph.
Mr. Fletcher presented petitions from several Counties against the repeal of the Board of Health act. Mr. Magee and Mr. Overstreet presented similar petitions.
Mr. Johnson presented a petition for the abolishment of Prison convict contract labor.
Mr. McCarthy presented a petition praying for a law taxing foreign Fire Insurance Companies doing business in the State for the benefit of volunteer Fire Companies.
These petitions were referred to appropriate Committees,
Mr. BELL, from the Special Committee thereon, retuned his bill [S. 219] introduced yesterday to authorize Gas and Water Works Companies to extend their mains not exceeding five miles beyond the corporation limits of any town or city, with a favorable report thereon.
On motion by Mr. VAN VORHIS, the Constitutional rule was set aside-yeas, 34: pays, 8, the report concurred in after the bill was read the second time by title only; they'll considered as engrossed, read the third time and passed the Senate by yeas, 43, nays, 1.
Mr. HENRY fearing the bill would cut out Companies hereafter organized, by unanimous consent the words "now organized' were stricken from the bill.
Mr. HENRY offered a resolution calling upon the Clerk of the Supreme Court to report the number of appeals pending in the Supreme Court on the 1st day of January, 1881, and January 1, 1883: also the number of cases decided therein during the two years preceding and the two years following January 1, 1881.
It was adopted.
The Senate took a recess till 2 o'clock.
Mr. Johnston's bill [S. 102] to amend the act for the organization of the Asylum, for the Feeble Minded Children was read the second time, with a Committee report recommending its amendment. The amendments were concurred in and the bill ordered engrossed for the third reading.
Mr. Hatchinson's bill [S. 50] concerning
the official term of the Director of the Northern State Pris )n was read the second
time, with a favorable report from a majority of the
Mr. Campbell stated the object of the minority report, because of the benefit of experience, to place the Board in better shape to transact its business. Conceding qualifications which always accompany experience, the minority report recommends the selection of one experienced Director, who can give the benefit of experience to the other members. Anoiher object of the substitute: It provides for the election of successors after the terms of these officers expire, which latter latter measure is not in the original bill.
Mr. VOYLES said the Directors already selected are men placed in the positions because of their qualification. The object of the bill is to make the Board of Directors serve for a term of four years-both Prison Directors should serve the same length of time.
The minority report was rejected by yeas, 19; nays, 23.
The majority report was concurred in.
The bill was ordered engrossed for the third reading.
On motion by Mr. BENZ the Senate took up the special order for this hour [2:30 o'clock p. m], being his bill [S. 6] for the election and appointment of Supervisors of Highways.-See pp. 98 and 131 of the Brevier Reports.
Mr. Henry's substitute bill-see page 98-was rejected by yeas, 21; nays, 24.
The question recurring on the minority report recommending the substitution of new matter-
Mr. RISTINE explained the substitute embodies two sections from Mr. Voyles' bill with reference to working out road tax in the Township
Mr. VOYLES said that law does not provide for filling a vacanc in the office of Road Superintendent; and if other respects could be improved, but there is such a clamor for the old law he believed it better to pass the bill No 6 as introduced. He hoped She minority report would be temporarily, at least, rejected. If the bill No. 6 fails then he would be in favor of the minority report.
The minority report was rejected by yeas, 19; nays, 27.
The majority report of the Committee was concurred in by yeas, 31; nays, 14.
Mr. MARVIN moved to amend the bill by requiring the Supervisor to be a freeholder for the reason that the Supervisor should be a responsible man, and if not a freeholder he can not be made legally responsible.
Mr. BUNDY opposed the amendment. If there is any reason why a man, In order to be a Road Supervisor should be a freeholder, he did not know of it. There are many irresponsible men who own land and many responsible men who do not own any land.
Mr. BROWN thought every man should have a fair chance to obtain public favor. He desired to see every honest, aspiring young man have a fair Chance to become a Road Supervisor.
Mr. BENZ said: "I am opposed to that amendment, and will state my reason. When I was a young man I was elected Supervisor, and I did it so well I was elected twice, when I was elected School Trustee Then I was elected County Coroner, and held an inquest on a nigger twice. [Laughter,] On the same nigger twice. [Renewed laughter.] I'll tell you how it was about that nigger I held an inquest over twice, I gave a man $5 to bury him, and he put him in the river with a stone around him; but the rock got loose and they found him again and I had another inquest over him [Laughter.] Then they elected me as Representative, and twice as Senator, and next step I'm going to beat my friend Browne for Congress. [Applause]
Mr. WILLARD moved to amend the amendment by adding the words "or householder."
Mr. SPANN objected to both amendments. If we are going back to the old law let it stand free to all.
Mr. MARVIN insisted the Supervisor should be legally responsible, so he can be
compelled to do
Mr. FAULKNER worked four years ago in the House of Representatives to get the property qualification out of the law. It does not require property to make a man tell the truth and be honest. He favored an open field and a fair fight.
Mr. WILLARD withdrew his amendment to the amendment so that the question may come directly on the freeholder question.
Mr. SPANN moved to lay the amendment on the table.
The motion was rejected-yeas, 17; nays, 28.
The amendment was rejected by yeas, 2; nays, 43.
Mr. MAGEE moved to amend so as to prevent Supervisors giving a reciept for road tax when the work has not been done, for the reason that the Supervisor sometimes gives a receipt for work done, before it is done, in fact, and there ought to be a clause in the bill preventing such action.
It was agreed to.
Mr. VOYLES moved to amend by requiring Township Trustees to appoint a Road Supervisor to serve till a successor is elected.
Mr. RISTINE thought the work already commenced ought to be closed up and provision so made in the bill.
Mr. WILLARD understands the proviso continuing the present Supervisors in office until April 1884, will permit them to operate this new law until that time-this bill having no emergency clause.
Mr. HENRY moved to amend the amendment by making the road districts an area of not less than six square miles.
Mr. VOYLES accepted the amendment. He desired to have the law go in operation as soon as passed, thereby lagislating out the officers under the present system.
Mr. SPANN opposed the amendment. The complaint against the present law seems to be the failure of means to raise revenue to put in the hands of the road superintendents. Let the majority report prevail-continue the present law one year longer.
Mr. HENRY did not understand the provisions of this bill were to be carried out by the present officers.
Mr. SPANN, if mistaken, would be glad to see the bill amended.
Mr. RAHM opposed the amendment. In his County the roads needed working badly. Men were called out and got the roads in order and were given orders on the Treasurer which will be used next month in paying taxes. He did not want such cases cut out.
Mr. SPANN moved to amend by way of substitute that this act shall not take effect until April, 1884. This would cure the defect in the section to which his attention was called by the Senator from Madison [Mr. Henry].
Mr. CAMPBELL favored the amendment believing it would meet with approbation in the northern part of the state.
Mr. BROWN considered laws should take effect upon publication throughout the State, or in cases of emergency as provided in the Constitution. A demand for the old law can not well be met by re-enacting it and providing it shall not take effect for some fourteen months to come.
The substitute [Mr. Spann's] was adopted by yeas, 23; nays, 22.
Mr. HENRY moved to amend by adding that the road districts shall not be less than six square miles of area.
It was agreed to.
Mr. HENRY moved to amend by limiting the time to thirty days' pay in any one year to the Supervisor.
It was agreed to.
Mr. KEISER moved to amend by increasing the Supervisor's pay from $1.50 to $2.
Mr. BENZ objected; $1.50 is enough.
Mr. SPANN favored the amendment.
Mr. VAN VORHIS moved to insert "$2.50" in place of the "$2" in the amendment.
Mr. WHITE thought $1.50 a day would be satisfactory to the farming community generally.
The amendment to the amendment was rejected by yeas 2; nays, 14.
Mr. VAN VORHIS moved to lay the amendment on the table.
Mr. BROWN demanded the previous question on this motion.
The demand was not seconded-affirmative, 21; negative, 22.
Mr. KEISER withdrew his amendment.
Section 1, as amended, was adopted.
On motion by Mr. HENRY the word "biennial" was substituted for the word annual in Section 3, where it occurs before the word "election."
Mr. VAN VORHIS moved to strike out Section 4. We ought to be able to secure supervision without making it a penal offense for them to refuse.
The motion was rejected.
Mr. HILLIGASS moved to amend Section 5 by requiring a $100 bond of the Supervisor for faithful discharge of his duties.
Mr. HENRY offered a substitute for this amendment for a $300 bond.
Mr. MAGEE opposed both the amendment and the substitute. The Supervisor is compelled to serve, and it would be an additional hardship to require a bond, which in many instances would be difficult to comply with.
Mr. HENRY insisted on making as good a law as possible out of this: if it is a foregone conclusion it must be passed, as it seems to be. There ought to be a bond given. There should be some safeguards placed in the bill.
Mr. VAN VORHIS favored this amendment, but there is the trouble in Section 4, which ought to be stricken out.
Mr. MARVIN saw the Senate coming back to where he desired the start-to make the Supervisor responsible. He opposed requiring a bond of the Supervisor, as the bill stands.
Mr. HENRY withdrew his substitute and-
Mr. HILLIGASS amends his by making the Supervisor's bond $200 condition for a faithful discharge of his duties.
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. GRAHAM moved to add a proviso if such Supervisor be unable to give bond, such inability shall be a defense to the collection of the forfeiture provided in Section 4.
The amendment was agreed to.
Pending the consideration of Section 5-
The Senate adjourned.
The SPEAKER called the House to order.
The session was opened with prayer by Rev. F. M. S. Taylor, Dean of St. Paul's Cathedral.
On motion the reading of the Clerk's journal was dispensed with.
Mr. SHOCKNEY offered a resolution, which was not agreed to, that the Standing Committee of the House be instructed to report all bills back in the order in which said bills had been introduced into the House. The resolution set forth that certain bills had been in the hands of the Committees for some time, while other bills introduced later in the session had been reported back from the Committees.
The House resumed the consideration of the bill [H. R. 302] making appropriations for the State Government and its institutions, directing the application of such appropriations, requiring accounts to be kept by the fiscal years of the State, and repealing inconsistent laws which was ending at the adjournment yesterday.
The SPEAKER announced the question before the House to be the amendment of Mr. Wiley to the amendment offered by Mr. Howland, that the appropriations for Purdue University be increased fr m $2,000 to $9,500-Mr. Wiley's amendment proposing to make the appropriation $14,000.
Mr. JEWETT moved to lay the amendment to the amendment on the table.
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. ROBINSON moved to amend the amendment by inserting
Mr. SMITH, of Tippecanoe, said the State of Indiana in its Legislative capacity accepted the princely gift; of Purdue University, and pledged herself to perpetually fester and sustain it on the terms of the joint gift of the doors forever as a College of Agriculture and Mechanic Arts. Will the Legislature now strangle this Institution and thus violate the compact? If so, will not the donors claim to reversion of their gift? The entire proceeds from the interest on the endowment fund are used in paying the salaries of instructors. and the Legislature is asked for an appropriation to meet the current incidental expenses, each item of which is set forth in the report of the Trustees. To-day the value of land, buildings and appurtenances is $312,000, or including endowment fund an aggregate of $652,000, showing that all interests have been cared for.
Mr. PATTEN had filtered to this discussion with some attention, and was unable to understand why some gentlemen had been advocating an increase of this appropriation. He desired to know what they wanted with the appropriation?
Mr. SMITH (interrupting): Two thousand dollars will not furnish the coal for the Institution.
Mr. PATTEN (continuing) understood that Purdue University would not come begging the Legislature every time it was in session. There is nothing practical about this Institution. It does not benefit the farmers at all. The farmers' sons are not educated there. He knew many of the students educated at this Institution become farmers? No, sir; they do not become farmers, and never will become farmers. Men do not send their sons there to become farmers. He was not opposed to Educational Institutions whatever. He found that gentlemen who were advocating a large appropriation had an ax to grind.
Mr. MUTZ knew something about Purdue University, and desired to state to the members what he knew concerning this Institution. He was as much opposed to large appropriations as the gentleman from Sullivan [Mr. Patten.] He knew they had a good Institution down at Purdue-an Institution that no man ought to be ashamed of. He educated one of his sons in this University, and he had never regretted it. When you talk about $2,000 or $9,000 for Purdue, it is too small. He regretted that men would get up on the floor and talk about giving Purdue $2,000. Give it enough so that it may run with credit to the Institution and to the State. Purdue is doing a good work, and nos only a good work, but a great work. He was in favor of a large appropriation.
Mr. WILSON, of Kosciusko, combatted the statement that Purdue University is inefficient and on the decline, referring to the reports of that Institution for proof to the contrary. The decrease in the academic department is owing to a higher grade of qualification being required for those who enter the University. The success of a farmer is not to be judged by the amount of produce sold only, but by the value of his experience. As two students are allowed to be sent to the Purdue University from each County he did cot think the Legislature could afford to strangle that Institution, but, rather, should carefully faster it. He favored the $12,000 appropriation.
Mr. STEWART made an ineffectual motion-yeas, 43; nays, 46-to lay the amendment on the table.
The amendment was agreed to by yeas, 92; nays, 38, and the amendment as amended was also agreed to.
Mr. SCHLOSS moved to amend the appropriation for the State Normal School by inserting seven thousand dollars in place of five thousand. He explained that there had been a considerable increase in the number of students, and it would require the extra two thousand dollars to carry on the school properly. He thought that as there had been such an increase in the number of students the appropriation should be likewise increased. He hoped that the House would grant the extra two thousand dollars.
Mr SMITH thought that an extra $2,000 would be a very small sum, and hoped the House would grant the extra $2,000.
Mr. JEWETT desired to state that the amount was the largest ever granted to the State Normal School, and read the several amounts granted for previous years. He further explained that the entire expenses of the Institution way not met by this appropriation, but that the law provides that the Superintendent of Public Instruction shall draw a certain sum in favor of this Institution.
The amendment was rejected.
Mr. PATTEN moved to strike out the $5,000 appropriated for the State Board of Health.
Mr. JEWETT stated that the Committee did not see way clear in this matter, but he considered the better than to be the continuance of the appropriation.
Mr. STEWART desired that the amendment of the gentleman [Mr. Patten's] would not prevail, and that the House would concur in the original appropriation "
Mr. HEFFREN favored the adoption of the amendment. He stated that the $5,000 granted in the appropriation was only a mere pittance of the amount the State Board of Health cost the people of the State. He thought that a vote on the adoption of the amendment would decide whether or not the members were in favor of continuing the State Board of Health.
Mr. WILSON, of Marion, stated that there had been two or three bill? introduced to repeal the law creating a State Board of Health, and that the friends ot the said Board have asked permission to be heard on this question before the bills are reported back on to-morrow Let this bill be acted upon. It does not continue the State Board of Health; and let these men have a chance to present this matter to the Committee.
Mr. WILEY desired to say a few words in answer to the statement of the gentleman from Washington [Mr. Heffren] that the State Board of Health had cost the people several thousand dollars, and that he was unable to see that it had benefited them any. He had been reliably informed that contagious diseases have been entirely removed in certain localities.
Mr. JEWETT (interrupting) asked if it was not a fact that a large part of the outlay so far has been for books and articles that will last for a long time to come.
Mr. WILEY stated that such was the fact. He would rather kill this Board of Health
outright than to strangle it by withholding the ap
Mr. McHENRY thought that the statistics of this Board were of little practical value, since many physicians had failed to make the required reports of deaths, births, etc; but it has been two short-lived to tell the result. He favored the appropriation, and said if the Legislature decides it must die let it be by a fair vote and not by strangling it to death.
Mr. MOODY believed the House ought to allow the appropriation and decide the matter on the merits or demerits of the bills when they reported back from the Committee. Allow these men who are prepared to show the effectiveness of this Board of Health, to appear before the Committee. In his opinion the existence of this Board has been too short to determine its usefulness.
Mr. THOMAS desired that the appropriation be continued, and hoped that the members would not cut off the same.
Mr. PATTEN did not care how this Board of Health was killed, so it was killed. Cut off the appropriation and it will die. It was created for the purpose of furnishing statistics for certain corporations. These corporations have to have these statistics, and they propose to make the State furnish them. What is this State Board of Health and what has it done? It is not right to appropriate this $5,000 to continue this thing that nobody wants. It is an outrage upon the people of the State of Indiana. One man has the power to make or damn every physician in the State.
Mr. PRICE thought the House should proceed cautiously in adopting the amendment. He was not fully satisfied with the workings of the Board so far himself, but he desired to see a full and impartial investigation. We should vote down this amendment.
Mr. BOWERS did not want to take a step backward. If the State Board of Health is not worth $5,000 it is not worth anything.
Mr. GANTS stated that there are some objections to this Board, and were when the bill was passed. Quite a number of physicians were opposed to the bill who, after they had investigated this matter carefully, are in favor of the bill or of leaving the Board as it is.
One gentleman said there was an object in view in passing this bill. Well are not all bills passed for an object? And the object of this bill was to protect the people. He referred to vaccination and every man knows that vaccination is for the protection of the community and family.
On motion by Mr. GORDON the amendment was laid on the table by yeas 64; nays, 27.
The House took a recess until 2 o'clock.
Mr. DEEM made an ineffectual motion to reduce the appropriation for the State Board of Health from $5,000 to $2,000.
Mr. HEFFREN offered the following amendment, which was adopted, to the appropriation for the State Board of Health; "And no more, by virtue of any former law, shall be appropriated than $5,000."
A motion to strike out the appropriation for the Fishery Commission was laid on the table by yeas, 63; nays, 19.
Mr. FLEECE offered an amendment to the appropriation for the House of Refuge for Boys, making it $60,000 instead of $50,000. He had been informed by the Manager of the Institution, whom he regarded a most worthy and honorable man, that $50,000 was not sufficient to properly conduct the Institution and furnish proper food and clothing to the inmates. He desired to have this appropriation raised to $60,000.
On motion by Mr. GORDON the amendment was laid on the table.
Mr. CAMPBELL made an ineffectual motion to increase the appropriation for the "Institution for Women and Girls," from $30,000 to $35,000.
He also made an ineffectual motion to strike out the following words: "But no person receiving a salary from the State or any of its institutions shall be paid additional compensation from this fund."
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, offered an amendment, which was agreed to, to insert the words, "inforce" at the time reports are delivered," after the word "law," where it first occurs in the following item of the appropriation bill: "For payment for volumes of the reports of the Supreme Court in number and prices as provided by law to be paid in the manner provided by law."
On motion by Mr. JEWETT the bill as amended was ordered engrossed.
The SPEAKER announced the special order the report from the
On motion by Mr. BEST the House resolved itself into a
The CHAIRMAN stated the question to be on the amendment of the gentleman from Wabash [Mr. Frazer].
This amendment was rejected upon a division-affirmative, 40; negative, 46.
The CHAIRMAN: The question recurs now on the report from the
The report was concurred in upon a division-affirmative, 53; negative, 33.
The report [Mr. McMullen's] as amended by the Patten and Jewett report was concurred in.
On motion by Mr. GIBSON the Committee rose, reported its action to the House and asked to be discharged.
The House concurred in the report of the
Yeas-Messrs. Adams, Antrim, Beeson, Best, Brazelton, Bryant, Campbell, Copeland, Davis, Deem, Fleece, Frazee, Frazer, Furnas, Genung, Gibson, Gilman, Graham, Ham, Hanson, Helms, Holler, Huston, Jewett, Kirkpatrick, Knowles, McCormick, McClelland of Lawrence, McClelland of Porter, Marsh, Mellett, Mering, Mosier, Patten, Pettibone, Pulse, Robertson, Robinson, Shaffter, Shively, Shockney, Smith of Blackford, Sterret, Stewart, Straughan, Thomas, Thompson, Weaver, Westfall, Wiley, Wilson of Kosciusko and Wooding-52.
Nays-Messrs. Bowers, Brooks, Cabbage, Carr, Chandler, Chittenden, Eley, Ferriter, Fisher, Gordon, Greene, Howland, Kennedy, McHenry, McMullen, Mauck of Harrison, Miller, Mack of Wells, Moody, Mutz, Nave, Price, Pruitt, Schloss, Smith of Perry, Spain, Stevenson, Stucker, Sutton, Tuley, Whitsit, Williams of Knox, Williams of Posey, Wilson of Marion and Mr. Speaker-35.
Pending the roll call-
It was stated that Messrs. Akin, Gantz, Smith of Lagrange, and Smith of Tippecanoe, who would have voted "aye," were paired with Messrs. Gerber, Heffren, Kester and Shaw, who would have voted "no." The absentees were Messrs. Barr, Peters, Montgomery, Henderson and Wright.
The vote was then announced as above.
So the House of Representatives concurred in the report from the
The SPEAKER announced a special order, being Mr. Brazelton's bill [H. R. 91] concerning the relocation of Counts seats, which was read the third time, the question being, Shall the bill pass?
Mr. ADAMS said this bill seeks to revolutionize the law on the subject of
relocation of County seats, and were it to pass, in a very short time the
Mr. JEWETT demanded the previous question.
The demand was seconded,and under its operations the-
Mr. BRAZELTON denied the intimation that there was any party politics in this question. Two thirds of the people interested ought to be allowed to vote, as provided in this bill. He spoke in favor of its passage.
The bill failed to pass for want of a Constitutional majority of the members elected, by yeas, 47; nays, 41.
Mr. JEWETT called up his bill [H. R. 27] for an appropriation for the Department for Women in the Insane Hospital.
The bill passed by yeas, 87; nays, 0.
On motion by Mr. WILSON, of Marion, his bill [S. 52] to construct a sewer from the Female Reformatory was read the second time and ordered engrossed.
The SPEAKER obtained leave of absence for to-morrow and Mr. Heffren was selected to act in his stead.
The House then adjourned.
The Senate met at 10 o'clock, Lieutenant Governor Hanna in the Chair.
On motion by Mr. HENRY, the reading of the Secretary's minutes of yesterday's proceedings was dispenced with.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first lime, and severally referred to appropriate Committees:
By Mr. HENRY [S. 246] to amend Section 10 of an act concerning drainage of April 8,
1881, and declaring an emergency-being section 4,282 of the Revised Statutes of 1881.
[Concerning assessment on lands for repair of
By Mr. CAMPBELL [S. 247] to provide for the more profitable and equitable hiring by the State of the convicts in the State Prison, and to amend Section 10 of the State Prison act, being Section 6,138 of the Code of l88l, so as to prevent contractors, getting a monopoly of the convict labor. [Proposed contracts shall be advertised by the Prison Directors for ten days in two of the leading dally papers of Indianapolis, Chicago and Cincinnati, and by such othes means as the Directors may deem profitable. When exclusive right to manufacture any article is given, any subsequent addition of convicts by new contract shall not extend beyond the expiration of the first pending contract. New contracts to take effect at the expiration of the old shall be made sixty days before the expiration of the old ]
By Mr. SPANN [S. 248] to provide for a Constitutional Convention to amend, alter or make a new Constitution for the State of Indiana. [The members of the Convention are to be fifty in number, to be chosen from the several Senatorial Districts at an election to be held on the first Monday in April, 1883. The Convention is to meet in Indianapolis on the first Thursday in June, 1883, and its members are to be allowed $10 per day. The mode in which the business of the Convention is to be conducted is set forth, and the new Constitution, or such amendments as shall be recommended for adoption, are to be submitted to the vote of the people within thirty days after the first Monday after the Convention adjourns.]
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR laid before the Senate a remonstrance from the City Council
of Indianapolis against the passage of the Metropolitan police bill. It was referred
to the
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR announced the unfinished business of yesterday, being the consideration of a special order pending at the adjournment.
Mr HENRY raised the point of order that under the rules of the Senate, No. 54, Wednesday's business supersedes the unfinished business, even were it a special order.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR decided that, in the absence of our rules we should be governed by the rules of the lower House or Congress, by which Wednesday's business takes precedence unless the special order was made to run from day to day until completed.
Mr. Hillgass' bill [S. 48] providing for the appraisement, purchase and convertment of toll roads into free roads, was read the third time.
Mr. SMITH, of Delaware, disliked to oppose any measure of this kind, but did not believe this bill would meet the wishes of its author or its friends; Under former laws citizens owning adjoining land were assessed heavily for building roads, and some roads constructed never have paid a dividend. The proposition now is to reassess these very same lands for the purchase of these roads. This is manifestly unjust. The bill also provides that a majority of these landholders shall first petition for the purchase, thus making the bill in-operative and ineffective, because you can not procure the petition of these men to assess themselves. He favored a bill to allow the purchase of gravel and Other toll roads and their conversion into free roads.
Mr. HILLIGASS insisted the reference to an old law inoperative was not pertinent to
this bill. That is no reason why the proposed bill should not be practicable. This
bill has had the careful consideration of some of the best lawyers in his District. If
the people along the line of pike, within the limit of three miles, are willing their
Mr. SMITH, of Jay, also hoped the bill would pass. It affects no law concerning gravel roads now on the statute books. In his County there is a six mile road from the County seat which the people desire to connect with another road and convert this toll into a free gravel road. For this and other reasons he hoped this measure will prevail.
Mr. VAN VORHIS feared that under this bill non-paying roads would have an advantage in selling non-productive roads to County Boards and thus make the land alongside pay twice-once for the original construction, and then again for the purchase of the same roads. He objected to this double assessment as not fair or just.
Mr. HILLIGASS saw no argument against the passage of this bill in what had been said. Where owners of land are wiling to encumber their real estate to purchase gravel roads running alongside the Legislature should not object.
Mr. HENRY objected to this bill in Section 2 where it provides for a wrong system of appraisement. As has been said frequently such stock is literally worth nothing in the market. The bill provides the assessment shall be at what it would cost to build the road, while the stock in the market may be worthless.
Mr. HILLIGASS: You forget the fact that if the owners and purchasers agree on a price it is a matter entirely with them.
Mr. HENRY: That is the difficulty. There may be ten men living along the road who have bought up the stock at ten cents on the $100, and under this bill they would take out the pockets of their neighbors what it would cose to out the road there. The assessment should be the value of the stock.
Mr. SPANN thought the Senator from Madison [Mr. Henry] had the wrong theory. He favored the bill.
Mr. FOULKE: The theory advanced by the Senator from Henry is undoubtedly correct, but the bill provides the case value of the road is to be determined. In determining the rent of a house not rentable for a percent, on the cost of construction it would not be valued at the cost of putting it up; and so it will be with assessments made under this bill.
Mr. VAN VORHIS moved to postpone indefinitely the further consideration of the bill.
This motion was rejected by yeas, 3; nays, 33.
Mr. FOULKE moved to recommit the bill to a Committee of One, with instructions to strike out the words "bridges and culverts," and "provided that the finding of the Court shall be final." There is no more reason why the finding of the Court should be final in this case than in cases where any other equitable relief is asked.
The motion was rejected.
Mr. CAMPBELL explained, while he desired some such measure should receive the approval of the General Assembly there were inequitable provisions in this bill which compelled his negative vote.
The bill failed to pass for want of a Constitutional majority-yeas, 21; nays, 18.
Mr. Fletcher's bill [S. 67] to authorize municipal corporations to invest their sinking fund temporarily in the bonds of the United States Government or Indiana State or County bonds, was read the third time.
Mr. VAN VORHIS explained its aim was simply to permit a temporary investment of any funds belonging to any city or town in Government bonds or Indiana State bonds at the hands of any County in this State.
The bill passed the Senate-yeas, 35; nays, 3. Then came an adjournment till 2 o'clock.
Mr. Voyles' bill [S. 91] was read the third time-designating a name by which the House of Refuge for the correction and reformation of the juvenile offenders shall hereafter be known providing for the appointment of Commissioners and prescribing their power and duties, and regulating the commitments thereto, and for the more efficient and uniform government of said Institution; also, authorizing the Governor to commute the sentences of boys under twenty-one years and declaring emergency.
On motion the further consideration of this bill was postponed, and made the special order for Friday at 11 o'clock a. m.
Mr. Yancey's bill [S. 62] to prohibit certain animals-horses, mules, meat cattle and sheep-from running at large in this State was read the third time.
Mr. YANCEY regarded it almost impossible to fence land with growing crops thereon because of the scarcity of timber. He hoped the bill would pass. A similar bill was before the Senate last session, at which time it was pretty thoroughly discussed, and the need of such a law is pretty generally recognized.
The bill failed to pass for want of a Constitutional majority-yeas, 22; nays, 12.
Mr. Hilligass' bill [S. 124] to authorize cities to permit municipal taxes to be paid in installments-one-half on or before the third Monday in April and the first Monday in November, being read the third time-
Mr. MAGEE explained as the law now stands city taxes are payable but once each year. This bill proposes to allow them to be paid as County and State taxes are-in semi-annual installments.
The bill passed the Senate by yeas, 16; nays, 10.
The motion by Mr. HUTCHINSON his bill [S. 50] concerning the official terms of the Directors of the Northern Prison was made a special order for Friday at 11:30 o'clock.
Mr. Johnson's bill [S. 102] to amend
Sections
Mr. BROWN moved to make this bill a special order for Friday at 11:15 o'clock.
This motion was rejected by yeas, 25; nays, 18, for want of a two-thirds vote.
Mr. SPANN believed this the law of 1879 increasing the salary to $500. He opposed
the bill on the ground of economy. From Rush County there comes here one of these
Trustees who says he is securing enough money for the labor he is performing, saving
it would be an iniquity and unjust to pay the Trustees any more. Mr. Spann opposed
the bill of 1879 because it destroyed the Soldiers' Home, wiped out its distinctive
features, and made it subservient to the feeble minded and idiotic children of
Indiana, making them subservient to the small-headed idiots of the State. A
Republican Trustee of this Institution has been upon the floor of this Senate
demanding that this bill shall not be passed, because the money paid to him is
enough and more than enough to pay for the services rendered. He wanted it to go out
to the country that the Democracy are anxious to raise salaries of these Trustees in
the face of these statements.
The demand for the previous question was seconded-yeas, 36; nays, 9-and under its operation-
The bill passed by yeas, 26; nays, 19.
Mr. HILLIGAS3 voting therefor, with the understanding that the bill does not increase the pay of Trustees.
Mr BROWN moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed and to lay the motion to reconsider on the table.
The latter motion was agreed to by yeas, 25; nays, 16.
The bill [H. R. 27] for an appropriation for the completion of construction and furnishing of the Department of Women for the Indiana Hospital for the Insane and for the construction of warehouses and woodhouses [$42,000 for completion; $10,000 for furnishing: $5,000 for warehouse, and $2,500 for coal-houses. Total, $59,500.]
Mr. MARVIN, recognizing the importance of immediate action on this bill, moved for a dispensation of the Constitutional rule that the bill may be pressed to its passage now. This money was appropriated two years ago, but for some reason has not been used and the money is doing nobody any good.
The motion was rejected-yeas, 25; nays, 35.
Mr. WILLARD, explaining his negative vote: He is willing to grant everything necessary in this case, but unwilling to pass an appropriation of this kind without examination by a Committee.
The bill was referred to tne
The bill [H. R. 231] to amend an act for fixing the Court terms in the Fourth Judiciary Circuits, concerning Floyd and Clark Counties-was read the first time.
Mr. McCLURE moved to refer the bill to the
The motion was agreed to.
The bill [H. R. 212] to fix the time for holding Courts in the Thirty-third Judicial Circuit affecting Whitley and Kosciusko Counties-was read the second time with a favorable Committee report. The bill was passed to the third reading.
The PRESIDENT pro tem. [Mr. Spann in the Chair] announced the order of the day-the consideration of the bill pending at the adjournment yesterday [S. 6] to provide for the election and appointment of Supervisors of Highways.
Mr. WHITE moved to insert "ten" instead of "eight hours" in Section 6 for a day's work.
It was agreed to.
Mr. MAGEE moved to strike out the words "and under fifty years" in Section 6. He knew no reason why a man over fifty years of age should not work on the road.
Mr. SMITH of Jay, moved to amend the amendment by inserting the words "Under sixty years of age."
Mr. DAVIDSON and Mr. HILLIGASS opposed both the amendments. Men over fifty who have been exempt should, not be again brought back to road work. "
Mr. HENRY favored the amendment.
The amendment to the amendment was rejected by yeas, 6; nays, 28.
The amendment was also rejected.
Mr. HILLIGASS made an ineffectual motion to strike out the last words in Section 6, viz.; "Although such person may be in some respects deformed."
Mr. HENRY moved to amend Section 7 by inserting the word "mule" and the words "road scraper or road scoop."
Mr. RAHM favored the mule part of the amendment inasmuch as there are but few horses or oxen in his County.
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. BUNDY moved to amend Section 2 by adding a proviso preventing voting for a Road Supervisor in any other District than the one in which the voter resides.
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. VAN VORHIS moved to amend by inserting $1.50 instead of $1 per day wherever it occurs in Section 10.
Mr. HENRY moved to make it $1.25.
Mr. WILLARD opposed both amendments.
Mr. RAHM did not believe in starving a man on $1 a day; $1.25 is little enough.
The amendment to the amendment [Mr. Henry's] was agreed to, and the amendment as amended was also agreed to.
On motion by Mr. VAN VORHIS $1 was made to read $1.25 in Section 11.
On motion by Mr. HENRY 25 "was inserted after the word dollar" in section 13.
Mr. HENRY moved to amend Section 15 so as to give credit for the same class of work done by inserting the words "similar extra" after the word "subsequent."
It was agreed to.
Mr. ADK1NSON moved to strike from Section 16 the words: "Unless he should deem them unreasonable, in which case he may reduce the amount"-striking out this discretion. The Supervisor with the disinterested persons are better qualified to judge in such cases than the Trustees.
Mr. MAGEE thought this feature may be unconstitutional, though favoring the amendment.
Mr. HOWARD offered a substitute by providing that appeal may be made to the Circuit Court in the question of damages.
Mr. ADKISON made the point of order that the substitute is not germane.
The PRESIDENT pro tem [Mr. Spann in the Chair] sustained the point of order.
On motion by Mr VAN VORHIS this section was referred to the Senator from Crawford [Mr. Benz] with instructions to amend as suggested by Mr. Magee. That there should be provisions made for appeals in all cases of damages under the rules of practice governing like cases.
The Senate adjourned until to-morrow.
Principal Clerk Edwins called the House to order at 10 o'clock, stating it necessary for the House to select a Speaker pro tem. to act in the absence of Mr. Speaker Bynum, and called for nominations.
Mr. TULEY nominated the Representative from Washington County (Hon. Horace Heffren.)
There being no other nominations the Clerk put the question to a vote of the House, and declared Mr. Heffren was unanimously elected Speaker pro tem.
And thereupon-
The SPEAKER pro tem. took the chair and announced prayer by Rev. G. S. Steigerwald, of St. John's Cathedral.
On motion by Mr. SCHLOSS the reading of the Clerk's minutes of yesterday's proceedings was dispensed with.
The following bills were introduced, read the first time, and severally passed to the second reading:
By Mr. SHOCKNEY [H. R. 364] to require
By Mr. SHOCKNEY [H. R. 365] to amend Sections 6 and 7 of an act concerning proceedings in criminal cases.
By Mr. MERING [H. R 366] to abolish the Maple Lawn Cemetery of Richmond[to prohibit the interment of any bodies therein to provide; tor the removal of bodies now buried therein to a new cemetery where ground can be obtained free of charge for such re-interment; for the sale of the cemetery, the proceeds to be devoted to the purchase and improvement of the new one. The town is built up all around and it is expected to sell the ground for a city park ]
The following described bills were returned from Committees with a recommendation that they be indefinitely postponed; which reports ' were severally concurred in, unless otherwise stated:
Mr. McMULLEN from the
Mr. WILEY moved to reconsider the vote by which House bill 263 was indefinitely postponed.
On motion by Mr. McMULLEN the motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
Mr. McMULLEN, for the. majority of the
Mr. PATTEN presented a minority report from the same Committee, recommending that the bill be indefinitely postponed.
Mr. WILES moved the adoption of the minority report.
Mr. STEWART said: "It seems to me that the majority report ought to prevail. Here are men 'who claim that they entered into a contract with the State to do certain work, and these men claim that they did the heavy part of the work-the part on which they could not realize any profit and then the light work, and that on which they expected to realize the profit for the entire work was refused them because of the modifications made by the architect. Now these men want a trill passed that will allow them to go into Court and present their claim against the State. This bill does not grant their claim; It simply gives thee men an opportunity to go into Court and let the Court say whether or not there is anything due these men from the State; and if, after a fair 'hearing, the Court decides that there is any money coming to the men, then the next Legislature will be called upon to grant or refuse this claim. If these men have a just claim let the 'Court so say, and if they have no just claim that will be the end of it.
Mr. ADAMS stated that the minority report was made as they claimed upon the provisions of the contract; that the provisions of the contract al- lowed the modification which the architect made, and this the gentlemen knew when they accepted this contract. Now these gentlemen should have looked to this matter before accepting this contract, provided they were capable of making such contract, find he believed they were. This minority report should be concurred in, or else we should make provision for a guardian for these gentlemen.
Mr. GIBSON was of the opinion that these gentlemen desired to get a judicial construction on this claim, and then come before the Legislature and say, Is this Legislature going back on the claims that the Court has decided legal?
Mr. WILEY said: Mr. Speaker. I am heartily in favor of concurring in the minority
report. As a member of the
1. Under Section 24 of Article 4 of the Constitution, just referred to by me gentleman from dark, the bill, if passed, would, in my opinion, be clearly unconstitutional, for the Constitution plainly says: "But no special act authorizing such suit (suit against the State) to be brought, or making compensation to any person claiming damages against the State, shall ever be passed." It is she intent of this bill to permit Messrs. Neal, Dodd & Co. to bring such action against the State, and hence for that reason I am opposed to it.
2. The alleged claim of Messrs. Neal, Dodd & Co. is based upon a statement of facts, which if true and the bill should pass, the claim could not be enforced a law.
It could not be enforced because it is based upon what our Courts have been pleased to denominate "speculative damages," and has been frequently held by our Supreme Court that this class of damages can not be enforced.
In short, the bill seeks to make the possible profits of the contract of Neal, Dodd & Go. with the State a measure of damages, when that contract was broken, by virtue of its own provisions, and such profits can not be the measure of damages, for it is contrary to public policy and ban been so held.
Mr. JEWETT stated that the objections urged by members on the floor against this bill were considered by the Committee, and was the reason why the gentlemen had submitted the minority report. He did not think that the House should attempt to decide this Constitutional question. These gentlemen do not ask the Legislature to pay them any special amount of money.
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, (interrupting) asked Mr. Jewett if he knew the amount of these claims.
Mr. JEWETT did not know, and did not think the matter of paying an honest claim should depend upon the amount of the claim.
Mr. GORDON thought it was but fair to suppose that this Provisional Board acted fair about this matter, and it is but fair to believe that this Board had better knowledge of the facts than any Board or any Court that might be called upon to settle the fact of his claim.
Mr. ANTRIM said because differences arise between parties leading to litigation it does not follow that either party is dishonest. Because those contractors claim that the State owes them money it does not follow that they are dishonest, nor does it follow because these claims are not paid that the Provisional Board is dishonest. Now, this bill does not propose to pay the contractors one cent. it simply proposes to allow them an opportunity to prove their claim, and if they establish their claim the next General Assembly max or may not make appropriations for the payment of said claims. I see nothing unfair in this. It is just and right, gentlemen, being that if the contractors establish their claim the State will have to pay the cost of the suit. This the State should do if It owes these men and compels them to go into Court to establish their claim.
Mr. SHIVELEY thought that the claims should have been referred to the
Mr. WILLIA.M8, of Knox, said: Mr. Speaker, I signed this minority report, and I am glad of it. The gentlemen who favor this majority report and advocate the payment of the Neal claim have talked a great deal about it, and the lobby is a most persistent and impudent one. In my five minutes I can not review this subject fully, but I wish to call the attention of the House to a few facts which the greedy advocates of this grab have failed to give us, but which are, nevertheless, facts that can not be disputed. In the first place this bill is in direct conflict with Section 24, Article 4. of the State Constitution, which rightly and expressly prohibits the General Assembly from passing any special act authorial suits to be brought against the State. The bill under consideration is a special bill for the benefit of Neal & Co. The fact is that Neal & Co. have been fully paid in cash for every dollar's worth of labor and materials furnished by them to the State. This claim, enormous in amount and extraordinary in character, is purely and entirely for speculative damages. It is not claimed that Neal & Co. lost any money on their contract with the State. It is not claimed that the State in any way violated the letter or spirit of the written contract made with Neal & Co. It is true that desiring the progress of the work some modifications were, with the knowledge and consent of Neal & Co., made in the contract, but, Mr. Speaker, in the original contract the State reserved the right to modify it, Neal & Co. assented to the changes and completed the work and got every dollar due them. It simmers down to this, that this is a claim for additional profits which they might have made upon this work if they had been working under a more liberal contract. They made money, but are sorry they did not make more. The gentleman from Kosciusko says Neal & Co. ought to have a day in Court ought to be provided with a tribunal before whom they can present their claims. I say to him that the law has provided a Court for them. The Provisional Board is the tribunal where this now stale claim has had its day in Court. This Board had the power to pay this claim, it was their duly to pay it if it was equitable and just. The Board did examine this claim years ego and decided that it was without merit and refused to pay it. I hold in my hand an able opinion by Judge Holman In the case of the State ex rel. John Martin vs. Provisional Board, etc., in which the Court holds that this Board has full and excessive jurisdiction. The opinion says: "It must rest with tile Board, however, to say whether or not they will issue the warrant, and whether or not he is a bona fide creditor of the State, and if so to what extent, in these particulars, they are the Judges." Mr. Speaker, Neal & Co.&s claim had its day in Court; It was rejected, and since that time the lobby has had it in charge. I can not give a list of the persons to whom this money would go it its claim is paid because I do not follow who the members of Neal & Co. are. This work was done years ago. If the claim is what the gentlemen from Kosciusko (Prazer) says it is, how did it happen that the Legislature of two years ago did not approve it? It was unnecessary to mention Mr. Hendricks' name here; he simply wrote the bill because he was attorney for Neal & Co. My constituents are perhaps old fogy people. They abhor repudiation, but they are also opposed to the payment of a single dollar out of the public funds except there be a legal or equitable reason for so doing, and speaking for them, I object to this majority report and demand the yeas and nays upon the pending question.
Mr. SMITH was of the opinion that we ought to establish a Court of Claims, to which
all claims could be referred. He would not impugn any man's motives, but he thought
thi8 question should be relegated to the
Mr. PATTEN desired to call things by their right names, and when he denounced this as a steal he meant what he said. He thought that because these gentlemen had made a bad contract, or a contract on which they had not realized as great a profit as they desired, they have appeared ere asking the members of the House to put their hands in the pockets of the State and pay them this extra amount.
The minority report was concurred in by yeas, 75: nays, 10.
The question now recurred on the majority report as amended by the minority report.
Mr. WILSON of Marion, thought that a Judicial question of this kind should go to a Judicial Tribunal. The Provisional Board desired that this matter should have a fair and judicial investigation. This bill asks that privilege and that privilege only. If these gentlemen think that they can not trust the Court they had better take some steps to purify this Court. If a judicial investigation decides that these gentlemen should have this claim they will then be allowed to come before the Legislature with this fact.
Mr. MOODY said: Mr. Speaker; this debate has at least resulted in changing the mind
of the gentleman from Marion on Constitutional tribunals, and I suppose, hereafter,
the submissionists will count on this support, as he says: "Of all bodies in the world
the Legislature is the most unfit body to pass upon a Constitution I question " I
think the gentleman from Knox takes the proper view of this question. Who are urging
this bill? I will not impugn the motives of any man, but I do think that the justness
of this claim should at least be vouched for by the friends of the bill before we
voluntarily open the door to endless litigation. If this claim, amounting to $60,000
or $70,000, is just and the State ought to assume the payment thereof, then,
certainly, these contractors will meet with a respectful hearing before the
This Committee has been provided for for this purpose, and why should this claim be an exception t all others? Again, Section 24, Article 4, of the Constitution of Indiana provides:
"Sec 24 Provisions may be made by general law, for bringing suit against the State, as to all liabilities originating after the adoption of this Constitution; but no special act authorizing such suit to be brought, or making compensation to any person claiming damages against the State, shall ever be passed "
Now, this bill proposes to do indirectly that which the Constitution provides can not De done directly. The bill provides that these contractors shall be authorized to go into Court and there establish the justness of their claim, and then with this club in their hands come back to the next Legislature and say, now we have a just claim. It had no merit four years ago; it gained none in two years, but now it is just because the Court to whom the last Legislature referred it, has so decided, and a refusal by you to make an appropriation for its payment is repudiation. I trust, gentlemen, that you will concur in the minority report.
Mr. JEWETT demanded the previous question which was seconded by the House, and under its operations the report as amended was adopted.
Mr. STEWART, from the
Mr. McMULLEN submitted another report from.
Mr. JEWETT moved that the report presented by Mr. Stewart be adopted.
Mr. McMULLEN moved to substitute for that report the report signed by himself and four other members of the Committee.
Mr. FRAZER moved that the consideration of the two reports be made the special order for 2 o'clock.
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. FRAZER, from the
The report was concurred in and the amendment adopted.
Mr. SHIVELY moved to amend by striking out the words "fifty dollars."
On motion the bill was made the special order for this afternoon at 2 o'clock.
The House took a recess until 2 o'clock.
The SPEAKER announced that the special order was Mr. GRAHAM'S bill [H. R. 256] to provide a fund for the permanent endowment of the State University.
Mr. GIBSON moved the House resolve itself into the
Mr. McMULLEN moved that the Committee rise, report a recommendation that the bill be
recommitted to the
The motion was agreed to, and the Committee rose and the Chairman reported as directed.
The report of the
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time, and severally passed to a second reading, unless otherwise stated:
By Mr. MOCK [H. R. 367] to provide for the assessment and collection of taxes by cities and towns in certain cases.
By Mr. McCORMICK [H. R. 368] to amend Section 4 of an act to provide for the government and discipline of the State Prisons.
By Mr. SUTTON [H. R. 369] concerning the duties of County, Township and State officers.
By Mr. SUTTON, by request, [H. R. 370] to amend Section 4,273 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, concerning drainage.
By Mr. W1LEY, by request. [H. R. 371] for the relief of Baker, Smith & Co.
By Mr. CHITTENDEN [H. R. 372] concerning voluntary associations.
By Mr. WILEY [H. R. 373] to amend Section 261 of an act concerning; proceedings in criminal cases.
By Mr. STERRITT [H. R. 374] to amend Section 309 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, concerning proceedings in civil cases.
By Mr. JEWETT [H. R. 375] to amend Section 815 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, concerning proceedings in civil cases.
Mr. Jewett moved that the Constitution rules be suspended; that the bill be read the second time by title, be considered engrossed, read the third time by sections and put upon its passage. '
The motion was agreed to by yeas, 85; nays, 0.
The bill was read a second time by title; a third time by sections, and passed the House by yeas, 85; nays, 0.
The special order [H. R. 223] was now called up, the question being on Mr. Shively's amendment striking out the word "fifty dollars," when it refers to filing of claims of that amount and upward.
Mr. DEEM moved an amendment to the amendment by inserting "one hundred dollars" instead of "fifty dollars."
Mr. FRAZER made an ineffectual motion-yeas, 36; nays, 48-to postpone indefinitely the amendment to the amendment.
Mr. FRAZER moved the previous question, which was seconded by the House and under its operation the amendment to the amendment was adopted.
The amendment as amended was agreed to by yeas, 46; nays, 37.
On motion by Mr. FRAZER the bill as amended was ordered engrossed.
It was announced by the Speaker that the special order for the hour was the Committee reports or the bill [H. R. 26] to repeal Section 6 of an act concerning promissory notes, etc.
Mr. WILSON, of Marion, said: The principal object of this bill seems to be to protect those who can not protect themselves against the patent-right and hay-fork sharpers. It comes with humble professions of good will to the people of this State and a benediction upon our business interests. It would have been better to have entitled the bill as one to strike down all business men working on credit, to paralyze business at home and excite ridicule abroad!
If a man of ordinary care is so stupid that he can not tell the difference between the promissory note payable in bank and one that is not, or a promissory note end a contract that is not a promissory note, he should have a guardian appointed, or he should interpose the defence, when sued, that he was non compos mentis, in which event he would escape liability. If he does not exercise ordinary care, then it ill becomes this Legislature to protect him against his own folly, and at the same time, while thus encouraging carelessness, break in upon a law, the practical value of which to the business world has been attested by the experience of centuries.
Under the law as it now stands a third party can not recover on a promissory note payable in bank, unless he gets it before maturity, bona fide, in the ordinary course of business, for a valuable consideration and without knowledge of defence to the same; even when so gotten he can not recover if it was forged, procured by duress, executed by one under disabilities, or for a consideration prohibited by statute. This is enough.
The repeal of the present law will do no good and must do infinite harm.
The stupid innocent who can not tell what he is doing will be induced to accept bills of exchange or indorse them, or to put his name on a blank paper, which will blossom into a bill of exchange; or he will sign a promissory note as heretofore, not payable in a bank in Indiana, but payable in Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio or Illinois; this will be governed by the law of the plea of payment. So you will not protect those you seek to protect.
But you will do harm. You repeal a law which had its origin from the inexorable
demands of business; had its origin from the usages and customs of merchants; a law
that is recognized in every civilized country on the face of the earth as of
practical value in business. Without it you cannot issue and negotiate a single bond
(for they are but promissory notes); without such negotiable bonds (unless payable
out of the State) what building enterprise of any magnitude can be ventuted on? You
will drive capital out of the State; what credit will be gives by a business man
when he
Mr. McMullen's report was rejected by yeas, 19; nays, 64.
The question recurring on Mr. Stewart's report, it was concurred in by yeas, 66; nays, 19.
Mr. JEWETT moved that the bill be ordered engrossed.
Mr. SHIVELEY moved to amend the bill by striking out all after the enacting clause and inserting in lieu new matter.
Pending which-
The House adjourned.
The Senate met. Lieutenant Governor Hanna in the Chair, who directed the readings of the minutes of yesterday's proceedings.
On motion of Mr. HUTCHINSON the reading thereof was dispensed with.
Mr. YANCEY presented a petition from Han- cock County providing that the Board of Health Committee be not disturbed. Like petitions were presented by Mr, Smith, of Jay, and Mr. Overstreet and Mr. Hening.
Mr. Graham, by request, presented a remonstrance against the erection of Brush electric light towers in Evansville.
Mr. Kaiser presented petitions in favor of a law to prevent convict Prison labor from coming into competition with free labor. Similar petitions Were presented by Mr. Johnson.
These petitions were severally referred to appropriate Committees.
The following described bills were introduced the first time and severally referred to appropriate Committees, unless otherwise stated:
By Mr. FAULKNER (by request), [S. 249] to prevent and punish the sale of adulterated articles of food, drink or medicine, whether injurious to health or not, unless the notice that the same is mixed is plainly marked thereon, or on the package containing it; and so informing toe buyer of the fact. Receipts from fines to go to the school fund.
By Mr. BELL (by request), [S. 250] to establish provisions respecting private corporations existing under corporate laws prior to 1852.
By Mr. HILLIGASS [S. 251] to amend Sections 2 to 10 Inclusive of an act concerning drainage of April 8, l881, being Sections 4,275 to 4,[2?]82 inclusive of the Revised Statutes of 1881. [ Amending the Circuit Court drainage law, by allowing lands in the Indian Reservation to be described in the petition. Provides that where lands are described as they appear of public record it shall be sufficient. That all objections to the petition and viewers must be made before viewers go out and giving additional grounds of remonstrance; following supplemental petitions; allowing Counties to be assessed in certain cases, and providing for the keeping in repair of ditches.]
By Mr. ADKISON [S. 252] to amend Section 67 of an act entitled concerning Criminal Courts, approved April 12, 1881-see Code, Section 1,640. [So that whenever any act is (or has been) made a public offense and also made punishable by my ordinance of any incorporated city or town, all prosecutions for any such offense before any Judicial officer of such incorporated city or town within the jurisdiction of such officer, shall be had under such city ordinance, provided that the offender shall not be made twice liable for the same offense.] Mr. A. states that under the present law such offenses are punishable under the State law as State offenses, and the object of his bill is to make them punishable under town or municipal laws, so as to give the town or city the benefit of the fines collected.
By Mr. McCLURE [S. 253] to amend Sections 8, 29, 71 and 87 of an act defining County boundaries on the Ohio and Wabash Rivers approved January 7, 1882, effecting the Counties of Grant, Blackford, Washington, Clark and Scott.
By Mr. RISTINE [S. 254] to authorize Boards of County Commissioners co construct or repair gravel or other roads on County lines, and authorizing the issue of bonds therefor [to authorize the construction of free gravel roads on the County lines by taxing the adjacent lands in two or more Counties to build said roads in the same manner that free gravel roads are now built, by a single County. The Boards of Commissioners of the several Counties acting together in its construction.]
By Mr. JOHNSON, by request, [S. 255] to provide for the incorporation of Orphan Asylums and Asylums for Indigent Females.
By Mr. WILLARD [S. 256] to fix the liability of railroads and other corporations for all damages or injuries received by their employes. [Makes Railroad Companies liable for injuries done employes, even if the injury was done through the carelessness of a co-employe.]
By Mr. GRAHAM, by request, [S. 257] to provide for the care and custody of orphans and abandoned children.
By Mr. HOOVER [S. 258] to empower Boards of Trustees of incorporated towns to compel
owners
Mr. KEISER [S. 259] to amend section 210 of the act concerning taxation, being Section 6,479 of the Code of 1881.
By Mr. RISTINE [S. 260] to legalize the incorporation of the town o Darlington, Montgomery County.
By Mr. VAN VORHIS [S. 261] to authorize cities to condemn or fill up mill races in certain cases.
Mr. KAISER moved to dispense with the Constitutional rule that his bill [S. 20] to define the Thirty-third and forty-fourth Judicial Circuits may be pressed to the final vote in the Senate.
Mr. Youche and Mr. Brown also insisted on its passage.
The motion was rejected-yeas, 33; nays 3- the Constitution.
The House concurrent resolution requesting Indiana Congressmen to favor the passage of a law granting extra pay to volunteer officers promoted for meritorious conduct in line of duty was read and concurred.
A message from the House announced the passage by that body of a Senate concurrent resolution for the purchasing of a Gubernatorial residence, and that Committee on the part of the House was made to consist of Representatives Wilson of Marion, Jewett, Frazier, Gilman, Robinson, Pruitt and Beeson.
Thereupon the Lieutenant Governor makes the Committee on the part of the Senate to consist of Messrs. Fletcher, Bundy, Magee, Lindley and Brown.
The Senate returned to the consideration of Mr. Benz' bill [S. 6] pending at the time of the adjournment yesterday, for the election and appointment of Supervisors of Highways. [See pages 98 and 131 of the Brevier Reports.]
Mr. VOYLES moved to amend Section 17 by striking out the word "plantation" and inserting in lieu the words "real estate."
It was agreed to.
Mr. HILLIGASS moved to amend Section 20 by inserting the words "not more than forty" instead of "not less than twenty-five" because there are many Townships which do not require a levy of even twenty-five cents tax for road purposes.
It was adopted.
Mr. MACARTNEY moved to amend Section 20 by adding no Supervisor shall issue a receipt for work done by himself, directly or indirectly, except to the amount of his own road tax, and no Treasurer shall receive receipts for work done other than by the parties presenting the same. This is to prevent throwing road receipts on the market by persons working out the tax of non-resident land-owners and then selling the receipts therefor.
It was adopted.
On motion by Mr. HILLIGASS the words "twenty-five cents" were added after the word "dollar" in Section 20.
Mr. SAYRE moved to add to Section 20 a proviso that road tax shall not be assessed against any incorporated town or city. He stated reasons why this amendment should be adopted.
Mr. VOYLES thought a section that town Marshals should have the same powers as Supervisors should be added to this bill rather than this amendment.
Mr. SAYRE would not object, and withdrew his amendment.
Mr. JOHNSON moved to add " if presented during the year or the year following in which the labor is performed" [referring to road labor receipts] it was agreed to.
Mr. HOOVER moved to Insert appropriately the words "between the months of April and October." [When-road tax must be worked out.]
Mr. MARVIN thought it wrong to say when this work shall be done. In his part of the County this restriction has never bees carried out.
Mr. HENRY suggested the same kind of a pro vision is in Section 29.
Mr. HOOVER withdrew his amendment.
Mr. HENRY moved to amend Section 18 by making the regulations for opening of highways the same as in Section 16.
It was agreed to.
Mr. OVERSTREET moved to amend Section 21 inserting the words "in the road district where levied." money shall be expended.
Mr. HENRY opposed the amendment.
Mr. BUNDY favored the amendment. Each road district should support itself.
Mr. WILLARD objected to the amendment. It would not practically work well.
Mr. HENRY offered a substitute: "For work done under the directions of the Trustee," instead of the words, "as the highways in their respective districts may require."
Mr. HILLIGASS opposed the substitute.
The substitute was adopted.
Mr. JOHNSON moved to add to Section 21 a clause to authorize the Supervisor to require the owner of land to keep open a good ditch where necessary on the line of highway.
It was rejected.
Mr. VOYLES moved to amend Section 22 by inserting in lieu of the word "same," in line one, these words: "Work contemplated in the last preceding section of this act."
It was adopted.
On motion by Mr. HENRY Section 23 was stricken from the bill.
Mr. HENRY moved to amend Section 29 by striking out all between the word "Auditor" in line 3, and before the word "all" in line 5, and inserting "such Trustee shall cause the same to be expended during the year in which it is received." and striking out all after the word, "year" in line 7.
It was agreed to.
On motion by Mr. HENRY Section 20 was amended by inserting in line 4 after the word "Township" the words: "outside of the incorporated cities and towns," so as to make it uniform to the amendment just adopted in Section 29.
The Senate took a recess till 2 o'clock.
Mr. HILLIGASS moved to amend Section 24 by adding a proviso that the Justice shall tax where judgment is rendered, $6 for attorney's fee as plaintiff's attorney, where suit is instituted for destroying guide boards or injuring and obstructing highways, ditch, dam, etc., etc. In the past Supervisors would not often prosecute for such damage from the fact that he would have to pay attorney's fees out of his own pocket. The punishment is not too severe.
Mr. McINTOSH opposed the amendment, believing it would encourage malicious prosecutions. The Supervisors have been able to get along heretofore without such a clause, He deprecated the encouragement of strife.
The amendment was agreed upon a division-affirmative, 8; negative, 6.
Mr. HENRY moved to amend Section 20 by substituting the word "Trustee" for the word "Supervisor" in line 9.
It was agreed to-affirmative, 13; negative, 6.
Mr. RISTINE moved a substitute for Section 22, making it more explicit as to what the Trustee shall do.
Mr. VOYLES considered the section well enough as it stands.
Mr. VAN VORHIS insisted there should be some intelligent basis for a proposed contract, and favored the substitute.
Mr. WILLARD moved to lay the substitute on the table.
The motion was agreed to.
On motion by Mr. HENRY this vote was reconsidered.
The substitute was rejected.
Mr. VOYLES offered an additional section, concerning the keeping of streets, alleys, etc., in order, in which the Trustees are given the same power as Township Trustees, and Marshals the same power as Supervisors of Roads, etc. Tax levies by Township Trustees not to apply to town property, etc.
Mr. BUNDY offered a substitute declaring the provisions of this act shall not apply to incorporated towns and cities.
Mr. VOYLES explained his sections would bring the streets and alleys of towns and cities under the same system of improvement as the roads and highways of the State. His Circuit Judge held there was no law to compel work on streets or alleys of cities and towns.
Mr. SAYRE stated objections to the amendment and to the substitute.
Mr. VAN VORHIS favored the amendment.
Mr. BUNDY insisted no answer has been made to his objection to the amendment.
The substitute was rejected-yeas, 15: nays, 20.
Mr. BUNDY made an ineffectual motion to lay the amendment on the table.
Mr. BELL insisted if every law on the subject of working roads were wiped out, cities would still have power to construct and repair streets and alleys.
Mr. BENZ moved to amend the amendment by authorizing: towns and cities to avail themselves of the benefit of the provisions of this act by en- acting proper ordinances,
Mr. HENRY offered a substitute for the amendment to the amendment by changing the terms of the original amendment in the third clause or section thereof, so that cities and towns may order road tax worked out within the limits thereof.
Mr. VOYLES opposed the amendment proposed by the Senator from Crawford [Mr. Benz.]
The amendment as amended by the substitute was agreed to.
Mr. HENRY offered an additional section abolishing the office of Road Master and Road Superintendent-the object being to protect Road Superintendents who have advanced money for the purpose of putting roads in repair, so their legal claims shall be paid.
It was adopted.
Mr. MAGEE offered a substitute for the section proposed by him and adopted yesterday, embodying its terms with a provision in addition for an appeal to the Circuit Court under the rules governing appeals from Justices' Courts.
It was adopted.
Mr. DUNCAN offered an additional section securing credit for all outstanding orders and road receipts. He desired to see persons protected who have already worked out their road tax.
Mr. WILLARD regarded this as
The additional section [Mr. Duncan's] was rejected.
Mr. MAGEE offered an additional section requiring all highways, hereafter to be established, 'to be of the width of not less than forty feet.
It was adopeted.
Mr. HENRY offered an additional section.
Mr. WILLARD made an ineffectual motion to lay it on the table.
Mr. HENRY explained his proposed section-if persons are willing to donate one-half of the expense necessary to make good public highways the Trustee shall perform work thereon equal in value.
Mr. BELL favored this additional section.
Mr. VOYLES also. Where public enterprise of this kind is shown it ought to be encouraged.
Mr. NULL favored the amendment to the bill as proposed by this additional section.
Mr. ADKISON desired to see it adopted.
The additional section was adopted.
Mr. SAYRE moved to amend Section 20 by requiring the Auditor to deliver to the Township Trustee a list of road tax assessed against each person in his district.
It was adopted.
Mr. SMITH, of Jay, moved to reconsider the vote by which an amendment was adopted declaring the width of highways hereafter established shall net be less than forty feet.
Mr. McCULLOUGH favored the motion. He thought such a clause in this bill would be unconstitutional. There is no need of raising that question, especially as it is desirable in some places that the road shall not be over thirty feet in width.
Mr. MAGEE insisted forty feet is none too wide for public roads. Where a ditch has to be built on either side of the road, certainly it is none too little. He saw no force in the Constitutional objection just urged. This provision of the bill ought to be retained.
The motion to reconsider was agreed to.
The question recurring on the amendment [Mr. Magee's]-Mr. VOYLES did not think this cause would endanger the Constitutionality of the bill.
Mr. McCULLOUGH insisted there could not be a misdemeanor act incorporated in an act concerning Supervisors.
The amendment [Mr. Magee's] requiring all highways hereafter constructed to be of the width of forty feet, was rejected.
Mr. WILLARD, as a report of a Special Committee [Mr. Benz's], submitted an amendment adding to Section 16 a proviso concerning appeals.
It was adopted.
Mr. BENZ offered a a additional section embracing an emergency clause.
It was adopted by yeas, 22; nays, 16.
Mr. SAYRE moved as a new section assigning the construction and keeping in repair of roads on Township, County and State lines. This in order to avoid conflict between Supervisors.
It was adopted.
Mr. WILLARD moved the engrossment of the bill, and on that motion demanded the previous question.
The latter motion was agreed to.
On motion there were 200 copies of the bill ordered printed.
Mr. BUNDY, from the Special Committee thereon, to which was referred several bills concerning the amending of the decedents' estates acts, reported a bill amending some twenty-three sections of that law. He moved a dispensation of the Constitutional rule that the bill may be pressed through the three several readings and put on its passage now.
The motion was agreed to by yeas, 34; nays, 14. And accordingly-
The Special Committee's bill [S. 262] to amend Sections 5, 47, 66, 86, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 100, 101, 102, 104, 105, 153, 157, 158, 159, 160, 164, 165, 168, 169, 170, 180, 18, 208, 241, and repeal Sections 4, 108,106, 162 of an act for the settlement and distribution of decedents' estates, approved April 14, 1881, was read, only the first three sections and about half of the fourth section, when the reading was interrupted, and "
The Senate adjourned.
The Speaker pro tem (Hon. Horace Heffren) took the Chair and announced prayer by Rev. Mr. Engle.
On motion by Mr. GREEN the reading of the Clerk's minutes of yesterday's proceedings was dispensed with.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time and severally passed to the second reading:
By Mr. BRYANT [H. R. 376] to regulate the sale of medicines and poisons.
By Mr. McMULLEN, by request, [H. R. 377] to provide for the protection of growing timber and for the appointment of a Forestry Commission.
By Mr. MOODY [H. R. 378] to amend Section 6,138 R. S. of 1881, for the government and discipline of State Prisons.
By Mr. MOODY [H. R. 379] to amend Sections 2 to 10 inclusive, of the act concerning drainage.
By Mr. MELLETT [H. R. 380] to legalize the incorporation of the Danville and Mill Creek Turnpike Company in the County of Delaware.
By Mr. ROBERTSON [H. R. 381] to fix the time of holding Court in the Forty-third Judicial Circuit.
By Mr. OILMAN [H. R. 382] to clothe Board of Trustees of incorporated towns with certain powers.
By Mr. ELEY [H. R 383] to legalize the incorporation of the town or city of Decatur.
By Mr. BRAZELTON [H. R. 384] to provide for the fees and salaries of County Treasurers.
By Mr. SMITH, of LaGrange, [H. R. 385] to amend an act fixing times of holding Courts in the Thirty-fourth Judicial Circuit.
By Mr. SMITH, of LaGrange, [H. R. 386] to provide for the transfer and recording of bill in the proper Auditor and Recorder's offices in the several Counties.
By Mr. HOWLAND [H. R. 387] to prevent the adulteration of articles of food, drink or medicine. and providing penalties for the sale thereof when so adulterated.
By Mr. HOWLAND [H. R. 388] to provide for the care and custody of orphans and abandoned children. [When a father abandons his child for one year, the mother shall have fall authority and control of her child thereafter, in the case of a boy until the age of twenty-one years, and in the case of a girl, until the age of eighteen.]
By Mr. WHITSIT [H. R. 389] to authorize cities to levy and collect special taxes for the construction of viaducts and bridges.
By Mr. WHITSIT [H. R. 390] to provide for the construction of a sewer from the female Reformatory to connect with a sewer in the city of Indianapolis [six-foot sewer to the intersection of Pogue's Run and Washington street, provided the city of Indianapolis shall extend the Washington street sewer from New Jersey street to Pogue's Run; and if it fails to do so by the time the State completes its sewer, the Governor shall have the work done by the State's contractors, and collect the cost off of the city in any Court of competent jurisdiction.]
By Mr. ADAMS [H. R. 391] to legalize assessments made on lands affected by the building and constructing of levees.
By Mr. ADAMS [H. R. 392] to amend Section 197 of an act concerning proceedings in civil cases, Approved April 7, 1881.
By Mr. STEWART [H. R. 393] to provide for the fees and salaries of County Treasurers [5 per cent. on delinquent taxes.]
By Mr. STUCKER [H. R. 394] to amend Section 268 of an act concerning proceedings in criminal cases, of April 19,1881, and to repeal Section 2,184 of the Revised Statutes of 1881.
By Mr. WILLIAMS, of Posey, [H. R. 395] to amend Section 4,421 of an act in regard to the State Board of Education concerning text books.
By Mr. GORDON [H. R. 396] for the benefit of Horticultural Societies.
By Mr. GORDON [H. R. 397] to legalize the corporation of the town of Roachdale, Putnam County.
By Mr. SHOCKNEY [H. R. 398] concerning surplus money resulting from convict labor. [To be paid into the State Treasury and known as the convict fund ]
By Mr. FRAZEE [H. R. 399] to amend Section 21 of an act to enable owners of lands to drain and reclaim the same when it can not be done without affecting the premises of others.
By. Mr. MUTZ [H. R. 400] to amend an act authorizing the appointment of students to Purdue University.
By Mr. HOLLER }H. R. 401 ] to provide fees and salaries for County Treasurers.
By Mr. PRUITT [H. R. 402] to amend Sections 1 and 3 of an act concerning the repeal of free turnpike roads and constituting Boards of County Commissioners and a Board of Turnpike Directors.
By Mr. SHIVELY [H. R. 403] to provide fees and salaries for County Treasurers.
By Mr. SHIVELY [H. R. 404] to prevent persons from voting when in a state of intoxication.
By Mr. BEESON [H. R. 405] for the relief of James McCullen.
By Mr. BEESON [H. R. 406] to provide for the purchase of librairies for the State Prisons and for the Female Reformatory.
Pending the roll call for the introduction of bills-
Mr. BOWERS presented a memorial from the Free and Equal Suffrage Society of Indiana
petitioning the House to submit a Constitutional amendment granting to all persons of
the desired age the right of suffrage, and asking the House to instruct our Senators
and request our Representatives in Congress to use their influence for the passage of
the Sixteenth amendment to the Constitution of the United States. The memorial was
referred to the
Pending the roll rail for the introduction of bills-
Mr. BARR offered a concurrent resolution instructing our Senators and requesting our Representatives In Congress to use their influence to secure the passage of a bill for extra pay for the voluntary officers of the late War.
The resolution was adopted.
Pending the roll call for the introduction of bills-
Mr. SHOCKNEY offered a resolution providing that the Committees of the House should report back all bills from the Committees in the same order in which said bills were introduced in the House.
On motion by Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, the resolution was laid on the table.
A PROPOSED GOVERNOR'S RESIDENCE. The Senate resolution looking to the purchase of the Furginson property for a Governor's residence, authorizing a Special Joint Committee to investigate the matter, was taken from the Speaker's table, read and adopted.
The SPEAKER appointed as members of that Committee on the part of the House Messrs. Wilson of Marion, Jewett, Frazer, Gillman, Robinson, Pruitt and Beeson.
The following described Senate bills were read the first time and severally passed to the second reading:
The bill [S. 67] to authorize municipal corporations to invest their sinking fund in Government, State or County bonds temporarily.
The bill [S. 102] to amend the Feeble Minded Children Incorporation act.
The bill [S. 119] to amend Section 1 of an act to authorize cities and towns to issue bonds to reduce indebtedness, etc.
The bill [S. 134] to authorize cities to permit municipal taxes to be paid in installments.
The bill [S. 5] supplemental to an act concerning the publication of the Revised Statutes of 1881, was read the second time.
The joint resolution [S. 1] to authorize the Auditor of State to audit and pay certain expenses to the Superintendent of Public Instruction for the prosecution of a certain suit against Ziva F. Williams, being read the second time-
Mr. JEWETT moved the adoption of the resolution.
On motion by Mr. HEFFREN, the resolution was informally passed until to morrow.
The House took a recess till 2 o'clock,
The SPEAKER announced the special order for this hour being Mr. Stucker's bill [H. R. 186] to provide for the election of County Superintendents.
On motion by Mr. SHIVELY this bill was made the special order for Thursday at 10 o'clock.
The following described bills were read the second time and severally ordered to be engrossed for the third reading, unless otherwise stated:
a. The bills H. R. 4. 14, 23, 31, 38, 39,
48, 51, 56, 59, 61, 71, 86, 88, 93, 94, 95,
96, 102, 103, 105, 106, 107, 109, 110, 113,
115, 117,
The following House bills were read the second time and severally referred to appropriate Committees unless otherwise stated.
The bills H. R. 301 to 353 inclusive.
On motion by Mr. McCORMICK the bill [H. R. 308] to amend Sections 1 and 2 of an act to incorporate the Trustees of Hartsville Academy was considered as engrossed and passed to the third reading.
The House adjourned.
The Senate met at 10 o'clock a. m., Lieutenant Governor Hanna in the Chair.
Prayer by Rev. F. M. S. Taylor, Dean of St. Paul's Cathedral.
On motion by Mr. MAGEE the reading of the minutes of yesterday's proceedings was dispensed with.
Mr. BUNDY presented a protest against any medical legislation from Henry County.
Mr. ADKISON presented a petition asking further legislation on the same subject.
Mr. GRAHAM presented a memorial concerning arrears of pensions-asking further time for tiling of claims.
Mr. FAULKNER presented a memorial from a Citizen of Ripley County, remonstrating against One pending medical bill and in favor of another specially opposing the exclusion of reform doctors.
Mr. FLETCHER presented a petition from Marion County on the subject of military affairs.
Mr. MAGEE presented a petition concerning Prison labor, remonstrating against its employment outside of Prisons. A similar petition was presented by Mr. Johnson.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR presented a petition from Knox County praying for relief from the greatest evil in the State the selling or giving away of intoxicating drinks.
These papers were severally referred to appropriate Committees.
Were submitted from the several standing Committees, which went to the files under
the rules to be considered when bills on the second reading came up. Among these were
a report from the
Mr. VOYLES called up his bill [S. 9, see page 168 of the Brevier Reports], to change the name for the government of the House of Refuge, being a special order. Having been read the third time heretofore, and the question being: Shall the bill pass?
The bill passed the Senate by yeas, 27; nays, 21.
Pending the roll call-
Mr. SPANN, when his name was called, said: I will vote against this bill for one reason-because, of a political necessity, it proposes to legislate out of office Dr. Freeman, of Union County, a gentleman appointed by the Governor of Indiana to serve a certain term and length of time. There have been no charges made against him on account of inefficiency, but he is to be legislated out of office because of a political necessity. I will vote against this bill because Dr. Freeman was a soldier in the War of the Rebellion; was wounded at Chickamauga; was shot through the body and lay on the battlefield three days, then was carried to a Hospital and lay on his back for six months. His case is reported in medical journals as being one of the most remarkable cases in the History of surgery. I desire to call attention to the fact that by the passage of this bill that man who has such a noble record Roes down in the dust under this bill, after having served his country so faithfully and that Institution so honestly. Therefore, I vote "no."
Mr. VOYLES, in explanation of his vote when his name was called, said: The Senator from Rush [Mr. Spann] has seen proper to make an objection when his ox is gored, f will remind him that a few days since, when a Democratic soldier with an armless sleeve was a candidate for Door-keeper, the Senator from Rush loudly and vindictively voted against him. So it is not the soldier so much with the Senator after all; with him it depends on whose political ox is being gored. This is the explanation of my vote. I vote "aye."
The vote was then announced as above recorded.
So the bill passed.
Mr. VOYLES moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed, and to lay the motion to reconsider on the table.
This latter motion was rejected.
Mr. MAGEE called up another special order, being Mr. Hutchinson's bill [S. 50-see page 162 of the Brevier Reports] concerning the official terms of the Directors of the Northern Prison, the question being on its final passage in the Senate,
Mr. CAMPBELL said: My greatest objection to the passage of this bill is that it does nothing but perpetuate the life of the Directors who have been lately elected: and it makes no provision for ever electing anybody else to succeed them. When I offered the substitute for this bill (which was voted down) I incorporated therein the four-year term contemplated In the bill, thereby re-organizing and conceding the efficiency which may be gained by experience, and that a four years' term in office is desireable. I, however, desired that because of the value of experience, one of the present Incumbents may be retained for the two-year term, but this substitute was voted down. Notwithstanding this I till say I have no objection to extending the office of the Directors from two to four years, and should vote for tills bill if it was for that purpose and drafted to that effect, but it is not. The bill prolongs the term of office of the recently elected Directors, and nothing else. It snakes no provision for the election of any successors, and if it is contemplated that successors shall ever be elected, it gives no directions how, or for what length of time the successors are to be elected, and hence, if elected at all, it would have to be by the present law and for two years as now; and hence, while I would willingly vote for a bill making the Directors and their successors terms of office four years, I am opposed to this bill which has no object or effect except to prolong the terms of the present elected Directors, and theirs only.
The bill passed by yeas, 27; nays, 20.
The Senate returned to the reading of the Special Committee's bill, introduced just before the adjournment yesterday, [S. 262] to amend twenty-eight sections and repeal four sections of the act of April 14, l88l, for the settlement and distribution of decedents'estates.
The reading of this bill for the first time having been completed-
The Constitutional restriction, having been dispensed with by a yea and nay vote of the Senate yesterday, for the purpose of passing the bill to the final vote, it was read the second time by title only.
On motion by Mr. FOULKE, this being a most important bill suggested it be made the special order for to-morrow afternoon at, 2 o'clock. At the suggestion of other Senators he named the hour of 2:30 this afternoon, and made a motion to that effect.
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. McCOLLOUGH gave notice that on to-morrow he should move to reconsider the vote
of the Senate directing the
The Senate took a recess till 2 o'clock.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time, and severally referred to appropriate Committees:
By Mr. BUNDY [S. 263] to amend Section 197 of the act concerning proceedings in civil cases of April 7, 1881, being Section 913 of the R. S. of 1881.
By Mr. BICHOWSKY (S. 264] concerning voluntary Associations for gymnastic and other purposes.
By Mr, DUNCAN [S. 265] to legalize the corporation of the town of Nashville, in Brown County, and all ordinances, resolutions, etc. of the Board of Trustees of said town, etc.
By Mr. FLETCHER [S. 266], by request, relating to sale grounds for the operation of dangerous machinery. [Any driver operating a tumbling rod or circular saw shall have the same protected so as to prevent it injuring persons.
By Mr. FOULKE [S. 267] to authorize either branch of the General Assembly, as well as the Governor, to require opinions of the Judges of the Supreme Court.
By Mr. HOOVER [S. 268] to make the general index of deeds or mortgage prima facie evidence where the record thereof has been lost or destroyed.
By Mr. JOHNSON [S. 269] to amend Sections 1, 2 and 4 of the act fixing the number of Trustees of Purdue University of March 9, 1855-being Sections 4,671-2-4 of the Revised Statutes of 1871. [Adds the General Superintendent of Public Instruction as an ex-officio member and President of the Board of Trustees of Purdue University- making the Board consist of seven members instead of six, as at present constituted.]
By Mr. SPANN [S. 270] concerning voluntary Associations and supplementary to said act.
By Mr. SAYRE [S. 271] to amend Section 13 of the Common School law approved March 6,1865.
By Mr. SPANN [S. 272] to create a Soldiers' and Sailors' Orphan Home, its maintenance, selection of officers, etc. [At Knightgtown, on the farm now occupied by the Feeble Minded Children, at such a distance as not to come into contact or association, appropriating $50,000 for erection of said building. Trustees to be honorably discharged soldiers.]
By Mr. MAGEE [S. 273] concerning foreign Insurance Companies.
By Mr. WILLARD [S. 274] concerning the qualifications of students for entrance into the educational Institutions of Indiana. [Provides that no Board of Trustees or Faculty of any Educational Institution deriving in part its funds from the public Treasury, shall make any rule excluding any student from such Institution at any time on account of his belonging to any secret society organization, and prescribes a penalty of a fine of from $100 to $1,000 for violation of its provisions. The bill is aimed at the Faculty of Purdue University dismissing students on account of belonging to Greek Societies.]
Mr. GRAHAM offered a concurrent resolution requesting Indiana congressmen to favor the passage of a law giving reasonable time for disabled soldiers or their representatives to file claims for relief.
It was adopted.
On motion by Mr. KEISER his bill [S. 207] to define the Thirty-first [Lake and Porter] and the Forty-fourth [Pulaski and Starke] Judicial Circuits was, under a dispensation of the Constitutional rule-yeas, 35; nays. 3-read the second time by title only, considered engrossed, read the third time and passed by yeas, 36; nays, 4. Mr. Keiser explaining the necessity for immediate action.
Mr. BUNDY called up the special order, the bill [S. 262] concerning decedents' estates.
On motion by Mr. HENRY an addition was made to Section 20, in the way of a proviso, that, where an account is filed and no notice of the "hearing of the same is required, it shall not be necessary for the Clerk to fix a day in the future for the hearing thereof, but the same may be acted on at any time by the Court."
On motion by Mr. COMPTON, Section 115 of said act was amended so that notice of the
pendency of the petition and of the time and place of hearing shall be given by
publication for three weeks successively in some newspaper printed and pub
Mr. WILLARD would like to have the changes proposed by this bill explained. It is almost impossible without a printed copy for members to know what the changes or alterations are.
Mr. HENRY explained: Everything in regard to a Master Commissioner is stricken out; if those words have been left in it is an overright. In regard to the filing and allowance of claims provision is made that any person having a claim against a decedent shall make out a statement, as provided in the present law, and file the same with the executor, administrator or in the Clerk's office, giving the claimant the option; the administrator or executor reports to the Court as in other matters relating to the estate. When allowed by the administrator or executor either on the appearance docket or by reporting to the Court, that is ail the action necessary. No presentation of claims, as now provided, is necessary. If not allowed the claim goes on the issue docket for trial, as in the former law-not under the present law. Exactly the same pro-provision as In the former law is provided for the claim of the administrator himself. Also where anyone desires to litigate, if the administrator does not, with an additional provision that he shall file a bond and made liable tor costs unless he reduces the claim 10 per cent. This bill dose away with cash accounts, which is required to be filed every six months under the present law. In place of that, at the end of the year, or as soon as the sale notes mature, he is required to make a report, as now required at the end of the year, with the additional provision that he shall report what claims have been presented to him for allowance or what he has concluded not to allow. That provision is exactly like the wording in the voluntary, assignment law in regard to claims, winch is very simple-the Committee thinking it better to take a practice that is familiar. That report is acted upon by the Court. It is a final report. In regard to notice, notice must be given if it is a final report as provided by the present law; that is notice by publication-not by summons. It does away with all notice by summons as under the present law. On final settlement he is to give notice, but on current report not. Under the old law no current report could be made final, even as to matters involved in it. If, in the judgment of the administrator, the account is of enough importance to require final action of the Court, then notice shall be given. That is the only notice required on current report. That is intended to meet the requirements of large estates and for the administrator to protect itself. When the time arrives under the notice it is heard. The amendment offered by the Senator from Clay [Mr. Compton] goes to the notice and does away with personal summons. [It is printed above.] The old clause is left in this bill providing for the opening up of accounts for fraud or mistake within three years. It requires the administrator and the Judge to inquire diligently into all claims, and makes them responsible for any damages resulting fro m neglect of that duty. When an estate is clearly solvent the administrator can pay a claim at any time when he has the money. On final settlement the Court may order him to pay out or pay into the Court. There was a defect in the old law, which allowed heirs or legatees to apply for a distributive share when required for their support. In this bill that limiting clause is stricken out. Then this bill makes this change: The Committee thinking it right that where there must be any litigation over a case one trial should end it, have provided that where a claim is not allowed, and there are other parties bound on the same contract with the decedent, the Court will order the claim amended, and have the other, the living party, brought into Court. Another provision is that a mortgage or either lien can lot be foreclosed as against the heirs until a year has expired from the taking out of the letters of administration and giving of notice.
The bill was then considered as engrossed and read the third time, and passed by yeas, 44; nays, 0.
On motion by Mr. FOULKE, the Constitutional restriction was dispensed with-yeas, 39; nay, 5-and his bill [S. 203] to authorize the Trustees for the Institution of the Deaf and Dumb to sell a strip off' the south side of the premises now occupied by said Institution, was read the second time by title, the third time by sections and passed by yeas, 32; nays, 7.
Mr. FOULKE explaining the Pittsburg, Cincinnati and St. Louis desire to lay another track: along side these grounds, and seven and half feet is all it requires for that purpose. The Trustees of the Institution desire some kind of a wall built to make the ground safe against reaching out, etc., and to protect the property.
Mr VAN VORHIS doubted the wisdom of this measure.
Mr. FLETCHER had examined in to this matter, and believes there is a necessity for a wall to be built along there to prevent ground from washing away. The seven feet is nothing, compared to the benefit to be derived from having a good wall built there.
Mr. VAN VORHIS, in explanation of his negative vote, said this is the first he had heard of this proposition, and it is a little strange that members from this County know nothing about it. Knowing nothing of the merits of the case, he voted "no."
On motion by Mr. ERNEST, the bill [H. R. 34] to legalize the town of Sullivan, Sullivan County, was read twice by title, under a setting aside of the Constitutional rule-yeas, 38; nays, 2-read the third time and passed by yeas, 40; nays, 1.
On motion by Mr. BICHOWSKY the bill [H. R.
32] to create the Forty-third Judicial Circuit-affecting the County of Vigo,
which constitutes the Forty-third Circuit; Greene and Sullivan the Fourteenth
Circuit, and Morgan and Owen the Fifteenth Circuit-was read the first time and
referred to the
On motion by Mr. MARVIN his bill [S. 167] defining the Twentieth Judicial Circuit [the County of Boone] and creating the Forty-third [the County of Clinton] was read the second time.
And then the Senate adjourned.
The SPEAKER commanded order and announced prayer by Rev. Mr. Patt, of the North Baptist Church, Indianapolis.
A call of the House roll was demanded, and being ordered and taken discovered eighty-seven members as present and answering to their names.
On motion by Mr. PRIER the reading of the journal was dispensed with.
Mr. SMITH, of Tippecanoe, rose to a question of privilege, and said that he was
reported, in the Indianapolis Journal, in the Legislative items, as having spoken in
favor and voted for the bill [H. R. 26] concerning promissory notes, etc. He de- sired
to state that he spoke against and voted against the bill. He said he could, not
afford to
Mr. JEWETT's bill [H. R. 26] to repeal Section 8 of an act concerning promissory notes, bills of exchange, bonds, or other instruments of writing, etc, which informally passed over on yesterday, was now called up.
The SPEAKER announced that the question before the House was the motion of Mr. Jewett to lay Mr. Shively's amendment on the table, which amendment proposed to amend the bill by striking out all after the enacting clause and writing the following: Section 3. No note shall be negotiable as an inland bill of exchange by being made payable at a bank or this State unless there shall be written or printed in said note the following words: "The maker has no defense to this note in the hands of any innocent holder for value "
On motion by Mr. JEWETT the amendment was laid on the table-yeas, 49; nays, 39.
On motion of Mr. JEWETT the bill was ordered engrossed for the third reading on next Tuesday at 3 o'clock p. m.
Mr. HEFFREN, from the
Mr. MELLETT, from the same Committee, submitted a minority report, recommending the indefinite postponement of the bill.
On motion by Mr. HEFFREN the minority report was laid on the table by yeas, 52; nays, 33.
The majority report was then concurred in.
Mr. HEFFREN moved that the bill [H. R. 223] concerning decedents' estates be read the third time by sections and put upon its passage.
The motion was agreed to.
The bill passed by yeas, 85; nays, 0.
Pending the roll call-
Mr. MELLETT, when his name was called, said: It occurs to me that this matter ought to be care- fully and deliberately considered. I desire to say In explanation of my vote that I think this bill better than the old law. But I desire to say that I vote for it under protest. I protest against the manner in which the Committee acted in regard to this bill, and the action of the Speaker in not allowing the question to be discussed.
The SPEAKER (interrupting) commanded Mr. Mellett to take his seat, saying that no such explanation would be tolerated on the floor of this House.
Mr. Wilson, of Marion, from the
The report was concurred in and the amendment adopted.
Mr, Wright, from the
The report was concurred in.
Mr. Gibson's bill [H. R. 2] to legalize the acknowledgment and recording of certain instruments of writing, was read the third time and passed by yeas, 79; nays, 0.
Mr. McMullen's bill [H. R. 5] to amend Section 461 of an act concerning proceeding in civil cases was read the third time, and passed the House by yeas, 85; nays, 0.
The general appropriation bill [H. R 302] for the maintenance of the State Government for the years 1883-4 and 1885-6 was read the third time, and passed by yeas, 86: nays, 0.
Mr. Deem's bill [H. R. 5] concerning town elections was read the third time and parsed by yeas, 86; nays. 1.
Then came a recess till 2 o'clock.
Mr. Graham's bill [H. R. 256] to provide a fund for the permanent endowment of the State University, was reported back by Mr. Graham with certain amendments and a recommendation that the bill pass as amended.
The report was concurred in.
On motion by Mr. HEFFREN the bill was ordered engrossed.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time, and severally passed to the second reading unless otherwise stated:
By Mr. AKIN [H. R 407] to amend Section 4, the same being Section 4,556 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, requiring the State Superintendent of Public Instruction in his next apportionment of the School Fund to set apart $10,000, and semi-annually deduct the same amount, and set it apart, to be known as a Normal School Fund.
By Mr. TULEY [H. R. 408] to amend Sections 7, 21 and 41 of an act to provide for a general system of Common Schools.
On motion by Mr. GORDON the constitutional rules were suspended-yeas, 72; nays, 5-and his bill [H. R. 408] was read the second time by title, was considered engrossed, and read the third time by sections and passed the House by yeas, 76; nays, 0.
By Mr. SCHLOSS [H. R. 409] an act in relation to Theater buildings.
By Mr. PULSE[H. R. 410] to provide for the subdividing of lands and lots.
By Mr. SHIVELY [H. R. 411] concerning foreign Insurance Companies.
Mr. COPELAND offered a resolution instructing our Senators and requesting our Representatives in Congress to use their influence to secure pensions for the members of the Indiana Legion.
The resolution was referred to the
Mr. Whitsit's bill [H. R. 13] concerning the use of firearms, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 75; nays, 0.
Mr. Shockney's bill [H. R. 22] to equalize the assessment of taxes made by the Board of Trustees of the town of Winchester, in the County of Randolph, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 75; nays, 4.
Mr. Henderson's bill [H R. 29] to enable the several Counties in the State to sell and dispose of land for the benefit of the school fund, was read the third time, and on motion by Mr. FRAZER was laid on the table.
The bill [H. R. 30] to amend Section 8 of an aot regulating descent of heirs, approved March 2, 1855, was read the third time.
Mr. JEWETT stated that when he examined the bill it appeared to him that the bill had been drawn for a particular case. He meant no offense by such a statement. He believed that it wax unnecessary legislation; that we are trying to do by legislation what the parents can do at present by their own action if they desire.
Mr. FRAZER explained that under the present law if a person adopt a child and then
die, that the property went to the adopted child. He con
Mr. STEWART thought that if a family adopted a child, thus making it their own, it should have all the rights and privileges of an own child. People generally adopt a child with the understanding that that child may inherit their property, and it would not be just to take from them this right.
Mr. WILSON, of Marion, thought that, under the present law, a person who adopted a child was adopting the whole family. Mr. Wilson cited a case similar to that cited by Mr Frazer: Where an adopted child died and its mother came in and brought suit for the property that would have fallen to the adopted child had it not died. He thought the bill was a wise one, and favored its passage.
Mr. ADAMS and Mr. GIBSON favored the pass- age of the bill.
The bill passed by yeas, 73; nays, 11.
Mr. Patten's bill [H. R. 32] to create the Forty-third Judicial Circuit, was read the time.
Mr. ADAMS stated that he did not desire to make a speech on the bill, but desired to state to the House that he knew concerning the necessity of this bill. In a recent conversation with the Judge of this Circuit he learned that at the close of the last term of Court the business pending was greater than at the beginning of the term. He considered it a matter of economy that the bill should pass.
Mr. HELMS desired to state that he was in favor of this bill. He had been petitioned by the entire Bar of his County with one exception to work for the passage of this bill. He was informed by an attorney of the Bar that the Court was more than a year behind. He hoped that the bill would pass.
Mr. SMITH also favored the passage of the bill.
Mr. PATTEN stated that the Court was very much behind, and it was a matter of necessity that the bill pass.
The bill passed by yeas, 75; nays, 10.
Mr. Robertson's bill [H. R. 381] to fix the time of holding Court in the Counties of Jackson and Washington, was called up.
On motion of Mr. HEFFREN the Constitutional roles were suspended, the bill read the second time by title, considered engrossed, read the third time by sections and passed the House by yeas, S3; nays, 0.
Mr. Patten's bill [H. R. 34] to legalize the election of the Board of Trustees of the town of Sullivan, Sullivan County. Indiana, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 80; nays, 1.
Mr. Patten's bill [H. R. 33] to amend Section 1 of an act to provide for a homestead exempting it from sale on execution, and exempting certain personal property, was read the third time.
Mr. HEFFREN did not know why the House should enact class legislation. He was opposed to class legislation, and ho was not aware that one debt was any more sacred than another. There is already in the statute books a law by which mechanics can put liens upon property. This bill does not give them any more rights, in fact, not so many.
Mr. PATTEN thought the gentlemen [Mr. Heffren] was wrong. The bill is simply to protect laboring men, and to enable small property holders to secure the necessary labor, which they can not do at present, because they have not the re- quired amount of property to make them amenable to the law. It is simply right that when a man performs a day's labor he should have wages for it.
The bill passed by yeas. 73; nays, 10.
Mr. Pattens bill [H. R. 35] to amend Section 18 of an act to incorporate the town of Sullivan was taken up and read the third time, and on motion by Mr. PATTEN was laid on the table.
Mr. Kirkpatrick's bill [H. R. 53] to legalize the incorporation of the town of Burnetsville, White County, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 77, nays. 3.
The bill [S. 207] to define the Thirty-first and Forty-fourth Judicial Circuits.
The bill [S. 91] for the better government of the House of Refuge.
The bill [S. 50] concerning the Directors of the Northern Prison.
The Senate concurrent resolution requesting Indiana Congressmen to favor the passage of a law giving reasonable time for disabled soldiers to file claims for arrears of pensions, was read, and,
On motion by Mr. Heffren, was concurred in by the House.
The following described Senate bills were read the second time and referred to appropriate Committees:
The bill [S. 102] to amend the Feeble Minded Asylum incorporation act.
The bill [S. 167] to authorize municipal corpora- tions to invest sinking funds temporarily.
The bill [S. 34] to permit municipal taxes to be paid in installments.
The bill [S. 219] to authorize Gas and Water Companies to extend mains beyond city limits.
On motion the bill [S. 29] to legalize the acts of Trustees of Westfleld was read the third time, and passed the House by yeas, 69; nays, 1.
The House adjourned.
The Senate met at 10 o'clock, the Lieutenant Governor [Hon. Thomas Hanna] in the chair.
Prayer by Rev. Thomas H. Lynch, of the M. E. Church.
On motion by Mr. BROWN the reading of the Secretary's minutes of yesterday's proceedings was dispensed with.
Mr. Johnson presented a petition of over 1,400 concerning convict labor coming in competition with free labor.
Mr. Spann presented a letter, praying that the present dog laws be not disturbed, from a Township Trustee.
Mr. Duncan presented a petition for a repeal of the State Board of Health law.
Mr. Lindley and Mr. White presented a remonstrance against the repeal of the Public Health law.
These papers were referred to appropriate Committees.
On motion by Mr. BELL the bill [H. R. 302] making appropriation for the carrying on
of the State Government and its institutions, for the years 1883-4 and 1884-5 [a total
of $l,254,120 per annum] was read by title only for the first reading, under a setting
aside of the Constitutional restriction-by yeas, 38; nays, 0-and 200 copies were
ordered printed. It was referred to the
On motion by Mr. BELL the constitutional rule was again dispensed with-yeas, 38; nays, 0-and his bill [S. 196] to attach Fayette to Franklin County for judicial purposes, and to give one week more to the Court in Rush County, was read the second time by title only. considered engrossed, read the third time. [Franklin, Fayette and Union Counties to constitute the Thirty-seventh Judicial Circuit and Decatur and Rush the Eighth Circuit.]
Mr. BELL favored its passage.
Mr. SPANN would probably have introduced this bill had he been in his seat at the time. The Senator from Allen and Whitly [Mr. Bell] introduced it by request. Mr. S. was satisfied it is a measure very much needed, and hoped to see it passed.
The bill passed the Senate by yeas, 41; nays, 0.
Mr. ADKIS0N made an in effectual motion-yeas, 30: nays, 4-to suspend the rule, that his bill [S. 114] to change the time for tax sales from the first Monday in March to the second Monday in February.
On motion by Mr. COMPTON, his bill [S. 130] to amend Sections 5,422 and 5,480 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, concerning the regulation and working of coal mines, was read the second time and ordered engrossed for the third reading.
On motion by Mr. WHITE, his graded teacher's license bill [S. 145-see pp. 72 and 73 of the Brevier Reports] was read the third time.
Mr. YANCEY opposed this bill because it prevents young people from procuring a license to teach school after, their first six months' license has expired. It is unjust to poor young people who are trying to educate themselves. It is unjust, unfair, and ought not to pass.
Mr. WHITE did not think there was any unfairness in the bill. If young people will prepare themselves they can obtain a six months' license, There will be 'no trouble where they have the qualifications for governing a school and imparting education. He recited the provisions of the bill printed on page 72 of these reports.
Mr. JOHNSON believed that during the six months of teaching elementary branches on a trial license, the teacher will have ample time to qualify himself for taking a one year's license. If he does not qualify himself for a higher license then a six months' license shall not be re-issued. Other young teachers can take his place it he can not obtain a higher license. In the interest of schools and school teachers, also, that they may more thoroughly qualify themselves for their difficult and responsible task, this bill should pass. There is no in justice in giving this trial license but once.
Mr. YANCY (interposing): Will it not in time cut off every young man and woman from educating themselves for teachers by practice?
Mr. JOHNSON (resuming) could not see in what respect it could; on the contrary it would have the effect to impel them to be diligent.
Mr. YANCEY (interrupting): There are hundreds of young men and young women who get a certificate for six months and teach school, who have poor relatives to take care of, that takes all the money they can get for their support, and who have not the means nor the time to improve their education while holding a six months' certificate. This bill would take away from that class the opportunity of teaching longer.
Mr. JOHNSTON (resuming) did not know whether the principle was a correct one to keep teachers of elementary grades at the lowest level of efficiency. This bill has been recommended by the Committee on Education and by the out-going and in-coming Superintendents of Public Instruction; and he thought it would add to the efficiency of teachers throughout the State.
Mr. CAMPBELL was in favor of this bill. Because of its merits one or two of his own bills on the same subject were laid on the table with his consent in order to give place to this one. He thought the Senator from Hancock [Mr. Yancey] was mistaken in supposing this bill might have a tendency to deprive young teachers from securing licenses. If the teacher of extra proficiency obtains a twenty-four or 36 months' license he is relieved, as is right, of the burden and inconvenience of undergoing an examination year after year.
Mr. SMITH, of Jay, opposed the passage of the bill. If there are any class of professional men m the Slate being oppressed it is the Common School teacher. He served a term of eight years, and believes the first term under a six months' license was the best he ever taught. Under the present law the teacher is between two fires. There is a constant coming down in wages, and the fees are being increased for examinations and for attendance on Normal Institutes. If one attains the general average of 60 per cent. under the present law, teaches a good school to the satisfaction of the citizens of the District, that is all that ought to be required. This bill would drive from the profession a great many bright minds instead of giving encouragement to the profession.
Mr. VAN VORHIS explained his negative vote by declaring this bill was in the interest of teachers who now hold twenty-four months' licensee as the bill does not require such to submit to an examination after the taking effect thereof.
The bill failed to pass for want of a Constitutional majority-yeas, 21; nays, 13.
Mr. McCULLOUGH called up his motion, notice of which he gave on yesterday, to
reconsider the vote of the Senate empowering the
Mr. McCULLOUGH, as Chairman of the
Mr. FOULKE opposed the motion. Day after day we have heard on the floor of the Senate, from members of the other side, charges that these parties nave interfered with the purity of elections. We have heard it stated by Senators upon their personal honor, that there are instances, again and again, where men have been driven to the polls by these parties, to vote against their will. The demand for an Investigation has come from the party charged. No demand had come from Mr. Winterbotham. He expressly stated that he does not press an examination of the matter in Congress by abandoning a contest for the seat. He shrinks from an investigation. He declines to investigate the very charges which he makes. Now the demand comes for investigation, and from whom? From the parties accused of improper practices. It is asked to be referred to a Committee. To what Committee? To a Committee, a majority of whom are Democrats, and of the party which makes the accusation. These men demand investigation by a tribunal, even of their enemies. The Democratic party can not afford to make a charge of that kind, and shrink from the investigation of it. It will not do to say an investigation of these charges must not be had because it would require a little time and money. If it requires too much time to investigate them, then don't make them. When you charge a man with the commission of a crime, don't make it if you don't propose to investigate it. He insisted the investigation should go on.
Mr. SPANN would favor the motion to reconsider on one ground, and on one ground only. If the charges made by Mr. Winterbotham are withdrawn from this Committee and retracted, then there would be some purpose in the motion. But to ask that the power to investigate be laid aside without a withdrawal or retraction of the charges is unfair and unjust.
Mr. BROWN did not know that Mr. Winterbotham has laid any charges before the Senate
that he asked any investigation about. The memorial he presented con talus some facts
which nobody denies who knows anything about it. Shortly after that the Senator from
St. Joseph [Mr. Campbell-see page 119 of these Reports] presented a memorial from some
constituents of his asking that a Committee be appointed to investigate; and it was
thought best that the regular standing
Mr. BELL, as a member of the
Mr. HILLIGASS regarded this as a question outside the duties of representatives of the people. Every day and hour consumed in such an investigation is so much taken from the people of the State. No further attention should be paid to these memorials from either side. Even were an investigation to go on during vacation it would stop where it began, and that would be the end of it. Who would a Committee sitting in vacation report to? and after the report was made what action could the Senate take on it? There are other tribunals where such questions should be settled. They should not come before the Legislature over which it has no jurisdiction.
Mr. YANCEY: It is apparent that when the memorial of Mr. Winterbotham was submitted to this body by his attorney in the contest it was to show the people that he was defrauded out of an election to Congress, and for the purpose of prejudicing the people against the Republican party; and it was to throw a damper on and injure the business of two great manufacturing interests in South Bend. These parties engaged in business there have been of more benefit to the people of Indiana than all the Democratic party of this State, or Nation, for that matter. [Laughter, and cries of "Hear, hear."]
Mr. McCULLOUGH (interrupting): Does not the Senator mean that they have been of more benefit to the Republican party than all the Democrats in the State?
Mr. YANCEY (resuming): NO sir. I mean to say that the Studebaker Wagon Works and the
Oliver Chilled Plow Works have employed thousands and thousands of men to work for
them, and the remuneration for the work has gone to the support of their families.
Simply because the Democratic party could not control these men like slaves, and
Winterbotham was not elected to Congress, they come howling into the Senate of Indiana
like cowards as they are. If Winterbotham and his crew could have led their men to
vote as they wanted there would have been no memorial sent here. ["Hear! Hear!"] For
Democratic Senators to say the Senate has no jurisdiction over this case shows a small
amount of consistency to say the least. These men of South Bend have been slaudered
beyond questioned. They have laid their case before the Senate of Indiana, and in all
candor and justice the Chairman of the
Mr. VAN VORHIS called attention to the history of this case in the Senate. The memorial signed by Mr. Winterbotham asked that a law be passed [reaching to the very question raised in that paper], to prevent the voting of employes by such manufacturing establishments. Following that came charges from Senators of crime in violation of the election laws in that part of the State. Following that came a memorial presented by the Senator from St. Joseph [Mr. Campbell]-when a bill was introduced on that subject. Now, to claim that this is not a proper subject for investigation is not consistent. This is a proper subject of investigation and has in view but one object, and that is to furnish data on which to pass a law reaching the very crime of which these manufacturers are accused. If it is for this purpose, then the proposition of the Senator from Jackson [Mr. Brown] that this matter shall be investigated in vacation, has no meaning, and is made simply for the purpose of meeting an objection, and an ambush behind which to hide their retreat from this investigation.
Mr. GRAHAM: This is a charge made against two fo the most honorable manufacturing companies in the State by politicians as a stab at their business. This gentleman [Mr. Winterbotham] seeing he had not been elected, abandons a contest for a seat in Congress, then comes to the Senate, and not being content with striking at these loboring men, he must at the same time stab and inflict a wound on one of his own party, which was an insult to this Senate, and now he asks to be relieved from the responsibility. He went into the public prints with one of the most infamous charges against a member of his own party, and now he is tired of investigation.
Mr. BROWN (interrupting): The Senator is mistaken. Mr. Winterbotham is exceedingly anxious that this investigation shall be conducted.
Mr. GRAHAM: Mr. Winterbotham was at the foundation of this matter originally. He came in here with his memorial and followed it up with an attack, scandalous and unwarrantable, upon the Senator from Laporte [Mr. Hutchinson] in the public prints, and that Senator got to be an elephant on his hands. It had its foundation first in political purposes-in advancing his own business of employing Prison labor in opposition to these manufacturers who employ free labor. The reflection is upon these gentlemen and their business. As this has served Mr. Winterbotham's purpose he now is content, because he knows, and so does every man in this State know, that an investigation of these manufacturing companies will result in a complete vindication of these gentlemen.
The Senate took a recess till 2 o'clock.
Mr. BELL suggested a vote would reveal no quorum present, therefore he asked unanimous consent that the pending question be passed over till Monday, so routine business can be done.
Mr. FLETCHER presented a memorial from John Martin embracing a claim for
$46,736.46. It was referred to the
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time and severally referred:
By Mr. GRAHAM, by request [S. 275] to require certain officers to keep cash books [each County, Township, town or city official who has control of any public moneys, to be open to inspection by any one.]
By Mr. VOYLES [S. 276] to establish a house for soldiers, orphans and helpless
ex-soldiers of Indiana. [Governor shall appoint three Commissioners, who shall each
give $5,000 bond. Shall select a proper location in the 3d Congressional District of
not more than 300 acres, and build a house on such site; employ an architect, make
contracts after sealed bids. The capacity shall be such as to accommodate at least
350 occupants. Appropriates $42,000. Commissions to be paid the same as State House
Commissioners; $8,000 appropriated for maintenance.] One hundred and fifty copies
were ordered printed. It was referred to a
By Mr. White for Mr. SAYRE [S. 277] concerning salaries of County Clerks and repealing all other laws on that subject.
By Mr. BELL [S. 278] supplemental to the act approved March 9, 1875, concerning the drainage of wet lands. [Viewers shall assess damage done to water power in constructing ditches under the act of 1875.]
On motion by Mr. BELL, Mr. Brown's bill [S. 43] to fix Coroner's fees, was read the second time with a Committee report recommending amendment so the bill shall apply only to cities having a population of 60,000 as by the last census.
Mr. BELL moved to amend by reducing the number to 40,000, so as to include four cities in the State.
The amendment was agreed to, the report as amended was concurred in, and the Dill ordered engrossed for the third reading.
And then the Senate adjourned, under an order adopted this forenoon, till Monday at 2 o'clock p. m.
The House met at 10 a. m.
The session was opened with prayer by Rev. J. H. Doddridge, of Fletcher Place M. E. Church.
A call of the House being demanded and ordered and taken discovered seventy-nine members present and answering to their names.
The bill [S. 20] relating to the qualification of Petit Jurors in Courts of this State was read the third lime, and passed the House by yeas, 74; nays. 3.
The bill [S. 12] defining the crime of false
pretense was read the third time, and, on motion by Mr. MOODY, was referred to the
The bill [S. 32] to punish persons who disclose messages sent over telegraph lines was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 77; nays, 0.
The following described House bills were read the third time and passed the House unless otherwise stated:
Mr. Wnson's, of Kosciusko, [H. R. 66] to legalize, the incorporation of the town of Syracuse, in Kosciusko bounty, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 75; nays, 0.
Mr. Wilson's, of Kosciusko, [H. R. 67] to legalize the incorporation of the town of Silver Lake. Kosciusko County, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 70; nays, 1.
Mr. Adam's bill [H. R. 74] to amend Section 409 of the civil procedure act, approved April 7, 1881, [provides for the trial of all civil causes involving issues of fact by Jury, unless the parties waive their rights] being read the third time-
Mr. FRAZER stated that the proposition of this bill is to go back to the Jury system again, and he hoped the bill would not pass the House.
Mr. SHIVELY desired that the bill would not pass the House. It requires all causes to be tried by Jury. He considered many cases too intricate in their nature for a Jury to hear and render an intelligent decision. Their decision is simply guess work.
Mr. SMITH'S observation had been that Jurors were not allowed to note down evidence while in the Jury box. This is a privilege that the Judge can take ad vantage of and thereby reader a better decision than if placed under the same restrictions. On issues of fact, especially those involving intricate inquiries as to accounts, could not well be tried by a Jury, for the Juryman could not carry in his mind a long array of figures, being debarred from taking any notes to assist his memory. He thought this bill simply placed twelve men in a trammeled position. He was not in favor of the passage of the bill.
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, thought the bill was of in the interest of economy. It would require at least one-third more time for the trial of cause in the Circuit Court of this State. In the interest of economy this bill should not pass.
Mr. HEFFREN: When the bill was first Introduced was opposed to it, but after hearing the discussion in the House, and after close inspection of the bill, he favored its passage. He could not comprehend why Juries should not try questions of fact. In answer to the argument that injury sometimes results from trial by Jury, he said that in his long experience at the bar, he found that the benefit resulting from Jury trials very much overbalanced the injury. It is not supposed that every man who sits upon a Jury has a classical education. But he had always I found that the men who come from their farms to sit in the Jury box have as much good common sense as persons who are educated in Colleges.
Mr. MOODY thought that in a great many cases the Jury could not arrive at the facts near enough to render a decision that would not immediately be set aside by the courts. He favored leaving the law as it now is.
Mr. GORDON made an ineffectual motion to lay the bill on the table until a full House.
Mr. WILSON, of Marion, said that while he had confidence in the good sense of Juries, he was nevertheless satisfied that under the limitations imposed upon Juries they could not try certain chancery cases. He then spoke of the expense and delay growing out of the trial of such cases by Juries, of the appeals to higher Courts and reversals and consequent delay. He called attention to the practice in other States in the Union as in harmony with the existing statute, that the federal Courts, and the Courts of the Nations most celebrated for their jurisprudence, recognized the wisdom of trying such cases by the Court. Nonresident creditors will avoid the State Courts if this law is repealed and seek relief in the Federal Courts wherever such Courts have jurisdiction. The inconvenience of this is well known to defendants at a distance from Courts. Bear in mind too that judgments in the Federal Courts are liens on lands of the defendants throughout the District, and the consequent inconvenience. It is the opinion of the most eminent jurists that the Judge only should try a certain class of chancery cases. This is approved and attested by the experience of civilized Spates.
Mr. GORDON, when the question was up before, favored the bill, but since that time he had made some little inquiry, and was informed that there probably had been more appeals occasioned by this section than any other section of the Civil Code. He undertook to say that after a Judge had given instructions to the Jury that the Jury is just as apt to come to a correct decision as the Court itself. He was of the opinion that the bill should pass.
Mr. ADAMS stated the objections to this bill simmer down to about one
proposition-that of trials of cases involving accounts by Jury. He desired to ask if
this one single objection alone should overbalance all the argument in favor of trial
by Jury. In answer to the argument that a Jury is not competent to try a case
involving accounts, he stated that he could take a Jury of Morgan County men, present
the case to the Jury, and after the Judge had given his instructions that Jury could
render as fair a decision as any Court in the world. Every member of his County bar
desired the bill to>
Mr. Heffren's bill [H. R. 79] to amend Sections 8 and 9 of an act concerning elections proposing to increase the number of votes in election Precincts from 350 to 500;] was read the third time.
Mr. SMITH, of Tippecanoe, stated that the one thing he thought he knew about election matters was this that the less frequently the law was changed the better for all persons concerned. He thought the laws were changed so frequently that if we were to hold strictly to the letter of the law no elections would be legal. He thought that the Precincts should be small. It caused too great a delay of the election returns where the Precincts are large.
Mr. WILSON, of Marion, opposed the passage of the bill, contending that the act of
the last Legislature regulating election districts was working satisfactorily, and
that to make the change proposed by this would be to practically disfranchise many
workingmen, who could not vote until the last hour of the polling. He moved that the
bill be recommitted with instructions to the
Mr. JEWETT thought the motion to recommit should not prevail, and that the bill itself should be voted down. He thought the people of the State were satisfied with the present law.
Mr. MOODY hoped the motion to recommit would prevail. It would simply place the bill back where it could be considered again by the Committee.
Mr. GORDON was of the opinion that our present election law is good enough as it is. The bill would not be in the interest of economy. He hoped that the motion to recommit would not prevail and that the bill would not pass.
Mr. STEWART opposed the motion to recommit. We have only had one election uno er the present law. The people have just learned where their Precincts are. He was of the opinion that the Precincts should not be channel every time the Legislature met. He considered the difference in the expense between having two Election Boards and having one to be very little.
Mr. SHIVELY was in favor of recommitting the bill. It had been a source of great inconvenience to the people of his County. He considered a Precinct of 350 voters too small in the rural districts. He thought 500 votes s to the Precinct was not too large.
The motion to recommit was rejected.
The bill was also rejected by yeas, 21; nays, 48.
The House took a recess until 2 o'clock.
Mr. MELLETT, by consent, introduced a bill [H. R. 412] to provide for the election of a Board of Regents for the State University.
The following described bills were read the second time and severally referred to appropriate Committees, unless otherwise stated:
Mr. Ferriter's bill [H. R. 133] to provide for a Board of Metropolitan Police Commissioners in all cities of 25,000 or more inhabitants.
On motion by Mr. SCHLOSS it was made special order for next Tuesday at 10:30 o'clock.
Mr. Akiss' bill [H. R. 40] to amend Section 4, being: Section 4,550 of the Revised Statutes of 1881-requiring the State Superintendent of Public Instruction in his next apportionment of the school fund to set apart $10 000, and semi-annually deduct the same amount and set it apart to be known as the Normal School Fund.
On motion by Mr. AKIN the bill was ordered engrossed.
Mr. Frazee's bill [H. R. 354] to amend Section 4,472 Revised Statutes of 1881.
Mr. Mutz's bill [H. R. 356] to amend Section 10 of an act concerning drainage.
Mr. Shockney's bill [H. R. 361] to require County Auditors to give bonds in the sum of $30,000, and repealing all laws in conflict therewith.
Mr. Shockney's bill [H. R. 365] to amend Sections 6 and 7 of an act concerning proceedings in criminal cases.
Mr. Mering's bill [H. R. 366] to abolish the Maple Lawn Cemetery of Richmond.
Mr. Meek'a bill [H. R. 367] to provide for the collection and assessment of taxes.
Mr. McCormick's bill [H. R. 368] to amend Section 4 of an act to provide for the government and discipline of the State1 Prisons.
Mr. Sutton's bill [H R. 369] concerning the duties of County, Township and State officers.
Mr. Sutton's bi 1 [H. R. 370] to amend Section 4,273 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, concerning drainage.
Mr. Wiley's bill [H. R. 371] for the relief of Baker, Smith & Co.
Mr. Chittenden's bill [H. R. 372] concerning voluntary associations.
Mr. Wiley's bill [H. R. 373] to amend Section 261 of an act concerning proceedings in criminal cases.
Mr. Sterritt's bill [H. R. 374] to amend Section 309 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, concerning proceedings in civil cases.
Mr. Bryant's bill [H. R. 378] to regulate the sale of medicines and poisons.
Mr. McMullen's bill [H. R. 377] to provide for the protection of growing timber and for the appointment of a Forestry Commission.
Mr. Moody's bill [H. R. 378] to amend Section 6,138 R. S. for the government and discipline of State Prisons.
Mr. Moody's bill [H. R. 379] to amend Sections 2 to 10, inclusive, of the act concerning drainage.
Mr. Mellett's bill [H. R. 380] to legalize the incorporation of the Danville and Mill Creek Turnpike Company in the County of Delaware.
Mr. Oilman's bill [H. R. 382] to clothe Board of Trustees of incorporated towns with certain I powers.
Mr. Eley's bill [H. R. 383] to legalize the incorporation of the town or city of Decatur.
Mr. Braaelrou's bill [H. R. 384] to provide for the fees and salaries of County Treasurers.
Mr. Smith, of Lagrange's, bill [H. R. 385] to amend an act fixing times of holding Courts in the Thirty-fourth Judicial Circuit.
Mr. Smith, of Lagrange's bill [H. R. 386] to provide for the transfer end recording of bill in the proper Auditor and Recorder's offices in the several Connies.
Mr. Howland's bill [H. R. 387] to prevent the adulteration of articles of food, drink or medicine, and providing penalties for the sale thereof when so adulterated.
Mr. Howland's bill [H. R. 388] to provide for the care and custody of orphans and abandoned children.
Mr. Whitsit's bill [H. R. 389] to authorize cities to levy and collect special taxes for the construction of viaducts and bridges.
Mr. Whitsit's bill [H. R 390] to provide for the construction of a sewer from the
Female Reform
Mr. Adams' bill [H. R. 391] to legalize assessment made on lands affected by the building and construction of levees.
Mr. Adams' bill [H. R. 392] to amend Section 197 of an act concerning proceedings in civil cases, approved April 7,1881.
Mr. Stewards bill [H. R. 393] to provide for the fees and salaries of County Treasurers [5 per cent. on delinquent taxes.]
Mr. Stucker's bill [H. R. 394] to amend Section 268 of an act concerning proceedings in criminal cases, of April 19,1881, and to repeal Section 2,184 of the Revised Statutes of 1881.
Mr. Williams', of Posey, bill [H. R. 395] to amend Section 4,421 of an act in regard to the State Board of Education concerning text books.
Mr. Gordon's bill [H. R. 396] for the benefit of Horticultural Societies.
Mr. Gordon's bill [H. R. 397] to legalize the corporation of the town of Roachdale, Putnam County.
Mr. Shockney's bill [H. R 398] concerning surplus money resulting from convict labor. [To be paid into the State Treasury and known as the convict fund,]
Mr. Frame's bill [H. R. 399] to amend Section 21 of an act to enable owners of lands to drain and reclaim the same when It can not be done without affecting the premises of others.
Mr, Mutz's bill [H R. 400] to amend an act authorizing the appointment of students to Purdue University.
Mr. Holler's bill [H. R. 401] to provide fee and salaries for County Treasurers.
Mr. Pruitt's bill [H. R. 402] to amend Sections 1 and 3 of an act concerning the repeal of free turnpike roads and constituting Boards of County Commissioners and a Board of Turnpike Directors.
Mr. Shively's bill [H. R. 403] to provide fees and salaries for County Treasurers.
Mr. Shively's bill [H. R. 404] to prevent persons from voting when in a state of intoxication.
Mr. Beeson's bill [H. R. 405] for the relief of James McCullen.
Mr. Beeson's bill [H. R. 406] to provide for the purchase of libraries for the State Prisons and for the Female Reformatory.
Mr. Schloss' bill [H. R. 409] in relation to Theater buildings.
Mr. Pulse's bill [H. R. 410] to provide tor the subdivision of lands and lots.
On motion the bill was made the special order for Monday next at 10 o'clock.
The House then adjourned until 2 o'clock p. m. Monday.
The Lieutenant Governor took the chair and commanded attention, while prayer ^was offered by Rev. R. S. Black.
On motion by Mr. VOYLES the reading of the journal of Saturday's proceedings was dispensed with.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR stated the question to be on the motion to reconsider the Tote
of the Senate empowering the
Pending at the last adjournment.
Mr. Voyles hoped the motion would not prevail Mr. Yancey opposed the motion, and
favored an investigation of the charges by the Senate
Mr. BELL said every presumption was in favor of the truth of these charges. There is no
reason- able or moral doubt but that they are true. He wanted those things inquired into
and if it discloses this sort of interference with the elective franchise he hoped no
Democrat between the shores of the Atlantic and Pacific will purchase one single article
from persons who resort to such practices. He hoped the Senate would take it out of the
power of these men to drive their employes like dumb cattle to vote the Republican
ticket. He hoped this matter would be probed to the bottom, and that such legislation
would be had that no man will dare resort to such practices hereafter. As it is patent
the
Mr. SPANN contended that there is no power In this body to continue any Committee to
investigate these charges after this General Assembly shall have adjourned, unless it
reached to the qualifications of a member to a seat in this body. Because the
Studebakers and the Olivers have been charged with a crime and have come into the Senate
to refute the charge made by old man Winterbotham, who is in his dotage, the blue-
blooded aristocrat "from Allen and Whitley [Mr. Bell] wants to boycotte such men.
Senators upon the other side voted for this investigation, and now when they found the
charges made by Winterbotham are untrue-false in foundation, false in fact, and based on
a tissue of lies-they come in cringing like cowards, and ask to be relieved from
investigation. He denounced it as an absolute political lie made out of whole cloth, for
the purpose of damaging men in the District in which Mr. Winterbotham lives and to
damage the present Senator from Laporte [Mr. Hutchinson.] The Senate has power to
investigate only while the Senate is alive; after the Senate is dead it has no such
power. The proposition to investigate these charges during vacation is t imply a trick
and a subterfuge to get rid of the whole question, and to ask for something the Senate
has not the power to grant. There ii nothing personal about this matter, but no man
should charge the Republican party with dishonesty and fraud unless he meets from this
side something that shall respond to it. There are four Democrats and three Republicans
on the
Mr BROWN had personally but the kindest feeling for these gentlemen in South Bend, bi.t
was lead to believe from facts made to appear and which will be laid before any
Committee which makes this investigation, that they, blinded perhaps by party zeal, or
too much of a desire to agrandize wealth in their own hands, did, at the time stated and
in the manner staler perpetrate one of the grossest outrages that could be practiced
upon the American franchise. He had repeatedly asked the Senator from St. Joseph [Mr.
Campbell] if the fact is not that agents of those manufacturers did not take their
labor
Mr. FOULKE read the present law touching undue influence of employers over employes in exercising the right of the elective franchise, and remarked that if the Studebakers have by threat or intimidation, or the refusal of time for their employes to vote-even that-there is already a law in Indiana which provides that they shall be imprisoned for a term of not less than one year. Where is the tribunal for the examination of that fact? The Grand Jury of the County in which the crime occurred. If these charges are true why is Mr. Winterbotham here where nothing can be done for his relief? Why is he away from the Congress of the United States? Why is he absent from the sittings of the Grand Jury in St. Joseph County? It is because the charges have no existence in fact. The United States Grand Jury has the right to investigate also. Why is he not there? Why does he not go to some Tribunal that has jurisdiction? This comes before us bearing upon its face evidence of fraud. We have the right to presume that each and every charge is false. These are charges made by a Democrat to make Democratic capital out of it. This Democratic petition has gone out for wool and comes in shorn.
Mr. BUNDY was satisfied that Mr. Winterbotham saw his case was gone-he had no hope of
succeeding in a contest for a seat in Congress, and put this memorial in the Indiana
Senate simply for the purpose of getting revenge out of these men in the city of South
Bend, who opposed his election. And when these men, against whom these charges are made,
presented a petition asking for an investigation of the truth of these charges, what did
you do? You referred them to the
Mr. CAMPBELL-The memorial from these manufacturers asking an investigation of the influences brought to control the election in South Bend is no intrusion. It only came after the Winterbotham memorial of grave charges against them had been entertained and a bill drafted and placed upon the calender of this Senate, based upon the assumption that the charges of the first memorial are true; and more than that, a challenge for an investigation. Then they asked, and I still demand for them, that an investigation may be had, to see what legislation is needed, and who needs protection and from what, but as it seems now that this is to be denied, I want to say that, coming myself from the city of South Bend, with a full and complete personal knowledge of the facts as it is possible for a man to have. I know that the charge that these manufacturers discharged or threatened to discharge, coerced, intimidated or in any way improperly influenced the votes of their employes is not true. It is a malignam falsehood, concocted and promulgated for political capital, and now it is returning like the boomerang which a falsehood always proves to be. It is now claimed as a pretext for withdrawing from this investigation that the Senate has no jurisdiction. I grant that we are not a Court to decide upon criminal actions or to punish, or to release from punishment any man or men. I understand full well that we are not here to decide or even to listen to or consider in any manner whatever personal or political grounds or abuses, but the objects of the investigation is not to decide upon the merits of any personal or political quarrel, but to determine fairly and intelligently if there be any call for legislation for this purpose, neither can any one deny the detestable force that would be enacted were legislation had, or even contemplated upon so important a matter, without the most careful investigation on both sides of the question, and this is one of my great reasons for inviting and still challenging an investigation, because I know that when had with a view to determining legislation it must be had fully upon both sides. I am prompted, not so much by a desire to have the Studebaker Wagon Works and the Oliver Chilled Plow Works exonerated, for I question if there be ten men in the State of Indiana who believe them to be guilty of any offense against the elective franchise, but I want this investigation to show, as it would, the depth of infamy to which the Democratic party sank itself in conducting the campaign of the Thirteenth District. I want a report made of the measured quantities of whisky, the unlimited supply of money the coercion, and intricue so damnable that I would blush to stand here and enumerate them, and then I wanted to see if, when this report was made, this Assembly would have the patriotism to enact laws for the punishment of these crimes which if unrebuked and oft-repeated must crush to powder the very rock of our national salvation-the ballot-box. And, sir, I demand, sir, that the investigation shall be made. In answer to the oft repeated statement that affidavits may be had, and are now in Mr. Winterbotham's hands, against these manufacturers, I have only to say I think, or possibly I have the written statement of a man who says that he was offered $250, which is half of $500, offered to another party to get six affidavits. When affidavits are wanted so badly I suppose that they can be gotten or made to order.
Mr. McCULLOUGH said that a more respected memoriral than Mr. Winterbotham's was never
presented to any Legislative body. It does not mention names, and the purpose is that
the Legislature may pass such a law as will protect the elective franchise and prevent
the sort of practice complained of. The only question the Senate can have to do with is
the question whether there shall be legislation on that subject and whether such
practices have been committed heretofore has nothing to do with it. The investigation by
the Committee into the laws in existence and not to investigate people-wagon
manufacturers or anything else. If the practices complained of have existed, all this
Legislature can do is to pass laws to prevent it in the future. If the Studabakers have
not been doing anything wrong, it will not hurt them. If they are opposed to that sort
of legislation it will look like they didn't want it. Mr. Winterbotham is still asking
us to go ahead with the investigation and opposed to my making this motion to
reconsider. As a
Pending which motion
The Senate adjourned.
The SPEAKER commanded order and announced prayer by Representative Brazelton, of Jennings County.
The SPEAKER demanded a call of the House, which ordered and taken discovered eighty-five members present and answering to their names.
On motion by Mr. HEFFREN the reading of the journal of last Saturday was dispensed with.
Mr. BARR offered a resolution providing that a Special Committee of Five be appointed to which shall be referred all matters concerning the drainage of the wet lands of the State.
On motion by Mr SHOCKNEY the resolution was laid on the table.
Mr. TULEY presented a memorial signed by sixty-eight of the leading citizens of Floyd County protesting against the passage of Mr. Jewett's bill [H. R. 26] to repeal section of an act concerning promissory notes, bills of exchange, bonds or other instrument in writing, signed by any person who promises to pay money, etc.
By consent the memorial was referred to the
The following described bills were reported back from Committees with a recommendation that further action be indefinitely postponed:
Mr. WILEY, from the
Mr. HEFFREN, from the same Committee, reported back Mr. Shively's bill [H. R. 248] to amend section 1,637 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, concerning proceedings in criminal cases.
Mr. SHIVELY hoped that the report of the Committee would not be concurred in He had introduced the bill for the purpose of relieving the Courts. It provides that small misdemeanors, there the fine does not exceed $5, shall he tried before Justices, and that they shall have exclusive jurisdiction. It is merely to keep these trivial offenses out of our Courts.
The report of the Committee was concurred in.
Mr. McMullen, from the same Committee, reported back Mr. Wiley's bill [H. R. 249] in relation to petition for rehearing in the Supreme Court.
Mr. WILEY explained that he introduced the bill by request.
The bill provides that the Supreme Court shall hear oral argument in cases, of appeals, and that the Judge rendering the original decision shall not be allowed to participate in the deliberations on such appeal. He has received a great many letters from lawyers who desired that the bill should become a law. It is a wholesome measure, and he felt that the bill should pass.
Mr. HEFFREN was opposed to the bill on the ground that it would consume too much time for the Court to stop and hear oral argument. Each lawyer would consume something near a week in his argument for appeal.
Mr. McMULLEN felt that the question of time should not be considdred where justice was at stake. He was opposed to allowing the Judge who had rendered the original decision to take part in the consideration of the appeals. He considered the spirit of the bill to be good, and favored recommitting the bill with the instruction that a docket fee or penalty be inserted in order to prevent annuals being taken in cases not having sufficient and reasonable grounds.
Mr. JEWETT favored oral argument before the Supreme Court. He did not accord any
weight to the argument that it would consume the time of the Court. When per ons
desire to come before the Supreme Court they should have that privilege. He moved that
the bill be recommitted to the
Mr. WILSON, of Marion, was opposed to the bill. He thought the provision of the bill reflected on the Court.
Mr. Jewett's motion to recommit was agreed to.
Mr. WILS0N, of Marion, from the
Mr. ROBINSON hoped that the report of the Committee would not be concurred in. He believed that it was right that these attorneys should not be allowed to appear before the County Commissioners.
Mr. WILSON, of Marion, explained that the attorneys could not now, according to the decision of the Supreme Court, appear before the Commissioners by whom they are employed. He favored recommitting the bill, and moved that it be recommitted with instructions.
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. WILSON, of Marion, from the same Committee, reported back Mr. Beeson's bill [H. R. 296] to regulate the presenting of claims to the General Assembly. The report to indefinitely postpone was concurred in.
Mr. WILSON, of Marion, from the same Committee, reported back Mr. Heffren's bill [H. R 295] to amend Section 1,637 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, concerning proceeding in criminal cases. The report of the Committee to indefinitely postpone was agreed to.
Mr. W1LSON, of Marion, from the same Committee, reported back Mr. McMullen's bill [H. R. 344] concerning public offenses and their punishment. The report of the Committee to indefinitely postpone was agreed to.
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, from the same Committee, reported back Mr. Best's bill [H. R. 100] to amend Section 25 of the decedents' estates act. The report of the Committee to indefinitely postpone was concurred in.
Also, from the same Committee, Mr. Copeland's bill [H. R. 180] to amend Section 2,831 of the decedents' estates act of 1881. The report of the Committee to indefinitely postpone was concurred in.
Mr. STEWART, from the same Committee, reported back Mr. Robinson's bill [H. R. 260] concerning Grand and Petit Juries. The report of the Committee to indefinitely postponed was concurred in.
Also, Mr. Price's bill [H. R. 258] to amend Section 387 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, concerning proceeding in civil cases. The report of the Committee to Indefinitely postpone was concurred in.
Also, Mr. Stucker's bill [H. R. 350] to repeal and amend several sections of decedents' estates act. The report of the Committee to indefinitely postpone was concurred in.
Also, Mr. Woodling's bill [H. R. 321] to amend several sections of the decedents' estates act. The report of the Committee to indefinitely postpone was concurred in.
Mr. PATTEN, from the same Committee, reported back Mr. Nave's bill [H. R. 91] to amend Section 31, of the decedents'estates act. The report of the Committee to indefinitely postpone was concurred in.
Also, Mr Gilman's bill [H. R. 8] to amend a certain section of the decedents' estates act. The report of the Committee to indefinitely postpone was concurred iu.
Also, Mr. Beeson's bill [H. R. 45] to amend Sections 95 and 115, and repeal Section 106 of the decedents' estates acts. The report of the Committee to indefinitely postpone was concurred in.
Mr. MORGAN, from the same Committee, reported back Mr. Oreene's bill [H. R. 347] to repeal Sections 243 and 244 of an act concerning proceedings in civil cases. The report was concurred in.
Also, Mr. Heffren's bill [H. R. 250] to amend 25 and 26 of the decedents' estates
act. The bill was on motion by Mr. SPEAKER BYNUM [Mr. Wilson, of Marion, in the Chair]
recommitted with instructions to the
Also, Mr. Heffren's bill [H. R. 253] to amend Section 93 of an act concerning proceedings in criminal cases. The report of the Committee to Indefinitely postpone was concurred in.
Mr. McMULLEN, from the same Committee, reported back Mr Shively's bill [H. R. 49] to amend an act to authorize County Commissioners to construct roads and highways. The report of the Committee to indefinitely postpone was concurred in.
Mr. JEWETT from the same Committee reported back Mr. Sutton's bill [H. R. 184] concerning the quieting of titles to real estate. The report of the Committee was concurred in.
Also, Mr. McMullen's bill [H. R. 345] to amend Section 6,048 of the Revised Statutes of 1881. The report was concurred in.
Also, Mr. McClelland's, of Lawrence, bill [H. R. 174] to amend 2,184, 2,185 and 2,200 of the Code of 1881, concerning public officials. The report to indefinitely postpone was concurred in.
Mr. WILSON, of Union, reported back from the same Committee Mr. Smith's, of Perry, bill [H. R. 21] to repeal an act authorizing aliens to hold titles to real estate. The report to indefinitely postpone was concurred in.
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, from the same Committee, reported back his own bill [H. R. 92] to repeal Section 200 of the decedents' estates act. The recommendation of the Committee to indefinitely postpone was concurred in.
Mr. FRAZER, from the same Committee, reported back Mr. Mock's bill [H. R 47] to amend sundry sections of the decedents' estates act. The report of the Committee to indefinitey postpone was concurred in.
Also, his own bill [H. R. 114] to amend sundry sections of the decedents' estates act. The recommendation of the Committee to postpone indefinitely was concurred in.
Also, Mr. Stewart's bill[H.R. 278] to amend Sections 47 and 66 of decedents' estates act. The report of the Committee to postpone Indefinitely was concurred in.
Mr. JEWETT offered an amendment to the rules of the House, placing the time of meeting at 9:30 a. m. and 1:30 p. m. each day. The amendment was placed, under the rules, on the table for future action.
Mr. Patten's bill [H. R. 36] to amend sections of an act concerning public offenses,
which was reported back from the
Mr. Shaffer, by consent, introduced a bill [H. R. 413] for the relief of Wemus Megee and his sureties.
The House adjourned until to-morrow at 10 o'clock,
The Senate met at 10 o'clock a. m.
Prayer by Rev. D. D. Reed.
On motion by Mr. HENRY the reading of the Secretary's minutes of yesterday's proceedings was dispensed with.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR announced the question to be on seconding the demand for the previous question pending at the adjournment yesterday. The demand for the previous question was seconded, by the Senate and under its operations
The motion to reconsider the vote of the Senate authorizing the
Pending the roll call.
Mr. VOYLES, when his name was called, stated he was incorrectly reported in the morning papers as "hoping this motion would prevail." He hoped the motion would "not," prevail and voted "no."
The question recurring on the adoption of the resolution authorizing the investigation
by the
It was rejected by yeas, 19; nays, 23.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR laid before the Senate a communication from the reporter of the Supreme Court, in answer to a resolution of the Senate, stating that the number of appeals January 1, 1881, was 1,619, the number of appeals pending January 1, 1882, was 1,122. That the number of cases decided from January 1,1879, to January 1,1881, was 1,251, and from January 1, 1881, to January 1,1883, there has been 1,796 cases decided.
were presented and referred to Appropriate Committees:
By Mr. Bell, praying for the abolition of the Allan County Criminal Courts.
By Mr. Yancey, from fifty citizens of Hancock County, praying that his medical bill [S. 212] may become a law.
By Mr. May, from the Second Judicial Circuit.
By Mr. Ristine, against the repeal of the health law.
By Mr. Fletcher, from Pike, Grant and Gibson Counties, in favor of a continuance of the Board of Health act.
By Mr. Graham, from fifty citizens of Noblesville, a similar petition.
By Mr. Henry, from, the Physico-Medical Institute of Marion, against the passage of any law against the practice of medicine.
By Mr. McIntosh, from Richmond, for an extension of time for detention of girls in the Female Reformatory till twenty-one years of age, and the admission not until seventeen years of age, instead of fifteen, as now.
On motion of Mr. WILLARD the general appropriation bill [H. R. 302] was made the
special order for 2 o'clock p. m. He said the
were presented and placed on the calendar to come up for action in orders of the day, among which was one recommending the passage of Mr Compton's bill [S. 174] for continuing in office the Supreme Court Commissioners. Mr. Van Vorhis made an ineffectual motion for its consideration at once.
On motion by Mr. RISTINE his bill [S. 170] to create the Forty-fourth Judicial Cucuit-making the County of Montgomery a Circuit by itself, was read the second time, a favorable Committee report concurred in, and the bill ordered engrossed for the third reading.
On motion by Mr. COMPTON the bill [H. R. 32] to create the Forty-third Judicial Circuit-the County of Vigo, and opening the Fourteenth Circuit-Greene and Sullivan Counties, and Fifteenth Circuit-Morgan and Owen Counties, was read the second time and passed to the third reading.
Mr. BUNDY moved that the reference of the Governor's appointment of Superintendents
and Trustees of the Benevolent Institutions be with
The demand for the previous question was seconded, and under its operations the motion to withdraw the appointments was rejected by yeas, 20; nays, 27.
Mr. MAGEE, when his name was called, explained his affirmative vote; these appointments should not have been made; the Governor should not have asked the Senate to confirm them.
The vote was then announced as above, Mr. BUNDY remarking that the Democratic Senators seemed inattentive to business this morning, and he wanted to get them all in.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: There are enough of them here."
On motion by Mr. VOYLES, Mr. Graham's bill [S. 275] requiring certain officers to keep a cash boon. A Committee amendment concurred in, and the bill engrossed for the third reading.
On motion by Mr. SAYRE his bill [S. 57] to
amend Section 280 of the act concerning civil case proceedings [relative to the
testimony of administrators, heirs, etc.,] was read the second time and ordered
engrossed. Mr. Sayre stating the bill referred to the competency of testimony in
certain cases has the endorsement of the entire
On motion by Mr. HENRY, his bill [S. 162] concerning deeds executed by administrators, guardians, Sheriffs or Commissioners of Court, where the record thereof shall be destroyed by fire in the burning of any Court House, was passed by yeas, 48; nays, 0.
On motion by Mr. ATKINSON his bill [S. 114] to change the time of tax sales, was read a second time, with a Committee amendment changing the time back to the second Tuesday in February, as under the old law. The amendment was concurred in. The emergency clause was stricken out and the bill was ordered engrossed.
On motion by Mr. HUTCHINSON his bill [S. 17] for the construction of a sewer from the Northern Penitentiary to Fish Lake Creek, which flows into Lake Michigan [appropriating $33,000], was read the second time and ordered engrossed for the third reading.
Then came a recess till 2 o'clock.
Mr. RAHM, from the
On motion by Mr. BELL the Senate resolved itself into a
The bill having been read through-
Mr. GRAHAM move d that the Committee recommend the bill be printed with the
amendments proposed by the
Mr. RAHM explained the Committee amendments were mainly in the amounts-changed either to reduce or increase the sums.
Mr. SPANN supported the motion to print, not for the purpose of delay, but for careful and intelligent consideration, as ought to be done.
Mr. MAGEE considered the printing unnecessary, proposing to proceed with the consideration of the bill, at least till the Committee shall differ with the bill as transmitted here from the House. There are but few changes proposed by the bill, a difference of probably not to exceed $14,000. He was inclined to think this was a move to put off the bill from day to day till a later time in the session, when want of time may be plead.
Mr. VOYLES thought there was no need of delay for the printing of the Committee amendments and counseled immediate action.
The motion was rejected.
The Committee then proceeded to consider the bill by clauses.
Mr. BUNDY moved to make the salary of the Governor's Messenger $720 Instead of $700-the same that person was allowed for the part two years.
Mr. WILLARD said $700 was the largest amount till 1881; previous to that time $600 was the sum.
Mr. BUNDY understood the Messenger did more work than the Governor's Private Secretary.
Mr. MAGEE noticed the first appropriation for this Messenger was in 1877. In two years since that time there was no appropriation; $700 was enough for this Messenger.
Mr. FAULKNER moved to amend the amendment by inserting $600. That was sufficient. He could furnish any number from his County for that money.
Mr. SPANN did not think there was another person connected with the Governor's office who did so much labor.
The amendment to the amendment was rejected affirmative. 21; negative, 24.
The amendment for $720 was also rejected by the casting vote of the Chairman.
Mr. FAULKNER made an ineffectual motion to strike out the appropriation for the Governor's Clerk. The Committee's amendment, reducing the salary of the Adjutant General from $1,400 to $1,200, to comply with the statute fixing the salary at the latter sum being read-
Mr. HENRY staged that if the salary is not raised by a bill for that purpose the amendment should be adopted; but believing that the bill fixing the salary at $1,400 should be passed, he apposed the amendment.
Mr. McINTOSH did not think the bill referred to would be passed.
Mr. VAN VORHIS thought if there be any correspondence between what work is done and the pay, and any one acquainted with the work of that office well knows the work can not be done by a competent officer for $l,200.
Mr. VOYLES favored the Committee amendment.
Mr. MAGEE said the Committee had put down the salary of the Assistant Attorney General, and he did not think this was a very essential office, and $l,000 was the sum fixed in 1879 and was sufficient.
Mr. VAN VORHIS: Under the charge of this office are papers of immense importance to the soldiers of the State, and it was a very essential office.
Mr. GRAHAM praised the work done by the present incumbent, and insisted encouragement should be extended in that direction. He hoped the $1,400 would be retained.
Mr. SPANN: Out of the growing importance of this office the $1,400 should be left as in the bill.
The Doorkeeper announced a message from the House of Representatives.
On motion of Mr. BROWN the Committee rose to allow the Senate to convene in order to receive the message from the House, which announced the passage by that body of Mr. Brown's bill [S. 1] for the better management of the Benevolent Institutions of the State, with an amendment thereto.
Mr. BROWN moved to take the bill up and concur in the proposed House amendment.
The motion was rejected by yeas 27; nays, 22; not being a two-third vote as required by the rules.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR decided the motion lost.
On motion of Mr. BELL the bill was made the special order for 10:30 to-morrow.
On motion of Mr. BELL the Senate resolved itself into a
Mr. WILLARD defied gentlemen to point in this bill to a single dollar increase in any Democratic official; but on the contrary there is a decrease.
Mr. BROWN knew no change in affairs that 'would'allow a man to maintain a family for less now than two years ago, consequently he favored 'the $1.400 sum as in the bill.
The Committee amendment was reported.
Mr. MAGEE moved to reduce the Governor's civil contingent fund from $2,000 to
$1,000 in accordance with the recommendation of the late State Auditor in his report
to this General Assembly. The attention of the
Mr. BUNDY was informed this appropriation has never been less than $2,000, and as a matter of course, all the money not used will go back into the Treasury.
Mr. BROWN believed the Governor to be an honest, careful, conscientious public servant. The appropriation does not require the Governor to use all the money. He did not always judge the future by the past. This appropriation is made to aid in enforcing the laws of the Senate. He was willing to trust this money in his hands, and should support the $2,000 appropriation.
The Committee amendment reducing the appropriation to $1,200 was rejected-affirmative, 16; negative, 22.
The
Mr. GRAHAM moved to increase the salary of the Secretary of State from $2,000 to $2,500.
Mr. VOYLES insisted an appropriation bill is not the place to fix salaries.
The motion was rejected.
The
Mr. SAYRE moved to strike out the appropriation for a Deputy Auditor of State, for the reason that the office yields the Auditor of State, as he understands. $L,000 a month.
Mr. SPANN, while in favor of a just compensation, did not believe the Auditor receives any too much compensation, and would favor an increase rather than a decrease.
The motion was rejected.
Mr. SAYRE moved to strike out the salary provided for a clerk of the Auditor of State, for the reasons stated.
Mr. VAN VORHIS: If the statement that the office is worth $1,000 a month is true, this motion should prevail, as should the preceding motion.
Mr. YANCEY opposed the motion.
It was rejected.
Mr. SAYRE moved ineffectually to strike out the salary for the law department
clerk; and also to strike out the salary for the insurance department clerk of the
Auditor's office. The
Mr. WILLARD explained, for the past few years when the enumeration is made to fix the apportionment of the General Assembly, this appropriation is increased.
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. GRAHAM moved that the Committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again on Mr. WILLARD'S suggestion, at 2 o'clock Thursday afternoon.
The motion was agreed to. Accordingly the Committee rose, and through its Chairman reported as instructed.
The report was concurred in by the Senate.
Mr. HILLIGASS introduced a bill [S. 279] for relief of Weems Heagy, former Treasurer of Madison County, and his securities, which was read the first time and referred to the appropriate Committee.
On motion by Mr. MAGEE the bill [S. 78] to amend Section 2 of the act to establish a State Bureau of Statistics [the Chief to be selected by the General Assembly] was read the second time, with a Committee amendment providing that the first election shall take place oh the taking effect of this act, which was concurred in.
Mr. SPANN moved to amend by striking out all after the enacting clause, and denounced this as one of those infamous political bills to legislate out a man appointed by the Governor. This ought not to be done unless there can be some good reason given why it should lie done. He called upon the author of the bill to give a reason.
Mr. MAGEE said, acting upon the advice of the Senator from Rush [Mr. Spann], who said in the beginning of the session, "You, gentlemen, are entitled to the offices and you should have them," he had introduced this bill. There is an office created by that bill we want for the benefit of the people and we don't want it continued in the interest of a political party. We want a Democrat in that office, because all things being equal he is the best man. We don't want that office run in the interest of the Republican State Central Committee. We want that office run for the purpose named in the law creating it to furnish vital statistics. We don't want it to furnish statistics for either the Republican or the Democratic party. We don't wan't a man to discharge the duties of that office and at the same time dis- charge the duties of Assistant Secretary to the Central Committee of a political party. Without having any specific information, he said the charge comes from political and personal friends.
Mr. SPANN now supposed we had gotten to the bottom of this move. The Senator confesses there is nothing in this bill at all but the fact that the hungry Democrats want this one little office. Not being satisfied with taking the benevolent Institutions and Reformatory Institutions, and taking the State Prisons, and taking everything in sight, it is left for the Senator from Cass [Mr. Magee] to come in and claim the whole earth. [Laughter.] There is nothing in the bill but that it turns out of office a competent man He denied the charge that the head of this Bureau has run it in the interest of the Republican party. The gentlemen at the head of this Department would not allow that thing to be done if they knew it. If it has been done it was without their knowledge or authority. This bill is one of considerable importance, and for the purpose of having it fully and fairly discussed-it being now late in the afternoon-he moved that the Senate adjourn.
The motion was rejected.
Mr. WILLARD demanded the previous question.
The demand was seconded by the Senate by yeas, 25; nays, 19. The main question was ordered by yeas, 25; nays, 21, and the motion to strike out all after enacting clause was rejected by yeas, 21; nays, 25.
The bill was ordered engrossed for the third reading by yeas, 25; nays, 21.
Mr. SPANN moved to take up Mr. Brown's bill [S. 1] for the better management of the Benevolent Institutions of the State, and that the Senate reject the House amendment thereto.
On motion by Mr. BELL-yeas,-; nays,-, the Senate adjourned.
The session was opened with prayer.
On motion of Mr. HEFFREN the reading of the Clerk's minutes of yesterday's proceedings was dispensed with.
Mr. HEFFREN moved that the bill [S. 1] for the better management of the Benevolent Institutions of the State be made the special order far 2 o'clock this afternoon.
Mr. FRAZER said there was no need for hurry with Senate bills, but there was the greatest necessity for advancing House bills, of which there were several hundred awaiting third reading. He, therefore, moved to lay the motion upon the table.
The motion was rejected by yeas, 39; nays, 59.
Mr. FRAZER then moved to amend the motion so that 300 copies of the bill be printed, the bill being one of great public importance.
On motion by Mr. SCHLOSS this amendment was laid on the table by yeas, 58; nays, 39.
Mr. HEFFREN demanded the previous question.
This demand was seconded by the House-yeas, 58; nays, 39, and the motion to make the bill a special order for 2 o'clock this afternoon was agreed to by yeas, 57: nays, 40.
Mr. Heffren called up the special order, being Mr. Ferriter's bill [H. R. 133] to provide for a Board of Police Commissioners. [To apply only to cities having a population of 25,000] thereby including only Evansville and Indianapolis, making the Commissioners to consist of two Democrats and one Republican and forbidding officers from being delegates to Conventions or taking any part in elections; prohibiting persons from interfering with the Commissioners or patrolmen in the discharge of their duties, intended to apply to physical interference.] He moved that the bill be considered as engrossed and put upon its passage, and on that motion he demanded the previous question.
This demand was seconded by yeas, 56; nays, 41, and under the operations thereof the bill finally passed the House of Representatives by yeas, 46; nays, 38.
Mr. WRIGHT from the
Mr. HEFFREN and Mr. Speaker BYNUM [Mr. Adams in the Chair], opposed concurring in the report of the Committee.
Messrs. WILSON, of Marion, WRIGHT and JEWETT were in favor of concurring in the report of the Committee.
Mr. MOCK favored recommitting the bill with Instructions.
Mr. HEFFREN moved to recommit the bill with instructions.
Mr. SHOCKNEY moved to lay the motion to recommit on the table, and the yeas and nays were demanded thereon.
Mr. HEFFREN moved that the House adjourn. The motion was agreed to.
On motion by Mr. Shockney the resolutions of respect concerning ex-Representative Henry C. Meredith, of Wayne County, was made the special order for 3 o'clock this afternoon.
The Speaker announced that the question before the House was the motion by Mr. Shockney to lay Mr. Heffren's motion to recommit the bill [H. R. 43] with instructions pending when the House took the noon recess.
The yeas and nays having been demanded the vote resulted yeas, 40; nays, 48.
So the motion to recommit was agreed to.
Mr. WILSON, of Marion, moved his bill [H. R. 52] to provide for the construction of a sewer from the Female Reformatory to connect with a sewer in the city of Indianapolis, be made special order for to-morrow at 2 o'clock.
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, moved to amend the motion by providing that the bills [H. R. 39, 51, 103, 134] be made the special order for Thursday at 2 o'clock.
Mr. SHOCKNEY made an ineffectual motion to lay the motion and the amendment on the table-yeas, 40; nays, 54.
Mr. Williams' amendment was accepted by Mr. Wilson, and Mr. McMullen moved an amendment to the motion by adding bill [H. R. 148], which was agreed to.
The motion as amended was agreed to.
The special order for the House being the bill [S. 1] to provide for the better government and management of the State Benevolent Institutions, Mr. Jewett demanded that the special order be taken up, which was agreed to by the House.
Mr. JEWETT stated that this was a very wise measure and had been thoroughly discussed, and as he thought no one would be enlightened by a further discussion of the bill he moved the previous question, which was seconded by yeas 53; nays. 39.
The bill passed the House by yeas, 55; nays. 38.
The SPEAKER decided the special order to be Mr. Jewett's bill [H. R. 26] to amend Section 6 of an act concerning promissory notes, bills of exchange, etc.
The bill was read and by yeas, 41; nays, 52, the further consideration was passed over at present.
The Speaker decided that the special order before the House was the motion by Mr. Shaw to reconsider the vote by which Mr. Shively's bill [H. R. 248] to amend Section 64 of an act concerning proceedings in criminal cases was indefinitely postponed.
Mr. SHAW thought it was a bill of some importance, and spoke in favor of his motion.
Mr. McMULLEN stated that the House had spent some time in the consideration of the question of tile jurisdiction of Justices of the Peace, and he thought it was not worth while to occupy more time, and he therefore moved to lay the motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was rejected by yeas, 29; nays, 51.
The motion to reconsider was agreed to.
On motion by Mr. HEFFREN the report of the Committee was laid on the table, and on motion by Mr. SHIVELY the bill was ordered engrossed.
On demand by Mr. MERING the special order for the hour was called up, it being the resolution of respect concerning the death of ex-Representative Henry C. Meredith, of Wayne County.
The resolution was read by order of the Speaker.
Mr. MERING said: As the mover of the resolution it will be expected that I make
some remarks, and I only wish I was more competent to outline the character of and
portray the many good qualities of our deceased friend. But I am glad to know that I
will be followed by those who knew him longer and more
Mr. BEESON said: I think that on an occasion like this it is fitting and proper that we should stop the wheels of legislation for a time that we pay a tribute of respect to one that so young in lire had obtained such as honorable position in the service of the state. Henry C. Meredith was born near Cambridge County, July 17, 1843, and died, After a short illness, at his residence, near that place, July 5, 1882 He was the last living representative of an old and honored family who had been identified with the history of Eastern Indiana for over fifty years, and was recognized as leaders in all measures for public improvement, education and good morals. Henry C. Meredith's wife was the daughter of Hon. O. B. Claypool, of Connersville, Ind. It was my fortune to have personal acquaintance with him for a number of years, and to those who knew him it is scarcely necessary to speak of his many noble qualities. He was beloved because he was frank, cordial and sincere, and looked with the eyes of charity upon the failings and mistakes of men. This death, how sudden! He was in the prime life. Many years of distinction and honor were apparently before him. His life in this world is ended, his mission accomplished, and he has gone to join the innumerable host in that undiscovered country, from which there is no return. Life is but a span. We determine upon our plans, we lay out our work, arrange the programme for a long term of years-and view it, panorama like; when suddenly, perhaps without warning, our lives are required of us, and the bright future fades into the dark mystery of death. Even now, "our hearts, like muffled drums, are beating funeral marches to the grave." I cordially second the adoption of the resolution.
Mr. HUSTON said: I most heartily concur with the gentlemen from Wayne [Mr Mering and Mr. Beeson] in all that they have said in regard to Henry C. Meredith. I knew him as a citizen, I knew him in society, and I served with him in the last General Assembly. I can say this of him: That Henry C. Meredith was an honest man. He was honest to himself,he was honest to his family, and he was honest to his country. He was a man of strong conviction. He was a man who was actuated by what he considered to be for the best interest of the people. He was not actuated by any selfish motive. Henry C. Meredith lived in the County adjoining the one in which I live, and consequently I knew much of him and the estimation in which he was held by his own people. He was a man of large public spirit; a man who evinced great interest in the affairs of the County and State, He was a graduate of Bloomington University. After his graduation he conducted a paper at Cambridge City. It was a newspaper of the people and for the people. I attended the funeral of Mr. Meredith, and I do not remember of having ever attended a funeral where the people, without regard to party distinction, evinced to much sympathy for a bereaved family as was felt and shown for the family of Henry C. Meredith. His wife is a most estimable woman, a lady whom I have known all my life. I most cordially second the adoption of the resolution.
Mr. FRAZEE stated that it was in the capacity of a breeder of thoroughbred Short Horn cattle that he was most intimately associated with Henry C. Meredith, and that it afforded him pleasure to bear testimony to his strict integrity and high sense of right and wrong. He considered him a gentleman of refinement and culture. In his associations with him he had not heard him utter a word that might not with propriety be uttered in the presence of ladies. Mr. Meredith was fortunate in bis marriage to Virginia Claypool, of Fayette County, a young lady upon whom nature had been lavish of her gifts and i charms She was educated at Glendale College, where she carried off the first honors of her class. By an inscrutable Providence Henry C. Meredith has been called home, ere his sun was in its zenith, in the prime and vigor of his manhood, while his step was yet elastic, and with no gray hairs upon his brow. The last representative of a noble family, his two older brothers, the Major and Captain, had offered up their lives upon their country's altar.
Mr. Deem paid a tribute of respect to the deceased.
Mr. MELLETT was not personally acquainted with Mr. Meredith in his lifetime, but he knew him as an honest, valued citizen-a man whose usefulness in society was acknowledged. He cordially concurred in all that had been said.
Mr. Campbell and Mr. Smith, of Tippecanoe, heartily seconded the resolution.
Mr. Shockney also submitted a few remarks.
Mr. Sutten, as a further mark of respect, moved that the House adjourn.
The motion was agreed to.
On motion by Mr. BENZ the reading of the Secretary's minutes of yesterday's proceedings was dispensed with.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR laid before the Senate a communication from St. Louis in reference to the improvement of the Mississippi River.
Also a communication from the Board of Aldermen of Indianapolis praying for the passage of a law authorizing cities of 30,000 population and over to levy taxes in excess of ninety cents on each $100 of taxables for any purpose whatever.
These papers were referred to appropriate Committees
On motion by Mr. WHITE his graded teacher's license bill [S. 145-see page 72, and 182, of the Brevier Reports] was taken up, it having failed to pass last Saturday.
Mr. YANCEY said this bill ought not to pass. If a trial license is required the bill is unfair, because it prohibits the granting of six months' license the second time. Again, a young man or young woman not able to obtain a longer license should be granted a six months' license as often as applied for, if they can pass the examination therefor, otherwise an aristocracy in this line may spring up. In justice to those aspiring to qualify themselves for teachers the bill should be rejected.
Mr. SMITH, of Jay, opposed the bill. Some teachers holding a twenty-four months' license to-day do not teach as good a school as some holding a six months' license. He condemned the system, or the class of questions propounded to teachers on examination. This bill ought not to become a law.
Mr. ADKISON was influenced the other day by the Senator from Hancock [Mr. Yancey] and the Senator from Jay [Mr. Smith] to oppose the bill. Having thoroughly examined the bill since he did not believe the bill subject to the objections urged by these Senators. It is as important to guard the community against incompetent school teachers as against incompetent doc- tors. The bill contains a stimulus for young people to prepare themselves for the discharge of their duties as teachers.
Mr. HENRY also voted against the bill the other day, but should vote for it now. He looked upon this as an important matter-bearing upon the education of the people of the State, it is not simply for the purpose of furnishing occupation for persons, and if they can not more perfectly prepare themselves under a six months' license for'a twelve months' license they had better quit.
The bill parsed the Senate by yeas, 33; nays, 12.
On motion by Mr. SPANN the Senate returned to the consideration of his motion pending at the adjournment yesterday, to reject the House amendment to Mr. Brown's bill [S. 1] for the better management of the Benevolent Institutions-see pages 105, 135 and 136 of the Brevier Reports. He said the judgment of the Senate was this amendment stricken out in the House should prevail, and he desired to know upon what ground objection is made to such a humane provision. He urged Senators to rise about the rut of political necessity in this humane feature. We are willing a Democratic woman should be put in the position and have charge of this unfortunate class of fellow-beings. If this section remains he would vote for the bill. He favored recognizing women of the State who have the ability.
Mr. BROWN offered a substitute for the motion that the Senate concur in the House amdnemtn. The Senate can not dictate to the House what it ought to do, even to get the vote of the Senator from Rush. All this talk about a female physician has been made for the purpose of defeating the bill, because this matter is left to the decision of the Board of Trustees, who can make just such an appointment, as the Senator desires, if they feel so disposed. He demanded the previous question.
The demand for the previous question was seconded by the Senate-yeas, 25; nays, 20.
Under its operations the substitute motion, that the Senate concur in the House amendment, was agreed to by yeas, 27; nays, 21.
The motion as amended was agreed to by yeas, 27; nays, 21-and so the Senate concurred
in the House amendment, striking out of the bill the section requiring the Female
Department of the
Mr. BROWN moved to reconsider the vote concurring in the House amendment, and to lay the motion to reconsider on the table.
The latter motion was agreed to by yeas, 28; nays, 20.
Mr. CAMPBELL moved for a dispensation of the constitutional rule that his bill [S. 247-described on page 167 of these reports] for the better advertisement of contracts labor, that it may be pressed >to the final vote.
Mr. BROWN opposed the motion. The bill is not in the proper shape. It is a covert attempt to strike down existing contracts for the purpose of annulling them. He asked if the author would object to an amendment exempting existing con tracts from the operations of the bill.
Mr. CAMPBELL had no objection,not intending to interfere with existing contracts.
The motion to suspend the rules was rejected yeas, 28; nays, two-thirds not voting in the affirmative.
Mr. HILLIGASS called up his bill [S. 48-see page 167 of the Brevier Reports] providing for the appraisement, purchase an'l convertment of toll roads into free roads, which failed to pass last Monday. He explained it provides for a majority petition by owners of land lying along the roads. The Committee can order an appraisement on the actual cost value and make assessment on lands benefited lying within one and one-half miles of the road. The provisions are the same as under the free gravel road law. It only encumbers the land owners along the line represented by a majority of petitions. The limit is ten years for the tax to be paid.
Mr. VAN VORHIS feared it would permit the sale of some roads at eight or ten times actual value, and enable parties who have bought up stock at a nominal price to recover from parties along the line full value, and make them pay the second time for the same road.
Mr. HILLIGASS considered a sufficient answer to be this: that the question of purchase is left with a majority of land owners along the line.
Mr. GRAHAM also feared the burden of paying for a road the second time by owners along the line of the road. The provisions of the bill will allow the taking away from owner thereof his stock in such roads without a fair compensation. That arbitrary right is not permitted by the Constitution. In his County there are a number of toll roads and the people want them continued. Our experience with free gravel roads has not been so satisfactory. The provisions of this bill would be liable to very great abuse-it will allow the appraisement of an old gravel road and compel its sale to the persons who built it.
Mr. VAN VORHIS regarded this as a vicious bill. He suggested a difficulty where the road is mortgaged-it would not be bought.
Mr. HILLIGAS thought the illustration an extreme one-there are probably not, a half dozen in the State mortgaged-but there is a provision in the bill that will overcome the difficulty suggested.
Mr. McCULLOUGH suggested a difficulty where owners of land along the line may be heavy stockholders.
Mr. HILLIGASS: The roads are not to be appraised beyond a fair cash value. There are provisions to protect every man who considers himself aggrieved.
Mr. LOCKRIDGE saw in the bill no provision for appeal on one side-the rule ought to work both ways. He was not opposed to the general provisions of the bill but desired to see this objection remedied before voting for it.
Mr. SAYRE also opposed the bill because the public interest is not sufficiently guarded. Money can be drawn for the purchase from the County Treasury without reference to the justice of the appraisement. While a taxpayer might enjoin, here are the mandatory provisions in the bill that its appraisement at a fair cash value shall be paid.
The bill passed the Senate by yeas, 30; nays, 16.
Mr. YANCEY called up his bill [S. 5] prohibiting certain animals running at large, which failed passing Saturday. He said it is a copy of the bill that came near passing two years ago.
Mr. ADKISON opposed this bill because his constituency, without regard to age, sex, or previous condition of servitude, are opposed to it. There is an abundance of outside range for cattle and horses, and they desire to avail themselves of their opportunities.
The bill failed to pass for want of a Constitutional majority-yeas, 21; nays, 22.
Then came a recess till 2 o'clock p. m.
Mr. BELL gave notice that he should on to-morrow, or at the proper time, move to change the hours of meeting of the Senate, so it shall convene at 9:30 a. m. and 1:30 p. m.
Mr. Benz's bill [S. 6] for the election and appointment of Supervisors of Highways [see pages 78, 97, 131, 169, 175 and 176 of the Brevier Reports] coming up in order, it was read the third time.
Mr. SPANN and Mr. Voyles pointed out omissions in the bill of sections adopted by the Senate.
Mr. BUNDY moved to recommit the bill to a Committee of Three [Mr. Benz, Voyles and Henry] with instructions to strike out the emergency clause and insert Mr. Voyles' section.
Mr. BUNDY said the bill as it now stands is inconsistent.
Mr. VOYLES referred to three sections which were adopted by the Senate the other day and omitted from the engrossed bill.
Mr. WILLARD had no doubt the Senator from Washington [Mr. Voyles] thinks his sections were adopted, but the journal of the Senate shows they were not.
Mr. VOYLES The fact is all the same. No matter what the record is, the Brevier Reports show the sections were adopted as amended by a substitute offered by the Senator from Madison [Mr. Henry] to a clause in the third section as proposed by him.
Mr. SPANN read from the Brevier Report record to show the facts as stated by Mr. Voyles, the Senator from Washington.
Mr. WILLARD would consent to a recommittal if the bill be reported back at once.
Mr. HENRY moved a substitute for the motion to recommit to a Committee of One [Mr. Benz] with instructions, so that upon the taking effect of the act Township Trustees shall appoint Supervisors, and striking out the postponement of the taking effect of the act until the first Monday of April, 1884, and the three Sections, 36, 37 and 38 [Mr. Voyles'], as adopted the other day.
Mr. SPANN would vote for the bill if the emergency clause be stricken out.
Mr. BUNDY insisted this General Assembly can determine a time when a law shall go into effect, but not sooner than the Constitution contemplates, except in cases of emergency, which is also provided for in the Constitution. The law now on the statute books is one of the best ever enacted, but there has been no opportunity to test its bad qualities because of a defect in furnishing the money for carrying out its provisions.
Mr. HENRY was not as well satisfied with this bill as be would like to, but it is a better one than the House bill, and if we are to have either he preferred this. It is for the interest of the roads of the State to have the bill take effect at once.
Mr. VOYLES favored the motion to recommit. He desired to see the bill made consistent, and to see his amendments incorporated in the bill as they have been by a vote of the Senate.
The substitute [Mr. Henry's] was agreed to by yeas, 31; nays, 15.
The motion as amended by the substitute was adopted, and so the bill was recommitted.
Mr. McINTOSH moved to take up the bill [H. R. 414] to appropriate $40,000 for the relief of sufferers on the Ohio, Wabash and White Rivers in the State of Indiana from the recent flood; that it be read the first time, the second time by title only and put upon its passage. He hoped the Senate would add $10,000 to the appropriation.
The motion was agreed to by yeas, 44; nays, 0; accordingly the bill was read the first time, and the second time by title. [The Governor, Secretary and Auditor of State to disburse the money without delay.]
Mr. SPANN moved to add to the Board of Dispensation the Lieutenant Governor.
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. WILLARD moved to increase the appropriation to $50,000.
Mr. MAGEE opposed the amendment. There will be a deficiency in the ensuing year. This bill was introduced this morning and hurried through the House. The expenditure of the money is not sufficiently guarded. While this appeals to the the impulses of our nature he opposed the passage of the bill without proper consideration. We are entitled to no credit for putting our hands into the State Treasury in this way. It is the people's money and not ours. Let us see,if the bill is to pass; that the people who deserve the money shall receive it, and that it shall not be dispense to undeserving.
Mr. VOYLES thought In a great emergency like this money should be appropriated from the State Treasury, The people will doubtless contribute liberally from their means, but it, will look niggardly unless this? Legislature make a liberal appropriation. To raise the captious question the money will not be properly distributed looks cap- nous. These sufferers call loudly for relief, and he thought no generous man or woman but would applaud the passage of this bill, even though it called for $100,000.
Mr. VAN VORHIS would favor the amendment did he think it necessary-he favored a sufficient amount to meet the emergency.
Mr. SPANN opposed the bill because it has in it concealed a communistic principle. Whenever any class want relief they knock at the doors of the State Treasury. We can not afford to make a bid precedent that shall go down the line of the ages. When any great disasters have overtaken people, when charity of their neighbors is appealed to relief will roll in and flood upon them until the suffering need no more. All over the country is bread, food and clothing being distributed to the people. This precedent is a dangerous one and ought not to be passed. The principle is wrong and the Senate ought to consider it well,
Mr. BROWN hoped localities had nothing to do in in influencing Senators in voting upon this bill. Its passage will not be a precedent for the legislature hereafter to do an improper thing. At such a time as this tins kind of relief should be extended. The duty of Goverment is to protect her citizens. Man is not responsible for the act of God or a public enemy. He thought the $40,000 would carry the needed relief and hoped the amendment would lie withdrawn. He appealed to the Senate to ex- tend heart and hand to this measure.
Mr. JOHNSON favored the bill but opposed the amendment, because its adoption would cause delay. If at any time delay is detrimental it is now. These sufferers hold up their arms imploringly for needed assistance, and he hoped not an hour's delay will be had.
Mr. McINTOSH did not believe the amendment would delay the bill half an hour, and he hoped it would pass.
Mr. SPANN insisted not a good reason has been given for the passage of this bill. No man appreciated more than he the deserving objects of the bill, but it will not do to inaugurate a communistic principle. It is not because he did no: love these people who were his brothers and neighbors; it is only the principle he was fighting against.
Mr. BELL thought there is a good deal of truth on both sides of this proposition. He should vote for the bill because of the great emergency-one unlikely to occur in the future. He acknowledged the principle to be a vicious one, but when emergency comes the eye is suffused and money flows like water to the relief of fellow sufferers. It is the easiest thing in the world to be generous with other people's money: but with this commission we may safely pass the bill. He opposed the amendment, believing the sum named in the bill sufficient for the present emergency. The public funds are not always raised by those able. Charity should come as the rain from Heaven, freely and unforbidden.
Mr. MAGEE supposed the bill would pass, but felt he must put his protest on record. He had as kindly a feeling for human kind as any Senator; but opposed anything like compelling charity. If this be a vicious principle, as acknowledged by the Senator from Allen [Mr. Bell], how can that Senator vote for the bill? We all had too good a knowledge of the generous people of this State to believe but that they would respond in abundant measure to their suffering brethren. If this precedent be established, every time a great fire or other calamity comes upon any people in this State, they will come here for relief and point to this precedent. The bill he regarded as unconstitutional, and should vote against it.
Mr. CAMPBELL appreciated what has been said on both sides of this question. This is an unprecedented calamity, and he felt justified in voting, gladly, for such a measure of relief as this.
Mr. ADKISON said the bill is not broad enough nor large enough. He would like to see it apply to every river in the State. The proposition is too narrow and the appropriation is too small.
Mr. BELL hoped the money would be used only for the relief of physical suffering and personal want. Mr. VAN VORH1S was willing to take the responsibility of voting to help these sufferers. Citizens who will not contribute ought to be compelled by law to do so.
Mr. WHITE felt his people would censure him were he not to favor this bill to relieve the suffering people of the State, though he opposed the amendment.
The amendment increasing the appropriation to $50,000 was rejected by yeas, 7; nays, 37.
Mr. SAYRE (explaining) would as lief vote for $100,000 as $40,000, but he would not, vote for the amendment now. If more money is necessary he stood ready to vote it.
Mr. FOULKE moved to amend by adding a proviso that no more than $5,000 be appropriated for sufferers from overflow of the White River or Wabash River.
Mr. SAYRE opposed any amendment on account of the delay.
The amendment was rejected.
Mr. MARVIN moved to strike out the words Wabash River and White River.
Mr. BROWN knew no difference in the suffering wherever it is regardless of localities. There ought to be no distinctions.
Mr. MARVIN had seen no report where the people on these rivers are suffering.
The amendment was rejected.
The bill was then read the third time and finally passed with the amendment adding the Lieutenant Governor to the Board of Disbursement by yeas, 39; days, 7.
The Senate resumed the consideration of Mr. Benz's bill [S. 9].
Mr. BENZ [the Special Committee thereon] returned his bill with the amendments as instructed by the Senate [Mr. Henry's substitute motion]
The report was concurred in.
Mr. WILLARD demanded the previous question.
The Senate seconded the demand and under the operation of the previous question the bill was passed by yeas. 39: nays, 8, with a new title proposed by Mr. Henry.
And then the Senate adjourned.
On motion the reading of the journal was dispensed with.
By consent Mr. Jewett offered a resolution that it be the sense of this House that $25,000 be appropriated immediately for the relief of the Ohio River sufferers.
Mr. SHOCKNEY offered an amendment, which was rejected that: a Committee of Three be appointed to inquire into the matter and report to the House.
Mr. WILSON, of Marion, offered a substitute for the resolution, instructing the
The substitute was accepted by Mr. Jewett.
Mr. PATTEN offered as a substitute a joint resolution providing that a joint Committee on the part of the House and Senate be appointed to inquire into the necessity for relief of the sufferers from the Ohio River flood.
Mr. JEWETT opposed the substitute and stated that these people are now in a suffering condition-wet, cold and hungry-and can not watt for the slow action of an investigation before there is legislation for their relief. On his motion the substitute; was laid on the table.
Mr. STEWART thought there is no doubt of the existence of this suffering. He lived in a town on the Ohio River, but his town did not need any assistance. If we are going to do anything for these people it should be done at once. He hoped that a bill would be drawn up, introduced, and that the House would act on the same without delay.
Mr. GIBSON had also received quite a number of dispatches from Jeffersonville relating to the suffering there, and he hoped that there would be no delay in the action of the House,
Mr, WILSON, of Marion, offered an
Mr. HEFFREN moved that the special order-the bill [H. R. 247]-for the incorporation of towns, etc., be taken up.
Mr. JEWETT opposed the motion to take up the special order. He felt that many members voted under a mistaken impression yesterday when they voted to pass over the consideration of the bill [H. R. 26] concerning promissory notes, bills of exchange, etc., and he believed that two-thirds of the members of the House desired to pass the bill. The bill has been before the House three times, and had each time been set aside. He thought that the motion for the special order should be voted down.
Messrs. Patten, Gordon and Copeland spoke in favor of taking up the special order.
The bill was taken up and read and the SPEAKER announced that it was ready for amendment.
Mr. BEST and Mr. SHOCKNEY each offered amendments.
The
By the
Mr. STEWART moved that the Constitutional rules be suspended, that the bill be read the second time by title, be considered engrossed, read the third time by sections and put upon its passage. The motion was agreed to by yeas, 91; nays, 4. The bill was then read the second time.
Mr, KENNEDY made an ineffectual motion to insert $50,000 hi place of $40,000.
The amendment was rejected.
Mr. MOODY offered an amendment making the provisions of the bill extend to all sufferers in the State from the recent floods.
Mr. PATTEN opposed the amendment. It was not necessary to extend this relief to every man who had lost a cabin or some cattle. In all such cases the neighbors could and would afford ample relief for the sufferers.
Mr. FRAZER moved to recommit the bill with instructions that the words "other rivers" be inserted after the word "Ohio."
Mr. SHOCKNEY moved to amend the amendment by inserting the words "Wabash and White Rivers."
On motion by Mr. JEWETT the motions to amend and recommit were laid on she table by yeas, 50; nays, 49.
The bill was read a third time by section.
Mr. MELLETT could see no reason if there are families suffering on the Wabash why these families should not be relieved by this Legislature a well as the families who are suffering from the waters of the Ohio River.
Mr. HUSTON had not heard of any suffering from water, except from the Ohio River. He thought that the bill should pass for those who are hungry, cold and homeless.
Mr. SHIVELY was most heartily in favor of the bill, but after the rejection of such fair amendments as had been offered he would have to vote against the passage of the bill. He had letters in his pocket stating that persons were suffering from the overflow of the Wabash River.
Mr. ANTRIM would like to see the bill, which he heartily indorsed, include the other rivers in this State.
Mr. PATTEN did not favor extending the pro' visions of the bill to other rivers than the Ohio, although the White and Wabash ran through his District.
Mr. GIBSON demanded the previous question.
The House seconded the demand by yeas, 49; nays, 35, and under its operation the bill passed by yeas, 88; nays, 4.
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed.
Mr. JEWETT made an ineffectual motion to lay on the table this motion.
The motion to reconsider was agreed to by yeas, 51; nays, 48
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, insisted upon the right and justice of making the charities
of this bill extend to the Wabash and White River Counties. The blue water of the
White and the muddy waters of the Wabash are as cruel and relentless as those of the
broad Ohio. The drowning
Mr. JEWETT could not understand how any man who had a heart in his bosom could stop to raise objection to this measure, while the people on the Ohio were in such great distress and appealing to the Legislature for relief.
Mr. WILSON, of Marion, regretted that there bad been any bad feeling raised on the question. He was satisfied that it arose from a misunderstanding of the facts. He slated that some 300 families were driven out of their houses near this city because of the high water, but the city of Indianapolis was able to take care of these people. He thought that if the people on the Wabash were in a suffering condition, and the people along that stream could not render them relief, and they should come to the Legislature with an appeal, that would immediately grant them.
Mr. BOWERS stated that the city of Lawrenceburg is under water and many hundred people are driven from their homes. He hoped that the bill would not be delayed, and that it might pass at once.
Mr. COPELAND objected to the amendment because the inhabitants of the White River and Wabash Valley regions have not asked for aid. He begged the gentlemen to turn their ears and hearts to the cry that comes up from the raging waters of the Ohio. Hundreds of our people have been driven from their homes, cold, desolate and hungry. The cry of hungry and despairing children rises to high Heaven asking for bread and shelter and clothing. Women with crying babes in their arms are Imploring us for aid: tottering old men with white locks are turned out of their homes in mid-winter at the mercy of wild winds and wilder waves; strong men with unlifted hands are begging and praying that the flood may roll back from the workshops and foundries that they may earn bread for their starving families.
Mr. SHIVELEY thought that the bill would receive the hearty endorsement of every member if the amendment was accepted. If the gentleman would accept the amendment the bill would pass the House in ten minutes. This amendment Is fair and reasonable, and the gentlemen who oppose it are the ones who are delaying the passage of what I consider a just and humane measure.
Mr. HEFFREN spoke of the terrible suffering of these people from this great flood. He thought it was no time to stop and quibble about what might befall some other people, and delay the measure simply because it did not extend to some other people and some other region. These people are driven out of their homes by the remorseless flood and are praying for relief.
Mr. MOODY did not think such legislation was right. He did not think they had any right to place their hands in the pockets of the State and take out this money for an appropriation. He favored extending the provisions of the bill so as to furnish relief to all persons in the State suffering from the recent flood.
Mr. PATTEN moved the previous question, which was not seconded by the House.
Mr. GIBSON moved that the bill be recommitted to a Special Committee of Two with Instructions to make its provisions extend to the flood sufferers from the Wabash and White Rivers, and to report in five minutes.
The motion was agreed to by yeas, 72; nays. 19.
This Committee was made to consist of Mr. Gibson and Mr. Frazer.
Mr. MONTGOMERY, by consent, introduced a bill [H. R. 415] concerning the distribution of property, etc., which was read the first time.
The Special Committee, to whom was referred the bill for the relief of the Ohio sufferers, reported that they had amended the bill as instructed.
The report of the Committee was concurred in.
Mr. HOWLAND regretted very much that the bill had been placed in a condition that he could not vote for it. No member of the House was more in favor of the bill, as first introduced, than he was. He was not in favor of adopting the amendment.
Mr. TULEY had several dispatches in his pocket asking for relief, and though he did not favor adding the amendment to the bill, was willing to accept just what would be allowed. The people are driven from their houses and are camping upon the hillsides with nothing but a blanket to protect them from the cold. We have already wasted too much time on this matter. We are now willing to take what we can get.
The amendment was adopted, the bill considered engrossed, and passed the House by yeas, 88; nays, 2.
The SPEAKER announced the special order to be Mr. Gordon's bill [H. R. 247] for the incorporation of towns, defining their powers, etc., and that amendments were in order.
The bill was amended in several sections, and on motion by Mr. JEWETT made the special order for 2 o'clock next Friday.
The SPEAKER announced the next special order to be Mr. Pettibone's bill [H. R. 273] to authorize the issue of 650 internal revenue improvement bonds of $1,000 each, for the improvement of the Kankakee region.
On motion by Mr. FRAZER the bill was referred to a Special Committee of five, with instructions to be reported back not later than next Friday.
The Special Committee was made to consist of Messrs. Frazer, Pettibone, Shively, Barr and Gibson.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time and passed to the second reading:
By Mr. - [H. R 416] to authorize the Librarian of the Supreme Court to purchase the Territorial laws, State laws and Legislative journals, not to exceed in number three copies with what the State now has.
By Mr. TULEY [H. R. 417] to legalize the recording of plats of lands and lots, etc.
Mr. PATTEN, from the
On motion by Mr. HEFFREN the bill was considered engrossed, read the third time and passed by yeas, 87; nays, 0.
On motion by Mr. JEWETT the House proceeded to the consideration of bills on the first reading, and the following described were passed to the second reading:
The bill [S. 162] concerning deeds executed by administrators, executors, etc., where the records thereof are destroyed by the burning of a Court House.
The bill [S. 243] to prohibit diseased animals from being led, driven or rode into any public place.
The bill [S. 203] to authorize the sale of a strip of ground from the south side of the Deaf and Dumb Asylum premises.
The bill [S. 48] to provide for conversion of toll into free roads.
The bill [S. 145] for teachers' graded licenses.
The bill [S. 262] to amend the decedents' estates act.
The following described bills were read the second time and referred to appropriate Committees unless otherwise stated:
The bill [S. 91] to change the name of the House of Refuge, on motion of Mr. Heffren it was made the special order for Friday at 10 o'clock.
The bill [S. 207] to define the Thirty-first and Forty-third Judicial Circuits.
The bill [S. 50] to extend the term of Directors of the Northern State Prison.
Mr. Patten called up Mr, Frazer's bill [H. R. 37] for the creation of Appellate Courts.
Mr. ROBINSON moved to amend so the Court shall consist of two Democrats, two Republicans and a Greenbacker-it being a non-partisan measure he thought the Nationals should be represented on the Bench of this Court.
This amendment was adopted by yeas, 63; nays, 26.
On motion by Mr. JEWETT the name of the Court was changed from "Appellate" to "Court of Appeals."
The bill was ordered engrossed.
by concurrence in reports from Committees so recommending, to-wit:
Mr. Whitsit's [H. R. 181] relating to qualification of Justices.
Mr. Robertson's, Public School officers [H. R. 169.]
Mr. Mozier's [H. R. 145] to amend Section 4,529 of the Revised Statutes.
Mr. Smith's, of Blackford, [H. R. 108] to amend Section 2 of the common school law.
Mr. Henderson's [H. R. 143] to amend Section 3,441 of Revised Statutes.
Mr. Shockney's [H. R. 138] to amend Section 8 of the school law.
Mr. Kirkpatrick's [H. R. 211] to amend Sections 450 and 4 425 of the Revised Statutes.
Mr. Williams', of Posey, [H. R. 395] to amend Section 4,421 of the Code.
Mr. Smith's,of Tippecanoe,[H. R. 358] to provide for examination of teachers.
Mr. Graham's [H. R. 237] to amend Section 2,911 of the Code.
Mr. Williams,' of Knox, [H. R. 272] to define the offense of attempting to compel a person to marry.
Mr. Spann's [H. R. 285] to amend Section 3,262 of the Code.
The House adjourned.
The reading of the minutes was dipensed with.
On motion by Mr. BROWN his bill [S. 43] to amend Section 30 of the fee and salary act so as to increase Coroner's fees in the City of Indianapolis, was read the third time and passed by yeas, 34; nays, 4.
On motion by Mr. BISCHOWSKI the bill [H. R. 32] to create the Forty-third Judicial Court [the County of Vigo], was read the third time and passed by yeas, 44; nays, 0.
On motion by Mr. HUTCHINSON his bill [S. 17] appropriating $33,240 for a sewer from the Northern Prison to Fish Lake Creek, which nows into Lake Michigan, was read the third time.
Mr. Bundy, as a member of the
The bill passed the Senate by yeas, 41; nays, 3.
Mr. BELL called up the special order, being Mr. Graham's bill [S. 87] for the location of additional Insane Asylums one at. Evan^ville and one at Fort Wayne.
Mr. MAGEE moved to postpone the further consideration thereof till Tuesday next at 10 o'clock, In view of the fact that the General Assembly is invited to visit Logansport next Saturday to return Sunday. It is but just to that locality that this motion should prevail.
Mr. VOYLES favored the motion, but doubted the propriety of building the additional Asylums at this time. He incidentally referred to a location in his District.
Mr. RAHM introduced this bill over a month ago, and to postpone action now is simply to kill the bill. It is due to his interests that this bill should be acted on without further delay. Evansville moved in this matter last November, and now for other cities to arrange excursions looks like an effort to kill the bill, and it is unfair to postpone it further from time to time. There is a crying necessity for greater provision for the unfortunate insane now behind prison bars in the County Poor Houses all over the State.
Mr. McCOLLOUGH also thought this bill should not be delayed for excursions. The incurably insane should be better provided for, as the Constitution demands, and the duty is imperative upon this Legislature to do something in that direction.
Mr. WHITE, for the northern part of the State, spoke in favor of locating one of these Institutions at Elkhart-having the healthiest location and best water works in the northeast. He favored postponement.
Mr. BUNDY thought a majority of the Senate are in favor of locating one Asylum there, the other one being contended for by Fort Wayne and Logansport, and lately Elkhart has come in with a claim. He favored determining the question of location of one to-day, leaving the determination of the other till another time.
Mr. MAGEE was willing to that.
Mr. BUNDY understands there is no way to back out of the excursion. That is a settled fact, There is an absolute necessity for additional Asylum for the incurably insane. Whether more than one shall be built now is another thing.
Mr. SPANN favored Evansville as a place for one Asylum, but for the other place his mind is not made up. The bill ought to be dismissed on its merits to-day, but the question of location north of the National Road might be lets open.
Mr. VAN VORHIS favored the motion to postpone, thinking it the view of many that the number should be greater, located at different places probably one in each Congressional District, making each District partially responsible for their management, under the control of the State.
Mr. YOUCHE favored postponement, but not for the purpose of killing the bill, for he
favored the erection of two Asylums. He desired time to consider the claims of places
in the northern part of the State. The question as to what point in the northern part
of the State an Asylum should be built, and as it is to be located for all time, great
care and deliberation should be taken to canvass the question. It Evansville folk
desire,
Mr. GRAHAM did not believe either Evansville or Logansport geography the proper place. Logansport is more central for the northern portion of the State than Fort Wayne, and there are other places in the southern part of the State more central than Evansville. This location is to be permanent, and time enough should be taken to select with care. The grounds near the city belonging to the State would be a proper place and a far more economical place than any yet suggested. After next Tuesday there is ample time to decide upon a location, and he favored the motion to postpone.
Mr. BELL desired only to urge necessity for immediate action. As has been intimated by the Senator from Gibson [Mr. McCullough] the Constitution for thirty years has-demanded that provisions be made for the insane of the State, of which there are now more than 1,600 unprovided for. Yesterday when cry came up from sufferers by the flood, help was speedily granted, and how much sooner should the cry of those from whom the light of reason has forever fled? No action we can take will meet the hearty approval of the people of the State than to make immediate provision for this call of our unfortunate human beings. Those best informed say it is a mistake to mass the Asylums at one point, that better results can be obtained by building them at separate places. A comparison of management is a great advantage. Then upon the simple plea of economy. For transportation here from Fort Wayne each one brought costs $57, and friends desiring to visit inmates are put to great expense in coming from all over the State to one place. He thought the cottage system an excellent one. He favored as many additional facilities as could be obtained. Insane persons are now kept in this State in thirty-two places without clothing; in 108 places they are confined in cells; in twenty-two places in pens; in fourteen places they are wearing chains and balls; in twenty seven places they are fed through a wicket in an iron grate; in three places they are wearing handcuffs and in seven places they sleep on straw in cells. In two places they are controlled with the rod.
Mr. FOULKE supposed there is no doubt of a necessity for additional buildings for the care of the insane. It is due to the State we should not consider the question of location until the claims of all cities applying shall be canvassed. This matter should not be disposed of now. A postponement till next Tuesday will not hazard the bill. Probably by that time inducements now unknown may be brought to the attention of the General Assembly. It may be sites may be donated or other things offered that would aid materially in the construction of the buildings.
Mr. RISTINE favored the bill except the locations named therein. There was a proposition leaving the places vacant, which he favored, but a majority of the Committee insisted on inserting them. The postponement might endanger the passage of the bill. Let it be considered now- except the location feature.
Mr. SPANN made a substitute motion that the bill to read the second time now, with the report of the Committee thereon, and the further consideration thereof be postponed till Tuesday at 10 o'clock.
Mr. RAHM consented. He disclaimed any combination with Fort Wayne, declaring the location at Evansville to be decided on its merits solely. To-day it is the only city on the Ohio not suffering from the floods.
Mr. MAGEE was also willing to except the substitute motion.
Mr. VAN VORHIS favored a larger number of Asylums, conceding the location to Evansville.
The substitute motion was agreed to.
Accordingly Mr. Rahm's bill [S. 87] to provide for the erection of an additional
Asylum for the Insane at Evansville [on not less than 160 acres of land, with a
capacity to accommodate 600 patients-see page 51-or may select several buildings-on
what is called the "Cottage Plan;" as soon as any portion is completed patients may be
received], was read the second time, with a recommendation of the
The PRESIDENT pro tem. [Mr. Bundy in the Chair] declared the further consideration of the bill and report is postponed until Tuesday next at 10 o'clock, under the order of the Senate just adopted.
On motion by Mr. FOULKE his bill [S. 47] to amend Section 4,524 of the R. S. so as to extend to all cities and town's the provisions of the Public Library act of March 7,1881-a tax of two-thirds- of one mill discretionary-was read the third time and passed by yeas, 38; nays, 5.
On motion by Mr. Marvin his bill [S. 167] to define the Twentieth Judicial Circuit and creating the Forty-third Judicial Circuit [Boone County the Twentieth and Clinton County the Forty-third] was read the third time.
Mr. Mclntosh saw no necessity of making a Circuit out of these two Counties.
Mr. MARVIN, answering, read statistis of numerous Counties showing as in comparison these Counties were not asking too much-some having nine and four times the Court facilities. His people were active and energetic, which makes a difference in litigation. Those charged with crimes frequently have to lay in Jail sixty days. The Courts there are behind. It is unreasonable to expect one Court to do the business of his two thriving Counties. This change is badly needed as the business of the Courts is behind.
Mr. GRAHAM favored the passage of the bill, a number of gentlemen having represented to him the necessity of this measure, which is but granting the right the Constitution says these Counties have. The Judge of that District is one of the most industrious, and yet he is unable to transact the business of the Circuit. New Circuits are- needed in many localities-one is needed in his District-and more will be created next session.
Mr. JOHNSON referred to the Constitutional guarantee that justice shall be administered freely and without delay, which in itself is a sufficient argument in favor of the passage of this bill. If the facts are as stated there should certainly be a new Circuit created, as proposed in this bill.
Then came a recess till 2 o'clock.
Mr. SAYRE desired to enter a protest against the passage of the bill. This session there has already been created two additional Circuit, Courts, and there may yet be other applications more deserving than the Counties of Clinton and Boone. He read a list of nearly twenty Counties having about as large or larger population than either the Counties affected by this bill having no more Court facilities. From an inspection of the docket of Boone County he had come to the: conclusion the measure is not absolutely needed. For these and other considerations he hoped this bill will not pass.
The bill passed the Senate by yeas, 29; nays, 10.
On motion by Mr. RISTINE his bill [S. 170] to fix Court terms in the Twenty-second Judicial Circuit-Parke and Montgomery Counties-was read the third time and passed by yeas, 44; nays, 0.
By consent, Mr. SMITH, of Jay, introduced ft bill [S. 280] to amend Section of an
act dividing^ the State into Counties and concerning the boundaries of Counties
bordering on the Wabash and Ohio Rivers, being Section 4,204 of the Revised
On motion by Mr. BELL the Senate resolved itself into a
The
Mr. DUNCAN moved to increase the sum for office expenses of the Superintendent of Public Instruction from $500 to $600.
Mr. WILLARD opposed the amendment.
Mr. DUNCAN offered this amendment at the request of both the outgoing and incoming Superintendent of Public Instruction.
Mr. HENRY stated that $600 was appropriated last year and all was expended.
Mr. WHITE also insisted $600 was necessary.
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. JOHNSTON said the janitor of the State Library also acted as janitor of the Agricultural Bureau, and his compensation should be commensurate with his duties. He made an ineffectual motion to increase the salary from $500 to $900.
Mr. HENRY made an ineffectual motion to increase the pay of the State Librarian night watchman from $500 to $900.
The
Mr. SAYRE is informed $2,000 is absolutely necessary, and he opposed the amendment.
Mr. Graham also understood this sum should not be reduced below $2,000. One Judge has occupied his room one year without the carpet "being taken up.
Mr. Van Vorhis was of opinion this would be parsimony instead of economy.
Mr. White felt a curtailment would cripple the Judges.
Mr. Willard reminded the Senate that it was only in 1881 that the appropriation was increased to $2,000.
The amendment was agreed to but this vote was subsequently reconsidered on motion by Mr. Henry.
Mr. SPANN moved to increase the salary of Assistant Librarian from $750 to $1,000, as justice to a woman who will do the work and have a good share of the responsibility.
Mr. MAGEE conceding what is stated, but opposed the amendment.
Mr. HENRY moved to amend the amendment by making the sum $900.
His amendment to the amendment was agreed to as was also the amendment as amended.
The
Mr. VAN VORHIS said this man does some clerical work in addition to his duties, but on general principles if the man is worth no more than that, the item had better be stricken out,
Mr. HENRY understood this messenger's duty is to carry books from the library to the Judges.
Mr. BUNDY saw no necessity for employing a full grown man for such light duties.
Mr. SPANN preferred to see a place abolished if not worth paying for.
The Committee amendment was rejected.
On motion by Mr. SAYRE the sum for salaries of Circuit Judges was increased $7,500 to pay the three additional Circuit Judges created this session.
Mr. FOULKE moved to make one of the three janitors provided for in the bill under the charge and appointed by the Judges of the Supreme Court.
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. SPANN moved ineffectually to increase the salaries of Prosecuting Attorneys from $500 to $1,000.
On motion by Mr. MARVIN the sum for Prosecuting Attorneys was increased $1,500 for the three new offices created this session.
The
Mr. MAGEE stated since the Committee acted upon this the Superintendent of the Asylum contends this should not be taken from the bill.
Mr. VAN VORHIS moved as a substitute for the Committee amendment a change of wording so as to make the appropriation in gross. There is no reason for counting these items in separate accounts. This is the view of the Superintendent of the Insane Asylum. Two years ago Mr. V. made an effort to have these sums stated in gross. They ought to be so considered.
Mr. HENRY saw no reason why these accounts be put in gross.
The amendment was rejected.
Mr. SMITH, of Delaware, understands the Committee reconsidered this act.
Mr. DAVIDSON, learning that appropriation was necessary, is satisfied the amendment was a mistake.
The CHAIRMAN understands the Committee's amendment to be withdrawn.
The
The
Mr. SPANN reiterated a former protest against an increase in the pay of the Trustees of this Institution, as one of them has come upon this floor saying the present pay is enough.
Mr. Voyles insisted the bill passed this session does not increase their salaries. The law requires these Trustees to meet once every two months and pay all their expenses.
The amendment was rejected upon a division.
The
Mr. WILLARD delivered a set speech in support of the Committee amendment as follows :
MR. PRESIDENT-As the author of the proviso which has been
unanimously reported from the
It proposes to declare in the most emphatic term in which this General Assembly can enunciate it, that and hobby-riding shall have no place in the advanced education which we are laboring to bestow on rich and poor alike in Indiana. It is indeed strange, Mr. Chairman, that in this, our advanced civilization, in a State which has the finest system of common schools on the continent, a legislator should be forced to insist that the blessings of civil liberty and freedom of thought shall not be denied to any citizen of Indiana.
One would think from the necessity which has given rise to this proviso that we were groping in dark ages of the past, under a despotic Government, rather than breathing the free air of Heaven in a State whose educational system is the pride and boast of her citizens. Nevertheless, the necessity is imperative. The Constitution of Indiana guarantees that "no law shall restrain any inhabitants of the State from assembling together in a peaceable manner to consult for their common good." Certainly no educational institution which is supported in party by the State will be permitted to invade this, one of the dearest rights of citizenship, simply because a fossilized faculty is imbued with the quintessence of craukism. The students of Purdue, who are so unfortunate as to be tyranized over by these antediluvian fanatics, know Their rights and have dared to assert them.
I purpose to briefly review the contest between the friends of civil liberty on the one side and the monomaniac faculty of Purdue up in the other. An application was made in the Tippecanoe Circuit Court in the name of the State of Indiana: on the relation of Stallard vs. White and others for a mandamus to compel the faculty of Purdue to admit a student, otherwise qualified, but who refused to sign what is known as the "Purdue Greek Fraternity pledge." The point in question was "whether a public institution supported in pa by the State could require any person, either a citizen or minor, to agree to abide by this rule of Purdue as a condition precedent to his entering the Institution. The rule alluded to is in the following language:
3. "No student is permitted to join or be connected with any so-called Greek or other College secret society, and as a condition of admission to the University or promotion therein each student is required to give a written pledge that he or she will observe this regulation. A violation of this regulation and pledge forfeits the right of any student to class promotion at the end of the year and to an honorable dismissal."
Upon a hearing of the cause before Judge Vinton, of The Tippecanoe Circuit Court, the writ of mandate was dented to the plaintiff and an appeal was promptly prayed to the Supreme Court. While this appeal was being taken, and while as yet the case was not decided by the Supreme Conn, the extremely conscientious, high-minded and honorible President of Purdue, whose hair stands erect in horror at the very mention of a secret society, by a species of chicanery which would disgrace a pettifogger in a Police Court endeavored to bias the action of the Supreme Court by an official report to the Governor of the State in which he uses the following language:
"It is not feared that Judge Vinton's decision will be reversed by the Supreme Court of the State, and hence the validity of the Purdue regulation prohibiting connection with College secret societies may be considered as judicially settled."
At the time those words were penned by the President of Purdue he well knew that nothing whatever was settled by a Circuit Court decision from which an appeal had been prayed to the Supreme Court, and his futile attempt to bias a Court can only be considered the chattering nonsense of a blind fanatic, or else a willful misrepresention in an official report. He may take whichever horn of the dilemma he choses, but notwithstanding this insinuating effort on the part of the President of Purdue, the Supreme Court, decided the case upon its merits. I desire to quote from the decision: "But the possession of this great power over a student after he has entered the University does not justify the imposition of either detracting or extraordinary terms as a condition of admission into it, nor does it justify anything which may be construed as an invidious discrimination against an applicant on account of his previous membership in any one of the Greek fraternities, conceding their characters, objects and aims to be what they are averred to be in the complaint." So much for the case which th e President of Purdue so boldly announced in advance was practically settled. But the Faculty of Purdue were not satisfied: they passed for a rehearing: they wanted more, and they got more than they wanted. The Court granted the rehearing, and then reaffirmed their former decision with this addition: "In legal effect we have only decided that Regulation No. 3, adopted by the Faculty, and the special pledge tendered to Hawley fairly implied a discrimination against a class of the inhabitants of this State as much entitled to admission in the University as any other class, and that to that extent, that regulation and that special pledge were both unlawful and unreasonable."
"When an inhabitant of the State has acquired the right of admission into a Public School, and that right has been unjustly denied, he is as much injured as if some important property right had been invaded, and as much entitled to appeal to the Courts for relief. This has been settled by innumerable precedents and decided cases, and is no longer an open question. It is equally the duty of Courts to grant relief against the enforcement of unjust and unreasonable regulation for the government of Public Schools after questions of admission have been disposed of." In this you perceive that the Court went even further than in its original decision, and says in fact that it is the duty of the Court to take cognizance of rules of this kind, whether they be precedent to admission or refer to the subsequent continuation of the student in the University. Now, how did the faculty of Purdue receive this decision of the Supreme Court? Did they submit to tit with good grace like law-abiding citizens? Did they bow with respect to the Supreme Judicial authority of the State and endeavor to right the wrong they had done to the students under their charge? Far from it. They assembled together and concocted a subterfuge that scarcely serves even to disguise their contempt by the Supreme Court of Indiana. Let me inform the Senate of the action they took. They adopted the following rules and pledge:
2. No student shall join or have any active connection as a member or otherwise with any so-called Greek fraternity or other College secret society or with any other students' society not authorized by the faculty, and as a condition of graduation or honorable dismission, students shall be required to sign a written statement that they have complied with this regulation.
6. As a condition of admission to the University or any department therein, o re-entrance, students shall be required to subscribe to the foregoing regulations and all other regulations of the University relating to obligation and duties of students, and promise a faithful compliance therewith during their connection; that is, until dismissed or graduated.
"Pledge (to be signed by student): I hereby subscribe to the foregoing
regulations, and all other regulations of Purdue University which re
In this way the faculty of Purdue re-imposed upon the students the very rule which the Supreme Court had termed degrading and extraordinary. These rules assume to establish a condition subsequent to admission of a condition precedent, but in truth and in fact they establish a condition precedent by making the student pledge his honor to abide by the condition subsequent. This is the most bold-faced and impudent attempt to evade Supreme Judicial authority that I have ever known, either in this State or any other. The faculty of Purdue have placed themselves in shameless' and open contumacy of the Supreme Court, and defiantly challenge its powers, and did the law of civil procedure permit it, I doubt not they would" be summoned for contempt and allowed to cool their fevered fanaticism inside the cold walls of a common Jail until they had purged themselves of their contempt. This is the history of the struggle which the students of Purdue have made against the oppression which crushes them down. You ask, perhaps, why do they not again go into the Courts? Why do they not compel the faculty to abandon their heinous and degrading regulation? Remember, Senator, that these students are many of them young boys, poor perhaps, and unable to bear the heavy expenses which an appeal of cases to the Supreme Court necessarily entails, and what assurance will they have that another contest will not be followed by another attempted evasion ? They have been victorious in the Courts but it has been of little avail, and, therefore, they come to you as the representatives of the people, and they have the right to make their appeal to you. They ask you to relieve them from these regulations, which the Supreme Court has pronounced to be degrading. They ask you to burst the shackles which bind their consciences, They ask you to relive them of the infamous pledge which dishonors their man hood. They ask you to say, through the medium of legislation, that you will not permit an class of the inhabitants of this State to be held in moral slavery by any combination of men what- soever. They ask to be relieved from the ignominious and insensate mandates of a cabal which can be most fitly characterized in the words of the most varsatile of English literati, "men who are a type of those never to-be-forgoten times of cold hearts and narrow minds-the golden age of the coward, the bigot and the slave. And these students have the right to appeal to you. It was a right guaranteed to them by their fathers, and that it might never be disregarded it was placed in the supreme law of the State in these words: "Knowledge and learning generally diffused throughout a community being essential to the preservation of a free Government, it shall be the duty of the General Assembly to encourage by all suitable means moral, intellectual, scientific and agricultral improvement, and to provide by law for a general and uniform system of Common Schools, where tuition shall be without charge and equally open to all."
Every Senator upon this floor is aware that it is under this provision of the Constitution that aid has repeatedly been granted to the State University, the Normal School and Purdue University, and to the credit of the other Institutions be it said that Purdue has been the only one to violate the Constitution of Indiana as expounded by the Supreme Court of the State.
I appeal to you, my fellow Senators, to right this wrong. I appeal to you not to close your ears to the demand of the down-trodden students of Purdue University. I appeal to every liberty-loving sentiment which animates your bosoms, I appeal to you Republicans whose hearts thrill with just pride when you recall, as the grandest achievement of the greatest representative of your party, the striking off the fetters from the limbs of 4,000,000 enslaved, and I ask you are you ready to maintain a species of moral slavery right here in the free State of Indiana? I do not believe it.
I appeal to my Democratic friends, members of a party which has survived so many successive defeats only because it is founded on inalienable and unchangeable principles, and I ask you, are you going to deny the prayer of the oppressed in utter disregard of the fundamental principle enunciated by the founder of our party, "equal and exact justice to all men?"
Again I appeal to yon as Senators acting under the obligation of a solemn oath, and I ask you, are you going to disregard the sacred provision of the Constitution that the system of Common Schools shall be equally open to all. Are you going to say that a man who joins a Greek fraternity should be classed in the same category as a criminal, that he shall not be accorded the-same liberty as other inhabitants of this State? Why, what are the Greek fraternities?
If you listen to the drivel of the President of Purdue, you would suppose that they were the offspring of Satan and the damned. Away with such fanaticism. These fraternities have numbered in their catalogues the grandest names in American history in the nineteenth century. You find their members in every assemblage of educated men. As I look around upon my colleagues, I find that well nigh half of them have experienced their blessings and known their worth. They throw around the young man just entering collegiate life the most secure protection imaginable. He leaves his home, doubting, hesitating, untried, inexperienced, totally unfamiliar with the ways of the world, and when be enters the fraternity he finds himself amid a brotherhood whose older members will guide and counsel him. He finds himself protected, advised, admonished, urged onward in the pathway of ambition, while his course is regarded with the most affectionate solicitude and brotherly care. He finds himself at once admitted
The Greek fraternities train the student by the art of criticism into habits of correct thought. They teach him the first rudiments of political maneuvering. They give him new and broader ideas of humanity. They elevate him in all that constitutes true manhood. These fraternities form the green oases in the dreary desert of collegiate labor. For myself I can say that the Greek fraternities into which I had the honor to be initiated, accomplished for me fully as much as the collegiate course itself. And in after days, when fighting the battle of life, in the pauses of the contest; with what fond remembrance does the mind look back and dwell upon fraternity experience! I have experienced the beneficent influence of the Greek fraternities, and never shall my voice be silent when they are assailed until my tongue is stilled in death.
But there is another aspect, in which this question should be viewed. What means this sudden attempt to engraft into the youthful mind the belief that a secret society is simply a league with hell? Are we going back to the dead issues of the palmy days of Thurlow Weed, and attempting to revive the spirit of Morganism in the land?
Are we expending the money of the State that the worn out so-called priciples of
the anti-Masonry party may be instilled into the minds of the young? If so I, for
one am ready to call a
The influence of the secret society is to-day well nigh forming a brotherhood of mankind as the various orders extend their power. The secret orders are cementing and uniting humanity in a "solid phalanx of friendship, which no foe can sever, neither can the gates of hell prevail against it."
They are hastening that day of universal brotherhood which the Scottish bard, with fatidical eye, foresaw more than a century ago and prophesied in his grandest poem.
Mr. Chairman, I sincerely trust that the proviso may be adopted by such a decisive majority as shall thoroughly and finally settle this question for the future.
Mr. FOULKE called attention to the fact that the proposed amendment would be a special act applying to Purdue University alone. Under some circumstances a proviso of this kind might not be very disadvantageous to a University, but prompted as this is by spite, and backed as it is by a speech in which personal vituperation of the President of that Institution has been a prevailing motive for the passage of such a proviso at such a time, it can be nothing more nor less than a stab at that College, and nothing more nor less than an insult to the gentlemen who constitute the Board of Trustees, the President an el Faculty of an Institution that has done a great deal of good in this State. Who is it that makes a complaint, and who is it that appeals to the Senate on behalf of these down-trodden students?
Mr. WILLARD stated that he had in his possession over thirty letters from the students playing for this prohibition, and every one of them telling him that they would be expelled if their names were revealed.
Mr. YOUCHE opposed the amendment, although'belonging to one of the honorable and ancient Greek fraternities that have chapters in this State. When voting on such questions we should rise above all considerations but what is for the best interests of the State. He favored the public interest and would not vote to saddle a rider of this kind on the bill which would put it in the power of one man to rob the people of the State from benefits that might be derived from this school.
On motion by Mr. SPANN the Committee rose, reported progress and asked leave to sit at 2 o'clock to-morrow.
The Senate concurred in the report.
On motion by Mr. Mclntosh the Senate concurred in the House concurrent resolution instructing and requesting Indiana Congressmen to try and secure an appropriation by the Federal Congress for a liberal sum to be used for the relief of the people suffering from the floods.
Mr. BELL called up his motion, notice of which was given yesterday, for a change of the daily meetings of the Senate so they shall convene at 9:30 a. m. and 1:30 p m.
Mr. BUNDY moved to amend by substituting 9 a. m. and 2 p. m.
The substitute was adopted.
The motion as amended was agreed to.
And then the Senate adjourned.
Prayer was offered by Representative Frazee, of Rush County.
On motion by Mr. Price the reading of the minutes was dispensed with.
By Mr. Carr, by consent, [H. R. 418] to legalize the incorporation of the town of Cherabusco, Whitley County.
By Mr. Jewett, by consent, [H. R. 419] to appropriate the sum of $100,000 from the general fund, not otherwise appropriated, for the relief of the sufferers from the floods of the Ohio, Wabash and White Rivers.
Mr. JEWETT stated the amount appropriated on yesterday is wholly inadequate to relieve the distress, and that he had in his possession several dispatches from the deluged districts which he desired to have read. The dispatches being read, he moved that the House take up and concur in the Senate amendment to the bill [H. R. 414] to provide $40,000 for the relief of the Ohio, Wabash and White River sufferers.
The motion was agreed to by consent.
Mr. JEWETT moved that the Constitutional rules be suspended and that his bill [H. R. 419] be read the second time by title. He would like to have an appropriation of $100,000 for the sufferers, but if that amount would not be appropriated, he desired to get as large an appropriation as the measure would allow. He explained the condition of affairs at New Albany in particular paying an exceedingly large number of the houses were small cottages, one story in height, and as these are flooded the people have absolutely no place to go, and many families depend upon the work of the mother for sustenance.
Mr. WILSON, of Marion, said the safest way would be to pass the bill to a second reading and leave it in that condition for the present, and until the present appropriation is distributed.
The motion to suspend the rules and read the bill the second time by title was agreed to by yeas, 82; nays, 7.
Mr. JEWETT moved that the bill be considered' engrossed, read the third time and put upon its passage.
A motion to strike out $100,000 and insert $60,000 was on motion by Mr. GRAHAM, laid on the table.
On motion by Mr. SHIVLEY the bill was referred to the
Mr. Tuley offered a concurrent resolution instructing our Senators and requesting our Representatives in Congress to use their influence to secure an appropriation of a liberal sum from the General Government for the relief of all persons suffering from the flood of the Ohio.
Mr. SHOCKNEY was of the opinion that the State of Indiana could provide ample means of relief for all sufferers within her borders, and as other States could do the same he did not think it necessary to call upon Congress.
An ineffectual motion was made to make the resolution Include the sufferers from the Wabash and White Rivers.
The resolution was adopted.
On motion by Mr. HEFFREN the vote by which Mr. Wlley's bill [H. R. 219] to amend Section 4,497 of the Revised Statutes was indefinitely postponed, was reconsidered.
The SPEAKER announced the special order to be Mr. Stucker's bill [H. R. 186] to amend Section 33 of an act providing for the election of County Superintendents.
Mr. SHIVELY moved to amend the bill so as to limit the number of days to which any County Superintendent should be entitled to 180 in a year. Mr. S. was of the opinion that no public functionaries had so much abused the privileges H their office as had the County Superintendents, often as asking pay for more days than there are in the year.
Mr. SHOCKNEY was very sorry to be at variance with the gentleman from Wabash [Mr. Shively] He considered this one of the most important offices in the County. In his County he was satisfied that the County Superintendent could put in every working day of the year in a manner that would be valuable to the interest of their schools.
Mr. SMITH, of Tippecanoe, and Mr. CAMPBELL were opposed to the amendment.
On motion by Mr. CAMPBELL the amendment was laid on the table.
Mr. SUTTON moved to amend by allowing the Superintendent in Counties of 15,000 inhabitants and under, $500 per annum; in Counties of more than 15,000 inhabitants and under 20,000, $600 per annum; in Counties of more than 20,000 and less than 30,000 inhabitants. $750 per annum: in all Counties of more than 30,000 Inhabitants, $750 per annum.
Mr. SUTTON thought this would be an equitable adjustment of the matter, and spoke in favor of its adoption.
Mr. STUCKER was opposed to the amendment. He desired the bill to come before the House that the members might vote upon it without any amendments.
The amendment was laid on the table.
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, made an ineffectual motion to amend the bill so as to limit the number of days any County Superintendent to 180 days in which to visit schools.
On motion by Mr. Jewett the bill was laid on the table by yeas, 53; nays, 37.
Mr. WRIGHT, from the
Mr. SMITH moved that the bill be indefinitely postponed. He considered this a radical change in the office of County Commissioner. Never in the history of the State had County Commissioners been compelled to give bonds. He thought that the members of the Legislature had just as well required to give bonds as to require County Commissioners to do so.
Mr. WILSON, of Marion, thought that every ministerial officer should be required to give bond. He believed that in the allowance of claims, end in the amounts allowed the County Attorneys, the Commissioners very frequently should be liable on a bond. He moved that the motion to indefinitely postpone be laid on the table.
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. SHOCKNEY concurred in what the gentleman from Marion [Mr. Wilson] had said. He was in favor of the County Commissioners giving bond.
Mr. MELLETT opposed the proposition of requiring the County Commissioners to give bond. Bethought you had just as well require the Judges of the Circuit Court to give bond and thereby render them liable on every decision rendered. Under the provision of this bill, should it become a law, no sit man could be induced to accept the office of County Commissioner.
Mr. SUTTON said: This is unquestionably a good measure, and should become a law. It would prevent undue and hasty action on the part of Commissioners, and when they knowingly violate the law in allowing unjust and extortionate claims their action might be adjudicated upon and they be held responsible upon their bonds.
Mr. ADAMS moved to amend by requiring the action for damages to be brought in the name of the State on the relation of the Attorney General.
The amendment was accepted by the author of the bill [Mr. Howland].
On motion the bill was laid on the table.
Mr. McCormick's bill [H. R. 218] to prohibit the infliction of whipping as punishment
of convicts confined in Penitentiaries, was reported back: from the
The majority report was concurred in and the bill was ordered engrossed.
The House took a recess until 2 o'clock.
Mr. Graham's bill [H. R. 256] to provide a fund for the permanent endowment of the State University was made the special order for 2 o'clock to-morrow.
The SPEAKER announced the first special order to be Mr. Wilson, of Marion's, bill [H. R. 52] to construct a sewer from the Female Reformatory to connect with a sewer in the cty of Indianapolis.
Mr. WILSON explained the necessity of this bill, stating that a suit had been brought by the Federal Government in the United Stales Court of this District to abate the nuisance of The sewarage passing through the Arsenal Grounds, and, the Court was Just waiting to see what action the Legislature would take before proceeding with the abatement. The State is a party to this suit, and, unless something is done the Institution, will be closed, and the expense the State has incurred in creating the Institution would be an entire loss. He further stated that the cost of the sewer would be, as he was informed, something less than $30,000, while the loss to the State by refusing to construct the sewer would be more than $100,000.
Mr. SHOCKNEY was of the opinion that the city of Indianapolis was to receive some of the benefit of this sewer should it be constructed and therefore thought that the city should pay a portion of the expense. He had been informed that the property to be drained by the sewer was not worth more than the sewer. He was opposed to the passage of the bill-at present, and made an ineffectual motion to postpone the further consideration until to-morrow at 2 o'clock.
Mr. SMITH, of Tippecanoe. considered this a very necessary work. The State had already appropriated one hundred and thirty thousand dollars to this Institution, and it would not do to refuse this appropriation as provided in the bill and incur the loss of the entire amount appropriated.
Mr. HEFFREN thought the only question before the House was whether or not the State would protect its own property. This Reformatory is a State Institution, and it is not a question of benefiting some one else, but it is a question of protecting an institution of the State.
Mr. MOODY felt that if the members were not, fully acquainted with the provisions
of the bill it was their fault, and not the fan It of the persons, who are urging
the passage of the bill. Suppose this sewer does benefit the city of Indianapolis
Mr. STEWART occupied the same position in regard to this matter at the beginning of the previous General Assembly as the gentlemen who are now hesitating about passing this bill. He was not sure that the selection of the present site for the location of this Institution was a wise one; but since the State had incurred the expense of erecting the buildings and the other expenses necessary to establish the Institution, it would not pay to allow the Institution to be closed simply to save the necessary appropriation of $30,000 required to build this sewer. He considered it a matter of economy, and felt that the money in the hands of the proper persons would be judiciously expended. He urged the necessity of immediate action upon the question.
Mr. FLEECE stated that ii; was not for the benefit of the city, but it was exclusively for the use of the State, and that the sewerage coming down from this Institution through the small creek, as it does at present, was the cause of much sickness to persons living along this stream. He favored the passage of the bill.
M. MELLETT desired to say to the House that there are provisions in the bill that he could not favor. He was not us fully informed on the question as he would like to be. Under the circumstances he thought there was but one thing to do and that was to construct the sewer.
Mr. ADAMS was not informed concerning the provisions of the bill, and did not like to vote for i a measure until he fully understood it. It might be his own fault, but this was the first time he had seen the bill. He thought the bill should provide for a commission to decide whether or not the city of Indianapolis is to be benefited by the construction of this sewer. He was of the opinion that the next Legislature, should this sewer be built, would be petitioned to allow citiizens of Indianapolis to tap this sewer, and thereby receive the benefit of the sewer.
Mr. BRAZELTON moved the previous question, which was seconded. by the House, and under its operations-
The bill passed the House by yeas, 75; nays; 19.
The Speaker announced the next special order to be Mr. Wiley's bill [H. R, 39] r,o provide for the election of a reporter of the Supreme Court, etc., allowing $2.50 per copy for reports of the Supreme Court.
Mr. SMITH considered the passage of the bill about equivalent to closing up the reporter's office.
Mr. HEFFREN stated that the reports cost less than half the sum allowed the reporter.
Mr. MOCK was of the opinion that the reporter of the Supreme Court would clear not less than $60,000 during his term of office.
Mr. WILEY was satisfied that we are paying more in the State of Indiana for our reports than any State in the Union, and was of the opinion that, the measure was fair and equitable.
The bill passed the House by yeas, 87; nays, 7.
The next special order was Mr. Mock's bill [H. R. 51] to provide for the taxing of dogs. It was read the third lime and passed the House by yeas, 77; nays 15.
Mr, Howland' bill [H. R. 134] to amend Section 1 of an act to provide for the regulation of stock running at large, was read the third time.
Mr. PATTEN opposed the passage of the bill, considering the present law sufficient. He thought the present bill would impose hardships upon the farming communities, and create innumerable lawsuits, without benefiting anyone in the least.
Mr. JEWETT was opposed to the bill because it recognized the principle that co one but a freeholder should have a voice under its provisions, He considered every man entitled to a voice, whether he was a freeholder or not. He was not seeking to influence others' votes, but there were the reasons why he could not support the bill.
Mr. MONTGOMERY thought the people of this State are satisfied with the present law, and was therefore opposed to the bill.
Mr. HOLLER believed the bill would create legislation, and for that reason opposed it.
Mr. KESTER favored the passage of the bill.
Mr. Mutz was opposed to changing the present law.
Mr. WILSON. of Koscinsko, also opposed the passage of this bill.
Mr. McHENRY regarded this bill as against the interests of the poorer class of farmers.
Mr. DEEM thought this bill in the interest of large and against the interest of small farmers, and hoped it would be voted down.
Mr. THOMAS believed his constituents are opposed to this bill and consequently should vote against it.
Mr. SUTTON was sure this bill places the matter in the hands of those most interested-just where It should be. He favored the passage.
The bill was rejected-yeas, 36: nays, 50.
Mr. Shively's bill [H. R. 103] concerning liens of mechanics, laboring men and others, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 85; nays, 0.
The House then adjourned.
The reading of the Secretary's minutes was dispensed with.
On motion by Mr. SAYRE, his bill [S. 57] to amend Section 280 of the act concerning cases in civil proceedings, approved April 7, 1881, [relative 10 the testimony of administrators executors, heirs, etc.-see page 195 of Brevier Reports], was read the third time.
The bill passed the Senate by yeas, 40; nays, 0.
On motion by Mr. LOCKRIDGE, his bill [S. 151] to amend Section 5,852 of the Revised Statutes of 1851, [concerning the paying over of monies, records, etc., to successors in office by Clerks of Counties], was read the second time with a Committee amendment making the bill apply to Clerks, Treasurers and Sheriffs, which was concurred in. The bill was ordered engrossed.
Mr. Macartney's bill [S. 52] to amend Sections 218, 227 and 228 of the act concerning taxation approved March 29, 1881, [for an increase of penalty on real estate sold for taxes after expiration of time for redemption where such sale has been declared illegal was read the third time.
Mr. MACARTNEY explained it was to remedy a defect in the present law, which is a bid to delinquents to put off paying tax liens on real estate. There is no reason why a less per cent. should be paid after the expiration of two years than before. The bill makes a uniform penalty of 10 per cent. and does not apply to tax sales made heretofore.
Mr. BELL hoped the bill would pass, it having been carefully examined by the
Mr. Bundy by consent offered a concurrent resolution for the consideration of Senate and House decedent estate bills of the Special Committees of the two Houses that a decision may be arrived at as between the two.
The resolution was adopted.
Mr. Van Vorhis' bill [S. 107] to define powers of attorney and concerning the recording of the same, being read the third time-
Mr. VAN VORHIS explained the bill authorizes Recorders to refuse to receive for record any instrument of record executed by any person claiming to be an attorney in fact until the power of attorney duly executed according to law shall be first placed on record; makes the record evidence; provides for cancellation, etc.
The bill passed the Senate by yeas, 40; nays,0,
Mr. Compton's bill [S. 130] to amend Sections 5,472 and 5,480 of the R. S. of 1881, and adding a supplemental section, was read the third time.
Mr. COMPTON explained the changes to be to insert the word "wire" before the word "rope," so the rope leading down into the mines shall be a wire rope instead of a hemp rope. Then the miners may have a check weight tested by sealed weights furnished by the State to see the weight of coal is correct, if they pay the excuse. The measure is recommended by the Mine Inspector and by the Governor.
The bill passed by yeas, 41; nays, 0.
Mr. Duncan'R bill [S. 66] to amend Section 4,424 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, concerning the election of County Superintendents.
Mr. DUNCAN explained the bill provides for a four years' term instead of a two years' term as now, which will obviate an objection to the present mode of selection because one-half of the Trustees will have nothing to do with electing a School Superintendent. The bill also provides that if the Trustees fail to make a selection on the day named in the law, they may meet en a succeeding day and ballot until they have selected a Superintendent. The first election to be in June next.
Mr. SPANN favored the bill, but thought the office of School Superintendent the most worthless office known, and it ought to be abolished.
Mr. GRAHAM concurred in the appreciation of the office just expressed. There is a great amount of fraud perpetuated by these officers, and there is no good reason apparent why the term of such an office should be extended. The Board of Trustees of incorporated towns should have a voice in the selection of County Superintendents. He moved to recommit the bill to a Special Committee, with instructions to amend.
Mr. BELL opposed the motion. The principle is viscous and would be giving towns more control than they ought to have. Two years ago this proposition was considered and rejected.
Mr. HILLIGASS would favor the motion in the interest of politics of his neighborhood, were politics to govern his vote. But he opposed it, believing the principle to be wrong. The County Superintendent has no control over town schools, and it would be unfair and unjust to give a representation to the town Trustees in the selection of a County Superintendent. He favored the bill as it is, and hoped it would pass in the interest of the glorious school system of Indiana.
Mr. MAGEE demanded the previous question.
It was seconded, and under its operations the motion to recommit was rejected by yeas, 15; nays, 29.
The bill failed to pass by yeas, 25; nays, 18, for want of a constitutional majority.
Mr. Magee's bill [S. 78] to amend Section 2 of the act to establish a State Bureau of Statistics-see page 196 of the Brevier Reports-being read the third time,
Mr. SPANN opposed the bill because the only object is to legislate out Republicans and put in Democrats. If gentlemen will point out one act of dishonest on the part of any man connected with the Bureau of Statistics he would vote for the bill. It is an iniquity and an outrage, and no precedent has ever been set in the State of Indiana for such action.
Mr. MAGEE stated in the discussion the other day he had said on information that the
chief of one of these Bureaus used the office for partisan purposes, and as an
attachment to the
The Senate seconded the demand for the previous question by yeas 28, nays 19, and under its operations the bill passed the Senate by yeas, 27; nays. 20.
Mr. FOULKE by request of the author moved to reconsider the vote-rejecting Mr. Yancey's bill [S. 62] prohibiting certain, animals running at large.
The motion was agreed to.
The question recurring; Shall the bill pass?
Mr. CAMPBELL explained that when he voted Tor the bill the other day he was not aware it was in the power of the County Commissioners to regulate the running at large of animals, and, as the people have this provision in their hands, he would now vote against the bill.
Mr. DUNCAN would vote no for similar reasons.
Mr. McINTOSH: If every householder were able to pasture his own stock on his own land he would be glad to vote for the bill, believing it would be an advantage to the people of the State, but having voted against it before he would vote against it now.
The bill was rejected by yeas, 22; nays, 23.
Mr. ADKISON gave notice that on to-morrow he should move to reconsider the vote just taken.
Mr. ADKISON'S bill [
Mr. ADKISON explained this change was made in order that the sales may not take place at the time of the March meeting of County Commissioners, as now. The change proposed by the bill is-to the same time as under the old law.
The bill passed the Senate by yeas, 39; nays, 3.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR directed the Secretary to read a dispatch from Secretary of
State Myers, of the
It was ordered that when the Senate adjourn to-day it be till Monday at 2 o'clock p. m.
Mr. Marvin's bill [S. 139] prohibiting the hauling of a burden of more than 2,500 pounds on wagon tires of less than four inches in width, between November 15 and May 15, on gravel, macadamized or plank roads, except when the ground is frozen sufficiently to bear up such a weight, was read the third time.
Mr. MARVIN spoke in favor of the passage of his bill; In his County thousands of dollars had been destroyed by driving heavy loads over newly made roads. The bill is almost an exact copy of the Ohio law on this subject.
Mr. GRAHAM did not believe this bill should pass. Where there are toll roads they must be kept up and in repair or tolls can not be taken. The authorities should keep roads in repair so that teamsters required to haul heavy loads may not be compelled to give up their occupation.
Mr. HILLIGASS thought when roads are furnished free at all times of the year it is not asking too much that in certain seasons the roads should be protected from such burdens as would destroy them.
Mr. RISTINE also favored the bill.
On motion by Mr. SPANN the bill was amended by making it apply only to free roads.
The bill passed by yeas. 36; nays, 11, at the beginning of the afternoon session.
Mr. BELL, from a majority of the
Mr. McCULLOUGH, as a minority of said Committee, reported with the majority as to all charges but bribery, but that the charge of bribery is made out and sustained by the evidence, and it sets out such facts as are fully and clearly proven by the direct and circumstantial evidence adduced before the Committee.
Then came a recess till 2 o'clock.
On motion by Mr. HILLIGASS the House concurrent resolution for a Joint Committee of five Senators and five Representatives to visit all the overflowed cities in the State, was taken up and concurred in.
The Lieutenant Governor appointed as such Committee, on the part of the Senate, Messrs. Hilligass Bundy, Duncan, Macartney and Sayre.
On motion by Mr. BELL the Senate resolved itself into a
Mr. JOHNSON deprecated the action of the faculty, but spoke in favor of extending
to that Institution the fostering care of the State. The $12,000 appropriation
proposed in the bill is inadequate ; it makes no provision for the running expenses,
nor for the expenses of the chemical department. He moved to amend the
Mr. CHAIRMAN-A great deal has been said on the floor of this
Senate about a certain rule adopted in Purdue University and excluding the so-called
Greek fraternities from that Institution. That such a rule was adopted and enforced
no- body denies. The matter was carried before the Courts and even went to the
Supreme Court for final adjudication, and after the decision of the Supreme Court it
yet remains, go to say, in status quo, neither party being entirely satisfied with
the decision. The result of this unfortunate quarrel is a great deal of bad blood
and irritation, which certainly reacts upon the Institution itself. The Board of
Trustees of Purdue, it is claimed, adopted the prescriptive rule against the Greek
fraternities because it was afraid that the members of these fraternities would
exert an injurious influence upon the spirit of an Institution which, to be true to
the intentions of its organization, must forever remain an Academy for the benefit
of agriculture and the mechanic arts. The Trustees supposed, it is claimed, that
classical students, such as usually compose the fraternities, would look down with a
sort of contempt on the students who were employed in the mechanical workshops and
on the farm connected with the Institution, and m order to avoid the presumed danger
of this contact, they excluded the fraternities from the Institution. Now, Mr
Chairman, I am willing to believe that the Board of Trustees and the faculty were
sincere and honest in their suppositions. But I must say at the same time that, in
my opinion, they made a great, fatal mistake, and to a decree injured the
Institution. I can not but believe that their fears and apprehensions concerning
these fraternities are without solid foundation, and are based rather on imagination
and illusion than on reality and substance. I will say right here that I want the
management of this Institution to be broad and liberal. Purdue University is
supported by National and State appropriations, and as such its portals should be
thrown open wide to all applicants and to all new comers, no matter whether they are
"Greeks" or barbarians, without any discriminations whatever as to religious,
political or social connections. As soon as the faculty of any public institution,
supported by the money of all the taxpayers of the State, makes such a
discrimination, it will place itself in antagonism with one or more classes of
citizens, and alienate their sympathies and good will. On that account I think the
Board of Trustees in enacting the rule committed a grave error, and Purdue
University has suffered by it. And, furthermore, Mr. Chairman, I do not see that
these Greek fraternities do so much injury to their members. All over the State, in
the highest offices and positions, we find men who have been or are still members of
these fraternities. On the floor of this Senate they are largely represented, and if
I am not mistaken a "Greek" occupies the presiding officer's chair with distinction
and honor. Now this speaks well for these fraternities. I am not afraid of them! Let
them come to Purdue and let them show there by their examplary conduct that the
fears of these Trustees are groundless and unreasonable! Let them by a strict
observance of the discipline of the University refute the charges preferred against
them that they are unruly and would be detrimental to good order and peace! Let no
rule or pledge stand in their way. Let this rule be rescinded, Mr. President, but
let it b6 done in a decent and dignified manner. We represent here the sovereignty
of a great State, and our acts should partake of the dignity which our exalted
position confers upon us. If we deem it our duty, in the interest of Purdue
University, to demand that the objectionable rule be rescinded, let us make that
demand, but in doing so let us take care that we neither insult the men upon whom we
enjoin the will of the State nor injure the Institution whose interests we are here
to protect. I have not the least doubt that the Board of Trustees and the faculty of
Purdue will bow to the sovereignty of the State as represented on this floor, and
that they will rescind the rule if admonished to do so by this Senate. And although
a Senator from Tippecanoe, which prizes Purdue University as one of her richest and
most precious jewels, I Will say that a majority of my people will welcome the
change in the management with pleasure and satisfaction.
But now, Mr Chairman, let me also raise my voice in behalf of the noble Institution, which applies to this Senate for protection in Its growth and for support in the development of the ends for which it was created and organized. Purdue University is not classical Institution of learning, it is not a University proper. But with all respect and deference to those great classical Universities, which have done so much for mankind, and from which our entire civilization has sprung, I yet may justly claim that loan agricultural State like Indiana and to the citizens of this State, an Institution like Purdue is of much greater benefit and practical value than any University possibly can be. There we have an Institution founded for the cultivation of those special branches of education which are needed most right here in our State, in the States surrounding us, in the West. It is an Institution for the teaching of scientific and practical agriculture. It is located among us to give the sons of farmers, the sons of the people a valuable and practical education, which they can not otherwise acquire and without which most of the discoveries and conquests of modern science would be lost to them. In Purdue the young man who wishes to engage in agricultural pursuits in after life passes not only through a regular course of theoretical instruction in all those branches which are connected with and have a direct bearing on agriculture and horticulture, chemistry, botany, zoology, meteorology, entomology-but he has also an opportunity on the University farm to observe and study tho practical application of the lessons and instructions he has received in the school room.
And again, the young student who devotes himself to the mechanical or Industrial
arts, passes not only through a regular course of theoretical instruction in
chemistry, drawing, engineering, mathematics, dynamics and natural philosophy but
from the school room he passes into the laboratory and work shops and is initiated
there at once into the practical application of the principles and lessons
inculcated in the school room. Now, Mr. President, it is for this Institution, so
invaluable to the industrial and farming interests of our State, that I ask adequate
recognition and support at the hands of this Assembly. I want this Senate to make an
appropriation for Purdue University which will prove sufficient to carry out the
great project for which it was organized-to maintain in our midst an Institution for
the benefit of agriculture and the mechanic arts." The Institution is there; it
I appeal to this Senate to vote that appropriation! It is necessary or I won Id not
ask for it! Let it not be said that ill-advised considerations of economy caused us
to cripple our Educational Institutions! This great State of which we have l so much
cause to be proud, want is system of education to be equal or superior to the best
in the land, and no man, no Senator, will find favor with his constituents who will
weigh dollars and cents with too rigorous care where the most sacred educational
interests of the State are involved. Not as a Senator from Tippecanoe County, not as
a Senator protecting the local interests of his own immediate constituency, but as a
member of the Senate of Indiana and in behalf of this noble State, in behalf of the
industrial and agricultural interests of this State, Mr. President, I now move the
following amendment to the amendment of the
Strike out [in line 138 of the printed bill] the word "twelve" and insert in lieu of it "twenty," and strike out all after the word "provide" and insert In lieu thereof the words; "That before any part of the appropriation hereby made be paid, the rule adopted by the Purdue University affecting secret societies, and the Greek fraternities in particular shall be rescinded."
Mr. GRAHAM offered a substitute appropriating $20,000 for Purdue University, and spoke in favor of his proposition to increase the sum appropriated for Purdue University from $12,000 to $20,000, and in the course of his remarks said a great many are I led to believe the State has, financially speaking, a greater interest in Purdue University than the facts in the case will warrant. He had taken the pains to ascertain some facts on that subject, and finds that taking out of the account the amount donated by Mr. Purdue, Tippecanoe County, the city of Lafayette and the General Government, according to the financial valuation nut upon the Institution, its buildings, grounds, etc., the State of Indiana has invested in it the sum of $82,000. Now as 882 000 is to $650,000, so is the interest this General Assembly has in that Institution, and in that proportion and no greater has it the right to interfere with the local management of that Institution. He was not here to make a fight for the Greek fraternities or that University ; but let us not take as a fact a rumor started by some person who probably has evil designs upon that Institution. The Trustees say that interference at this time with the fraternity question will seriously embarrass the Institution. The President is possibly a member of a Greek fraternity, and if that be true, he knows both sides of the question, and with the Trustees knows better what is for the good of the classes of that University on that question than does this General Assembly.
Mr. HENRY favored the proviso offered by the Senator from Tippecanoe [Mr. Johnson].
Not because not in favor of the proviso proposed by the
Mr. SPANN favored the proposed rider, provided it does not destroy the power of the Trustees and faculty to control the students in cases of personal misbehavior. Because the faculty have enacted a foolish rule which has brought disgrace upon the Institution, and is not manly enough to back down, this rider is the oil to be poured upon the troubled waters
Mr VAN VORHIS also thought the rule referred to a very foolish one, and by this time the faculty must see they have made a mistake. He did not favor the rider proposed by the Committee, and did not think we can afford to add to the jury already done that Institution. He favored voting a sufficient sum to run the Institution, if it ought to have more than named in the bill; then the amendment increasing it to $20,000 ought to be adopted.
Mr. HILLIGASS said the Senator from Hamilton [Mr. Graham] in the statement of donations to Purdue coming from other sources than the State, omitted to say that the State of Indiana has contributed in the past $266,000 for the support of that Institution. At one time it contained 284; students, but to day, in the face of an arbitrary rule adopted by the faculty, there are only 150 students From the showing in the past it may be predicted that the time is not far distant when Purdue University will have to be abolished altogether unless their tyrannical rules be abrogated. It the faculty have the right to go thus tar, they may go farther and prescribe rules against Church organizations. He spoke in favor of the amendment offered by the Senator from Tippecanoe [Mr. Johnson.]
Mr. BUNDY opposed the proviso. If it is a proper regulation to be placed upon the statute books it ought to apply to all the Colleges in the State; but he favored the $20,000 appropriation. With the magnificent donation made by the grand old man whose name it bears, and with the donation made by the General Government fend from Tippecanoe County, and the aid it gets from the State, it ought to be the pride and glory of the State.
Mr. BROWN referred to the history of the establishment of Purdue University and
the pledge by those then most interested in its location, that in the State would
accept the offered gratuities and put this College upon its feet and employ the
great power of the State to protect it, the Legislature would never be asked for a
dollar to sup- port it. He hardly thought the people making that promise could keep
it, and so staged at the time. However he has, and always shall, stand by and
support any just and fair appropriation notwithstanding that promise. The rule
adopted
Mr. DAVIDSON felt a deep interest in the success of the Institution from the fact that the farm Ins interest is the grandest of all the interests in this great country-all other interests live by and are supported by he plow. Therefore if any Institution needs protection and sup- port from the State it is an Institution that will educate and instruct the rising generation how to plow and how to analyze the soils and thus make them more productive. He had farmed long enough to know that there is a great difference in the productions of soils, and a farmer requires a knowledge of what land needs or how land is to be treated in order to be more productive, and that knowledge can be obtained so well in no other way than by analyzing the soils, and a study of them so as to ascertain what they need in the way of fertilizing. He did not like the idea of putting a rider on this bill, but he wanted the Institution protected in such a way that the people of the State may derive the greatest benefit from its success in the interest of agriculture.
Mr. BELL. [Mr. Spann in the Chair] was opposed to granting a single dollar of money to Purdue University, unless something in the nature of the provisions proposed by the Senator from Tippecanoe [Mr. Johnson] is coupled with the donation when it is made. The rule adopted by the faculty is illiberal, unjust, unreasonable, and violates all principles which should control our actions, and unless some such proviso is adopted he would not vote aid to this Institution.
Mr. MARVIN was in favor of voting $20,000 straight to Purdue University for the reason that it is the only farmers' College in the State of Indiana. Two years ago he favored $20,000, and it was voted without any restriction. What do you want to trammel Purdue for? It is wrong. He hoped the appropriation of $20,00 would be voted to Purdue University without a why or a wherefore.
The substitute [Mr. Graham's] was rejected upon a division-affirmative, 14; negative not announced.
The last proposition of Mr. Johnson's amendment, that before any part of the appropriation be paid, any rule adopted by the faculty affecting secret societies and Greek fraternities in particular shall be rescinded, was agreed to.
The first part of the amendment increasing the appropriation from $12,000 to $20,000, being next in order-
Mr. BROWN made an ineffectual motion to make the sum $15,000.
Mr. MAGEE moved to make the appropriation $13,000.
Mr. JOHNSON insisted the University needs from $20,000 to $25,000 to meet the current running expenses and necessary improvements. The Chemical Department alone requires $1,200, to say nothing of the other departments standing in need of improvements.
Mr. KEISER opposed the motion unless it be the intention to cripple the University
and eventually wipe it out. This is a people's College. There is not an Institution
in the State whose
Mr. MAGEE, judging from the last exhibit, was sure
Mr. CAMPBELL presumed this Institution is under able management, and should be perpetuated. Then give it what is asked for by the Senator from Tippecanoe [Mr. Johnson].
The amendment [Mr. Magee's] was rejected, upon a division-affirmative, 13; negative, not announced. The amendment [Mr. Johnson's] for $20,000 was agreed to.
The
On motion by Mr. VAN VORHIS the Committee rose, reported progress and asked leave to sit again on Monday at 2 o'clock.
The report was concurred in by the Senate.
Mr. McINTOSH filed a protest against the action of the Senate in voting to adjourn over from to-day until 2 o'clock o. m. Monday, signed by himself and Messrs. Bell, Hilligass, McCullough, Richardson, Hutchison, Null, Hoover, Johnston, Ernest, May, Davidson and Johnson.
Objection being made to the reading-
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR said it would lie on the table, and would be taken up and read on Monday.
The Senate adjourned.
On motion by Mr. Wiley, the reading of the Clerk's minutes was dispensed with.
Mr. HEFFREN offered an amendment to the rules so as to provide that the House shall meet at 9 a. m. and 2 p. m. each day. The amendment in pursuance of the rules of the House, was placed on the table for future action.
Mr. Stewart offered a resolution to provide for a Committee of four members of the House to be appointed by the Speaker, to solicit aid for sufferers from the Ohio River flood.
The resolution was agreed to, and the Speaker made the Committee to conssit of Messrs. Stewart, Shiveley, McMullen and Eley.
Mr. JEWETT, from the
The Senate resolution providing for a Conference Committee of three on the part of the
Senate and three on the part of the House, to consider the decdents' estates bills,
passed by the House and the Senate concurred in, and the sub-
Mr. McClelland's, of Porter, bill [H. R. 353] to regulate the running of railway trains, etc.
Mr. Schloss' bill [H. R. 204] to prevent movers, gypsies, tramps and beggars from occupying public highways that run into cities of 10,000 or more inhabitants, etc.
Mr. Gilman's bill [H. R. 7] concerning railroads and other corporations, was reported
back from the
On motion by Mr. PATTEN the Constitutional rules were suspended-yeas, 87; nays, 0-and the bill read the second time.
Mr. Gilman did rot desire members to vote for this bill without first understanding its provisions. He simply desired that the amendments be adopted and the bill ordered printed.
Mr. Gordon moved that the bill be printed and made the special order for next Tuesday.
Mr. GIBSON was opposed to making any more Special orders. He thought it would be a saving of time to allow all bills to come up in their regular order.
Mr. PATTEN considered this one of the most Important measures that could come before this General Assembly. While he had not asked a special order for any of his own bills, he believed that the people were demanding this legislation, and he was in favor of making this the special order for next, Tuesday.
Mr. MOODY concurred in the remarks made by the gentleman from Clark [Mr. Gibson]. He thought there had been too many special orders.
Mr. GORDON thought this question was second to none in importance that had come up before this House. He was, therefore, in favor of making it a special order.
The motion to make the bill a special order was rejected.
Mr. Stucker's bill [H. R. 261] to repeal Sections 4986 to 5,0l0 inclusive of the
Revised Statutes of 1881, establishing a Stare Board of Health, was reported back from
the
Mr. WILSON, of Marion, thought the Board of Health an institution that ought not to be abolished. Every Nation in Europe that looks after the interests of its people sustain similar institutions. He was opposed to killing the matter without proper consideration.
Mr. HEFFREN objected to Boards of Health because of the expense it had been to the people. He considered the $5,000 appropriated, but a small part of the cost of the people of the State. He moved to lay the report of the Committee on the table.
The motion was rejected by yeas, 43; nays 49.
Mr. WILLIAM, of Knox, demanded the previous question, which was seconded by the House, and under its operations
The report of the Committee was concurred in.
Mr. HEFFREN made an ineffectual motion to reconsider the vote by which the report of the Committee was concurred in.
Mr. Gilman's bill [H. R. 18] declaring it unlawful for Counties and Townships to aid
in the construction of railroads, was reported back from the
Mr. FRAZER moved that the bill be indefinitely postponed.
Mr. GILMAN believed that the principle by which one man votes money out of the pocket of another is wrong. He was opposed to the motion to indefinitely postpone.
Mr. ANTRIM thought it would be safe to allow the majority of the people to settle this matter. He referred to those Counties in the State that have but one railroad, and believed this bill would practically leave the Counties at the mercy of this one railroad, there being no competition. He thought that in such Counties the people should have the privilege of voting for another load if they so desire.
Mr. SHIVELY was of the opinion that the wisdom of the present law had never been questioned, and he hoped the present law would remain unchanged.
Mr SMITH, of Tippecanoe, was of opinion that in some of the southern Counties of the State there was need of more railroads, and he was not in favor of denying them the privilege of voting for more railroads if they so desire.
Mr. SHOCKNEY said: This is one of the bills formerly reported to this House by the
The motion to postpone indefinitely was agreed to.
Mr. Nave's bill [H. R. 58] to amend Section 3 of an act for the regulation of weights
and measures, was reported back from the
On motion by Mr. FRAZER, the bill was indefinitely postponed.
Mr. Shaffer's bill [H. R. 413] for the relief
of Wemms Heagey, was reported back from the
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, could not vote for the bill without having more facts concerning the case. He thought it might be possible that there are suits pending the County concerning this question, or that the people of the County were not in favor of this bill.
Mr. SHAFFER made an explanation for the benefit of members. Mr. Heagey took possession of the office, and received a certificate of deposit from his predecessor for $20,000. In a few weeks the bank failed, and the money was lost without ever having been in the hands of Mr. Heagey, who has made good to the State all the School Fund, and has paid Madison County the sum of $6,000 of said amount. The amount yet due from him is the sum of $7,000. The Township Trustees have all been relieved by special acts of the Legislature. The citizens and taxpayers of the County are all asking that this bill pass for his relief.
Mr. DEEM considered it a just bill and desired to see it pass the House.
Mr. MUTZ had received a letter from a prominent citizen of the County asking him to vote for the bill.
The bill passed the House by yeas, 89; nays, 7.
Mr. COPELAND offered a concurrent resolution to provide for the appointment of a Joint Committee on the part of the House and Senate to consist of five members from each House to visit Jeffersonville and other points on the Ohio, to investigate into the necessity of the sufferers from the flood and report to the House.
The resolution was adopted, and the Speaker subsequently made the Committee to consist of Messrs. Copeland, Shiveley, Jewett, Gibson and Sutton.
Mr. DAVIS offered a concurrent resolution instructing our Senators and requesting our Representatives in Congress to take some steps to relieve the people of the vexatious annoyance growing out of the driven well patents.
The resolution was adopted.
The Speaker announced the special order to be the bill [S. 9.], designating a name
by which the
Mr. HEFFREN moved the previous question, which was seconded by the House, and under its operations-
The bill passed the House by yeas, 59; nays, 39.
Mr HEFFREN moved to reconsider the vote on the passage of the bill, and lay that motion on the table.
The latter motion was agreed to by yeas, 58; nays, 38.
Mr. STEWART, from the Special Committee appointed during the morning session, to solicit aid from the members of the House for the sufferers from the Ohio flood, reported that the Committee had up to the present time obtained $265, and desired to know what disposition the House desired them to make.
On motion by Mr. WILSON, of Marion, the Committee was directed to turn the amount over into the hands of the Board, consisting of the Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Secretary and Auditor of State.
Mr. JEWETT made an ineffectual motion to put the money In the hands of some of the Relief Societies of Indianapolis, saying he desired to place the money in the hands of parties who would give relief at once to those who are suffering.
[It was ordered that when the House adjourn this afternoon it be until 2 o'clock on Monday.
Mr. Jewett, from the
Mr. JEWETT spoke of the necessity of passing the bill while the members are all present, believing it would be undue delay to wait until the members were called together again next Monday at 2 o'clock.
Mr. SHIVELY offered an amendment, which was accepted by Mr. Jewett, that any part of the appropriation not expended should be covered into the Treasury of the State.
Mr. JEWETT moved that the bill be considered engrossed, read the third time by sections and put upon its passage.
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, was of the opinion that the House should not take this action at this time. If when members return next Monday it is found that this amount is necessary, then the House could pass the bill in five minutes and get it into the Senate at once.
Mr. GIBSON had one reason why he desired the measure to pass at once. He believed that the reason the Board had been so slow in giving out the sum formerly appropriated was the small amount that they had to appropriate. That it required them to proceed in a too cautious manner. He hoped that the bill would pass the House this evening.
Mr. PATTEN was not in favor of voting any further appropriation until the $40,000 had been expended and it was seen to be necessary to pass this bill. He did not think the House or the Senate would be slow to act when the necessity is seen to arrive.
Mr. THOMAS would favor this appropriation when he thought it necessary tot do so.
Mr. MONTGOMERY thought it would be unexpedient to vote $100,000 at present.
Mr. WILEY was favorably disposed toward the bill. If the money is not expended and is more than is necessary, it will be covered into the Treasury.
Mr. WILSON, of Kosciusko, though the resources of the State too great to be penurious about granting this appropriation. He was going to materialize his feeling for the sufferers by voting this bill.
Mr. SHOCKNEY could see no reason why gentlemen opposed this bill, since all money not expended would return to the State. The $40,000 appropriated for the former bill would not be $1 for each sufferer. He thought there was no time to wait for a Committee to investigate.
Mr. JEWETT hoped that he would not be accused of unduly pressing the passage of the bill. He was satisfied if members knew of the message he had received of the persons who had come from the flooded district to plead for assistance, they would not question the purity of his motives in making this earnest effort to secure aid at once.
Mr. MOODY spoke favorably of placing the bill upon its passage at once.
Mr. WILSON, of Marion, thought in the face of the fact that more rain would likely fall in the near future, followed by colder weather, that this measure for relief should be acted upon at once.
Mr. GORDON was of the opinion that if the House passed the bill leaving hte appropriation at $100,000 it would not pass the Senate. He made an ineffectual motion to reduce the appropriation to $60,000.
The bill was considered engrossed and passed the House by yeas, 60; nays,
Mr. JEWETT moved to reconsider the vote and lay that motion on the table. The latter motion was agreed to.
By consent, Mr. Smith's, of Perry, bill [
Mr. Gordon' [H. R. 396] for the benefit of Horticultural Societies.
Mr. McMullen's bill [H. R. 377] to provide for the protection of growing timber and for the appointment of a Forestry Commission.
The House adjourned until 2 o'clock next Monday.
The Senate met at 2 o'clock p. m.
Prayer by Rev. W. B. Collins.
On motion of Mr. GRAHAM the reading of the Secretary's minutes of Friday's proceedings was dispensed with.
was announced by the Doorkeeper and His Excellency's Private Secretary communicated the following message, which was read by the Clerk:
The Constitution provides that every bill which shall have passed the General Assembly shall be presented to the Governor, and that if he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it with his objections to the House in which it shall have originated. It further provides that if any bill shall not be returned by the Governor within three days (Sunday excepted) after it shall have been presented to him it shall be a law without his signature unless the general adjournment shall prevent its return.
Senate Bill No. 1 relating to the government and management of the Benevolent Institutions, was presented to me on Wednesday, the 14th inst., Saturday, the 17th inst., had the Senate been in session, was the last day upon which I could have returned the bill with objections. The Senate not having been in session that day, and yesterday having been Sunday, no doubt is entertained that it is competent for me to return the bill with my last objections to-day. On Saturday last, however, thinking that a question might possibly be started whether, in order that the objections might be in session, the bill should not have been delivered to the presiding officer of the Senate on that day along with my objections thereto, I placed the bill in his hands and a written statement of my objections to it, and requested him to return the bill to the Senate on the meeting of the Senate to-day, and also to cause to be communicated to the Senate the statement of objections which I delivered to him. I have the honor now to repeat the same request, regretting however that an occasion has arisen which obliges me, under a sense of official duty, to differ from a majority of the two Houses in relation to the expediency of the passage of the bill.
I respectfully return to the Senate, with my objections, Senate Bill No. 1, entitled, "An act providing for the better government and management of the Hospital for the Insane, the Asylum for the Blind, and the Institution for the Deaf and Dumb; repealing all laws or parts of laws in conflict therewith, and declaring an emergency." The power of the Governor to appoint Trustees for the three Benevolent Institutions, the Hospital for the Insane, the Institution for the Education of the Blind, and the Institution for the Deaf and Dumb, was conferred by the act of March 6, 1879, reorganizing these institutions. But one Legislature has intervened since the passage of the act. The Legislature that passed it deemed the necessity so strong for the provision transferring from itself to the Executive the power of appointing Trustees that it did not allow the President of the Board of Trustees and two other Trustees whose terms of office had then two years to run, to serve out any part of the residue of their terms. The reasons of the Legislature for desiring to transfer this power from itself to the Governor are not difficult to understand. The sessions of the Legislature are limited by the Constitution to sixty days, except when some extraordinary duty is devolved upon it, such as revising the whole body of our laws.
The time is sufficient when the Legislature is in a condition to address itself
with earnestness to its legislative work. But to perform the duties entrusted to
it within the time limited, and to form wise laws, the uninterrupted and
deliberate attention of members of the Legislature is of course imperatively
necessary. That attention can not be given when the Legislature converts itself
into a body for the distribution of officers, and time is necessarily consumed
every day in the bodies of the Houses and elsewhere in listening to the
solicitations of candidates and their friends. The inevitable effect is a
distraction from the duties incumbent upon themselves and a
These may well be supposed to have been the considerations which induced the Legislature in 1879 to change the law to what it is now. The chief complaint of the people against our laws is that they are so unstable. The people do not see why the laws abolished and changed so often that plain men can never be certain what the laws are, and are obliged to resort, to a professional class to learn what they are, on the simplest subjects. It Is a wise rule not to change a law until evil consequences from it are sensibly felt.
It is claimed by the friends of the bill now re turned, that the present law which it is intended to replace, has thus far worked well. If, under it the Governor nominates for Trustees persons unsatisfactory to the Senate, that body can refuse to confirm the nominations, and put upon him the responsibility of nominating others whom they may ultimately approve. If he omits to do so the incumbents will continue to hold their places. The people will therefore perceive no satisfactory reason why in four years after passage of the present law it should be repealed by the law which the Legislature in 1879 condemned.
The power of appointing to office is not one to be coveted by the executive. To a sensitive mind the disappointment inflicted upon many worthy applicants is more keenly felt than the gratification of giving to a successful few. In arguing in favor of the law as it now is I feel that I can speak therefore, in an impersonal way for what is best for the public and not for what would be most agreeable to the appointing officer.
On motion by Mr. BROWN the messag3 was made the special order for day after to-morrow at 10 o'clock.
Mr. VOYLES, from the
On motion by Mr. GRAHAM, the House amendments to his bill [S. 29] to legalize the acts of Trustees of Westfield, Hamilton County, excepting suits now pending, were concurred in.
The Lieutenant Governor announced the special order being the consideration of the
general appropriation bill [H. R. 302], as in
Mr. MAGEE moved to make office expenses of the Clerk of the Supreme Court $500.
It was agreed to.
Mr. BUNDY moved to increase the appropriation for the Fishery Commission from $1,000 to $3,000. He has information that the present Fish Commissioner spent more during the past year than the appropriation. If we are to have this most benevolent institution of the States it ought to be placed on a basis that will enable the Fish Commissioner to carry out the purposes and intention of the law.
Mr. WILLARD opposed the increase, especially when not more than $1,300 was asked.
Mr. WHITE favored the motion. The northern part of the State is dotted all over with lakes, which should be stocked with fish. The State of Michigan appropriates s^me $10,000 a year, and Indiana should not be so far behind.
Mr. YOUCHE heartily concurred with the remarks just made by the Senator from Elkhart [Mr. White]. There is nothing that adds so much to the comfort, happiness and pleasure of the people of his section as good fishing grounds. They all are in favor of it, and they all want the Fishing Commission to be encouraged.
Mr. FAULKNER opposed the motion. Fish can be obtained by anyone by sending for them, without money and without price, a large sum being yearly expended by the government for the propagation of fish, which will be distributed to proper applicants.
Mr. SPANN insisted Indiana ought not to be niggardly in this matter of placing in the streams of this State food fishes, so that fishing may be full and free to every man who will cast a line. Indiana should be put in a position in this matter to be abreast of sister States on this fish question.
The amendment [Mr. Bundy's] was agreed to upon a division-affirmative, 23; negative not counted.
Mr. MAGEE moved to increase the sum appropriated for maintenance of T( pairs of the
State's Prison North from $75,000 to $85,000, at the suggestion of the Chairman of the
Mr. CAMPBELL visited the Prison with the Committee and knew the boilers were old and dangerous, and provision should be made for insane convicts. which latter are simply inhuman.
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. SPANN made the same motion with regard to the State Prison South. Before that Prison can be put in proper condition it needs a new wall better cell facilities, etc.
Mr. WILLARD thought it a strange way to treat an appropriation bill, when nothing of the kind is asked by the management. Last year both of these Prisons were within $75,000 of two years ago. It is the business of those interested to make these kind of demands, and he objected to these increases.
Mr. BENZ said the Warden of the Northern Prison requested him to make an increase, and would have been here but for sickness, asking that an additional amount be appropriated.
Mr. SPANN said the Warden of the Southern Prison made a similar statement. The work house needs repair, the cells need repairs and the Prison generally put in better condition.
The amendment was agreed to upon admission-affirmative, 23; negative, not announced.
The
Mr. WILLARD said the appropriation for this Institution has not been expended but once.
Mr. VAN VORHIS insisted instead of lowering this appropriation it ought to be increased. He moved to insert $35,000 instead of $30,000.
Mr. MARVIN hoped the sum in the bill would be allowed to remain. The managers tell him, as a member of the Committee, that they never had enough money appropriated for its management.
Mr. GRAHAM desired to see the substitute amendment prevail. He visited this Institution two years ago with the Committee, and if the inmates are fed as they were on that occasion, it is a disgrace to the State of Indiana-the food was unfit for any human being to eat He hoped the management would see 10 it that no starvation is Bilowed in that Institution.
Mr. HILLIGASS understands that two years ago there was over $2,000 unexpended; and that this is not the way to avert the evils just complained of. Unless this is done he opposed increasing the appropriation.
Mr. BROWN contended this sum can be used for maintenance-including food and clothing and repairs. This bill makes an increase of $2,000 over last, year, and that is probably as far as should be gone. He hoped the officers would remedy the evil spoken of by the Senator from Hamilton [Mr. Graham.]
Mr. WHITE thought the appropriation ought to be increased.
Mr. CAMPBELL in conversation with the Governor, that gentleman stated the appropriation has been too small.
Mr. RISTINE stated that there was urgent need in preparing comfortable quarters for the sick.
Mr. VAN VORHIS was satisfied $35,000 is none too much. That Institution is in such a needy condition the State ought not to permit it to remain. Many things have been left undone that otherwise would be done if it had the funds. The Hospital Department should be improved. The inmates are increasing, and the labor of the inmates would be better utilized if money were available to procure material.
The substitute [Mr. Van Vorhis'] was rejected upon a division-affirmative, 16; negative, 18.
The
Mr. BENZ moved to reconsider the vote adding $10,00 to the State Prison South.
Mr. SPANN opposed and Mr. Faulkner favored the motion.
It was rejected upon a division.
On motion by Mr. BROWN the words "and the certificate of State stock, if there be any of such stock," were stricken from the bill.
Mr. WILLARD moved to amend by providing there shall be no appropriation for expenses of the office of the Clerk of the Supreme Court for the fiscal year beginning November 1, 1881.
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. BUNDY moved that the Committee rise, report its action and ask leave to be discharged.
The motion was agreed to, and according-
The Committee rose.
On motion by Mr. BUNDY the Senator from Madison [Mr. Henry] took the Chair, the Lieutenant Governor being absent from the Chamber.
The following House bills were read the first time and referred to the appropriate Committees, unless otherwise stated:
The bill [H. R. 3] to amend Section 461 of the act concerning proceedings in civil cases.
The bill [H. R. 53] to legalize the town of Barnettsville, White County.
The bill [H. R. 133] to provide for a Board of Metropolitan Police Commissioners, was being read by the Clerk when-
Mr. Bundy objected to taking up bills out of the order as they came from the House, stating there were quite a number of House bills received in the Senate prior to this one.
Mr. Spann also objected and gave notice that he should file a protest against the action of the Clerk in reading bills out of their regular and proper order.
Mr. BROWN moved to take up the Police Commissioner bill and read it now, and on that motion he demanded the previous question.
The demand for the previous question was seconded by yeas, 22; nays, 17.
The motion to read the bill was rejected by yeas, 22; nays, 17-two thirds not voting in the affirmative.
Mr. BELL, Chairman of the
On motion by Mr. BELL the report of the Committee was concurred in.
On his further motion the amendments were ordered engrossed.
Mr. YANCEY moved to take up the bill [H. R. 119] to appropriate $100,000 for the relief of sufferers by the floods on the Ohio, Wabash and White Rivers.
The motion was rejected by yeas, 13; nays, 24.
Mr. CAMPBELL explaining that his negative vote was because he desired to hear from the Senator Committee sent to investigate the ravages of the flood. That Committee has promised a report to-morrow.
Mr. McINTOSH also explained his negative vote. When the bill appropriating $40,000 was before the Senate he vainly endeavored to obtain an increase to $50,000. But now, considering the vast amount proposed to be appropriated by this bill, it ought not to be hurried through.
transmitted to the Senate the first annual report of the Commissioner of Fisheries; which on motion by Mr. Bell was referred to a Select Committee of Three, which the President pro tem. ([Mr. Henry in the Chair] made to consist of Messrs. Bell, Spann, and Bundy.
Mr. VAN VORHIS moved to recall from the
Mr. BELL declaring this motion to be for delay and nothing else, moved to lay it on the table.
The motion was agreed to by yeas, 25; nays, 15.
Mr. SPANN moved to take up the bill [H. R. 419] to appropriated $100,000 for the relief sufferers by the flood, read it the first time by sections, the second time by title, the third time by sections and put upon its passage.
On motion by Mr. Bell, this motion was laid on the table by yeas, 21; nays 20.
Pending the roll call-
Mr. BENZ, in explanation of his vote, when his name was called said: I represent two Counties on the Ohio River and have received dispatches to use my influence for the passage of this bill. I know the people there are suffering and need that money. I vote "no."
Mr. VOYLES, when his name was called, in explanation of his vote said: While in favor of this bill I am inclined to think that the motion to advance it, coming from the source it did and from the time it did, is only used to impede the regular order of business; but in order to accommodate the Senator who made the motion I vote "no."
Mr. YANCEY, in explanation of his vote, said: I think it is the unkindest cut of all for my friend from Washington [Mr. Voyles] to cast an insinuation in regard to the source of the motion. I want to say I am in sympathy with these flood sufferers. They are in distress, and I don't believe it is the time in Indiana to act niggardly. I know his constituency want something done to help them, and therefore I vote "no."
Mr. FAULKNER, in explaining his vote, said: I vote "aye" because the
The result was announced as above recorded.
The motion was laid on the table.
Mr. WILLARD moved to take up the bill [H. R. 33], being the next bill in order, and on that motion demanded the previous question.
Mr. SPANN raised the point of order that it needs no motion, as the bill is in order without a motion.
The PRESIDENT pro tem. [Mr. Henry in the Chair] decided the bill [H. R. 33] to be the order of business-the Clerk had already commenced reading the bill-the motion is not in order.
Mr. WILLARD took an appeal from this decision-which he subsequently withdrew.
Mr. BELL moved to proceed with the reading of the House bill 33 without the intervention of any other business, and demanded the previous question.
Mr. VAN VORHIS made an ineffectual motion-yeas, 17; nays, 24-to lay his motion on the table.
The demand for the previous question was seconded by the Senate.
The motion to proceed with the reading of the bill was agreed to-yeas, 24; nays 16.
Accordingly the Clerk proceeded to read the bill
Mr. BUNDY moved that the Senate adjourn.
Mr. BELL made the point of order that the motion is not in order.
The PRESIDENT, pro tem. decided the point of order not well taken.
Mr. BELL appealed from the decision of the Chair, joined by Mr. Brown.
Mr. BUNDY made an ineffectual motion-yeas, 17; nays, 23-to lay the appeal on the table.
The question being shall the decision of the Chair stand as the judgment of the Senate-
Mr. BELL demanded the previous question.
Mr. YANCEY (before the Clerk commenced to call the roll) asked to be excused from voting.
Mr. BELL made the point of order that the demand having been made for the previous question, and stated by the Chair, no motion to be excused from voting is in order.
The PRESIDENT pro tem. sustained the point of order.
The Senate seconded the demand for the previous question by yeas, 23; nays, 15, and the main question ordered by yeas, 23; nays, 14.
The question recurring, Shall the decision of the Chair stand as the judgment of the House? The decision of the Chair was not sustained by yeas, 15; nays, 23.
The Clerk proceeded with the first reading of the bill [H. R. 33]. When he had concluded-
Mr. BROWN moved to take up and read through the first time the bill [H. R. 133] and that no other motion be entertained or other business transacted until said bill is read through the first time; and on this motion he demanded the previous question.
The demand was seconded by yeas, 24; nays, 17, and the main question ordered by yeas, 25; nays, 15.
Mr. FOULKE moved to adjourn.
Mr. BROWN raised a point of order that this motion is not in order pending the previous question.
The PRESIDENT pro tem. sustained the point of order.
Mr. BUNDY appealed from the decision of the Chair.
Mr. BROWN raised the point the appeal could now be sustained.
The PRESIDENT pro tem. permitted the appeal.
The decision of the Chair was sustained by yeas, 25; nays, 10.
Mr. SPANN moved to reconsider the vote just taken.
On motion by Mr. BELL this motion was laid on the table-yeas, 25; nays, 10.
Mr. FOULKE demanded a decision of the question.
The first part of the motion, viz.: to take up the bill [S. 13] was agreed to by yeas, 24; nays, 10.
Mr. FOULKE raised the point of order that the second part of the motion is not in order.
The PRESIDENT pro tem. sustained the point.
Mr. SPANN moved to reconsider the last vote, which was rejected by yeas, 12; nays, 24.
The bill [H. R.
Mr. FOULKE denounced this bill as utterly viscous, and utterly regardless of the rights of the people, and would make no apologies for obstructing the progress of this measure-the most pernicious ever operated-having for its purpose the taking away from the people their vested municipal rights. He gave way for
Mr. BUNDY, who made an ineffectual motion to adjourn.
Mr. BELL endeavored to obtain the floor.
Mr. FOULKE insisted he had yielded only for a motion to adjourn.
The PRESIDENT pro tem. decided the Senator from Wayne [Mr. Foulke] entitled to the floor.
Mr. BELL appealed from the decision of the Chair.
The PRESIDENT pro tem. decided there was nothing to appeal from.
Mr. BELL appealed from this decision.
The Senate refused to sustain the Chair by yeas, 10; nays, 24.
Mr. FOULKE still claimed the floor, and proceeded with his remarks. He contended the bill would put it in the power of the Police Commissioners to bankrupt the city of Indianapolis. At 8:20 he gave way for
Mr. MAGEE, on whose motion the bill was referred to the
Mr. SPANN moved that the bill [H. R. 419] be taken up, read the first time by sections, the second time by title, the third time by sections and put upon its passage.
Mr. BROWN moved to adjourn.
The motion was rejected-yeas, 18; nays, 19.
The motion to suspend the rules was rejected by yeas, 24; nays, 14.
The Senate adjourned at 8:35 o'clock p. m.
The House was called to order by the Speaker, who announced prayer by Rev. Mr. Talmage, of Indianapolis.
Mr. HEFFREN moved that the reading of the journal of last Saturday's proceedings be dispensed with.
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, objected to the motion, as he was of the opinion that the minutes would show that the constitutional restrictions in a certain case were not properly suspended.
On motion by Mr. PRICE the reading of the journal, except pages 158 and 159, was dispensed with.
The following described bills were reported back from Committees with a recommendation that further action be indefinitely postponed, which reports were concurred in unless otherwise stated:
Mr. Wilson's, of Kosciusko, bill [H. R. 234] to amend Section 1 of an act to protect sheep husbandry.
Mr. Patten's bill [H. R. 165] to repeal Sections 4,834 and 4,833 of the Revised Statutes of 1883, concerning legal enclosure.
Mr. Howland's bill [H. R. 179] to encourage the formation of voluntary associations for the encouragement of agriculture in all its forms.
Mr. HOWLAND desired that the report would not be concurred in. If it was the sense of
the Committee he would not object to striking out that provision of the bill which
provided for an appropriation by the State to pay for the publication of reports of
these several Societies. He thought that these Societies are composed of the
industrious and representative men of almost
Mr. MUTZ could see no necessity for this bill at the present time. He had no objections to these Societies, but he did not think they should ask the State to pay their expenses.
Mr. OILMAN favored the report of the Committee to indefinitely postpone. He was of the opinion that the^e same reports were to be found in the reports of the State Board of Agriculture. He was not in favor of taxing the whole people to pay the expense of Associations composed of a few persons.
Mr. SMITH, of Tippecanoe, was in favor of doing every thing possible to encourage the agricultural, mechanical and other Associations of 'the State. He favored the suggestion of the gentleman from Marion [Mr. Howland] to press the bill, if necessary, without the appropriation.
Mr. DEEM was astonished at the report of the Committee. He was satisfied that the Committee labored under a misapprehension concerning the provision of the measure. It is a bill to encourage stock raising, wool growing and cane growing, etc. The appropriation asked is to publish these reports that they may be scattered among the farmers of the State. The reports are not introduced simply for the breeders and stock men, but they are for all farmers.
On motion by Mr. DEEM the report of the Committee was laid on the table and the bill was ordered engrossed.
by reports from Committees, as follows:
Mr. Shaffer's bill [H. R. 11] concerning the State Board of Health.
Mr. Whitsit's bill [H. R. 274] to amend Section 9 in relation to laying out, widening and opening streets and highways.
Mr. Pulse's bill [H. R. 410] to provide for the subdividing of lands and lots.
Mr. Weaver's bill [H. R. 311] to fix time of paying taxes in cities.
Mr. Chittenden's bill [H. R. 306] to amend Section 1 of an act to amend Section 53 of an act relating to the incorporation of cities and towns.
Mr. Moody's bill [H. R. 317] to amend Sections 9 and 27 of an act concerning roads and highways.
Mr. Heffren's bill [H. R. 251] to amend Section 1 of an act in regard to foreign Insurance Companies.
Mr. HEFFREN hoped that the report of the Committee to indefinitely postpone would not be concurred in. He could not see any reason, and did not think any member could see any good reason why two papers in the city of Indianapolis should have exclusive right to publish these statements. Not one-tenth of the voters of the State take these Indianapolis papers. He was in favor of having these statements published in the papers of the different Counties of the State wherever these Companies have established agencies.
Mr. SMITH, of Tippecanoe, was in favor of good Insurance Companies, and very much opposed to poor Insurance Companies. He desired to be fair to the Companies as well as to the people, and he thought this bill would require the Companies to publish statements in ninety-two Counties, which he thought would be somewhat of a hardship.
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, desired to say in behalf of the Committee that this report reflected the sentiment of each individual member of the Committee. After a careful consideration of the question the Committee decided that the beat thing to do was to leave this law as it is now. The present law has given substantial satisfaction to the Companies, and substantial satisfaction to the State officers.
Mr. JEWETT moved that the bill be recommitted to the
Mr. Montgomery's bill [H. R. 246] to compel Foreign Insurance Companies doing business in this. State to pay judgments rendered against them in one year from the time the judgment was rendered, unless an appeal is taken, was recommended to be indefinitely postponed.
On motion by Mr. MONTGOMERY, the report of the Committee to indefinitely postpone was laid on the table, and the bill was ordered engrossed.
Mr. Chittenden's bill [H. R. 215] to empower cities and towns to tax foreign Insurance Companies, and
Mr. Smith's bill [H. R. 46] to amend Section of the act concerning drainage, were indefinitely postponed.
Mr. HEFFREN called from the table his proposed amendment to House rule 74, that the House meet at 9 a. m. and 2 p. m., which was taken up and read and adopted.
Mr. JEWETT made an ineffectual motion that when the House adjourn it be until 7 o'clock this evening.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time and severally passed to the second reading:
By Mr. MOCK [H. R. 421] to divide the State of Indiana into Congressional Districts.
By Mr. ROBINSON [H. R. 422] to amend Section 3,704 of the Revised Statutes concerning foreign Insurance Companies.
By Mr. JEWETT [H. R. 423] to authorize the Trustees of the State Insane Asylum to donate land for the purpose of opening up streets.
By Mr. BRYANT [H. R. 424] to amend Section 34 of an act concerning drainage.
By Mr. MELLETT [H. R. 425] to amend Section 4,232 of the Revised Statutes of 1881 concerning relocation of County seats.
By Mr. WEAVER [H. R. 426] to provide the fees and salaries of County Treasurer.
By Mr. JEWETT [H. R. 427] to amend Sections 8, 29, 71 and 87 of the act dividing the State into Counties.
By Mr. NAVE [H. R. 428] to amend Sections 20 of an act concerning elections and the contest thereof.
By Mr. PETERS [H. R. 429] to appropriate money for the erection of a family building and putting in gas mains at the House of Refuge, and appropriating $20,000 therefor.
Mr. HUSTON offered a joint resolution to agree to and adopt the amendment proposed to the Constitution by the last General Assembly, by inserting Article 17, prohibiting the manufacture, sale, and keeping for sale of liquors of all kinds, etc., which was read the first time and passed to the second reading, and made a special order for 2 o'clock tomorrow.
The House adjourned until 9 o'clock to-morrow under the rule adopted this afternoon.
On motion by Mr. YANCEY the reading of the Secretary's minutes of yesterday's proceedings was dispensed with.
The bill [H. R. 66] to legalize the incorporation of the town of Syracuse, Kosciusko County, and to legalize' each and every official act of the Board of Trustees of said town, coming up in regular order, it was read the first time.
On motion by Mr. SAYRE the Constitutional restriction was dispensed with-yeas, 36; nays, 0 and the bill was read the second time by title only, the third time by sections, and finally passed the Senate-yeas, 38; nays, 1.
A similar bill [H. R. 67] affecting Silver Lake, Koscuisko County, took tne same course, and was finally passed by yeas, 39; nays, 2.
Mr. SPANN moved that the Constitutional rule be dispensed with in order that the bill [H. R. 419] to appropriate $100,000 for the relief of sufferers by the floods on the Ohio, Wabash and White Rivers may be read the first time by sections, the second time by title, the third time by sections and put on its passage.
The motion was rejected by yeas, 20; nays, '<;3. Pending the roll call-
Mr. DUNCAN, when his name was called, said he had just returned from Jeffersonville, New Albany, Madison, Aurora and Lawrenceburg, but as the other members of the Committee had not returned, he thought it but just they have time to report to the Senate that it may vote intelligently on this subject. There is yet unexpended $25,000 of the $40,000 appropriated, and it will take some time to use that up. So he voted "no."
Mr. HOWARD, in explanation of his vote said because of the misery he knew was existing among these sufferers, and $40,000 is insufficient to relieve the distress, voted "aye.'
Mr. VOYLES when his name was called, said: When I know that the people are in distress owing to the great disaster brought upon them by unexpected floods, and when I know I have a right to do any act for their relief, I am willing to do it promptly, without luggling over forms and questionable delay. I vote "aye."
So the rules were not suspended.
By consent the bill was read the first time and referred to the
Mr. ADKISON called up his notice given Friday to reconsider the vote by which Mr. Yancey's bill [S. 62] was rejected to prevent the running at large of stock, was rejected.
Mr. HENRY Insisted if there ever was a time- when such a bill should be passed it is now when so many fences have been swept away by the recent floods The present law has been found wholly insufficient. The running at large of stock ought not to be allowed.
Mr. LOCKRIDGE also hoped the bin will pass. There never was a time when such legislation 1s- more needed than the present. Being at home over Sunday the people with whom he talked: were universally demanding such a measure. In many cases no fences have been left and there not sufficient timber to replace them. The statistics of 1880 show the fencing in. Indiana alone would reach fourteen and one-half times around the world, and the rail fence in Allen County would reach nine times around the State. The value of stock in this State is $104,658 260, or over $l2,000,000 less than the estimated value of fencing. This will be a big question in the near future: if about one-fourth or one eighth the amount of fencing will keep stock up.
Mr. MAY trusted the bill would not pass It is not consistent in Senators to vote for $100,000 to be given to sufferers in the Southern part of the State one minute and then vote for the passage of this bill the next. Simply say to the people along the Ohio River, "you shall fence in your stock," thus making a pasture monopoly for land owners and consign poor people to suffer by taking from them the main stay of their subsistance-their cows. He remonstrated against the passage of this bill, especially at this time.
Mr. DAVIDSON said if this bill does not consume a good deal of time it is worthy of
careful consideration. He opposed any measure that has a tendency to make neighbors
fallout with each other and quarrel, and that is what the present
Mr. ADKISON explained he made the motion to reconsider at the request of the author of the bill, and having voted against it twice before would do so again.
Mr. VOYLES insisted this bill would work a hardship in some portions of the State. The present law on this subject is right-it is in effect to make a local option on this subject. A petition to the Commissioners will certainly reflect the will of the people in the locality, and the County Commissioners will undoubtedly reflect that will.
The bill failed to pass by yeas, 21; nays. 22.
Agreeable to notice given yesterday-
Mr. SPANN moved to expunge from the journal of yesterday the protest thereon against the recess to allow time for the Legislative visit to Logansport.
Mr. BELL made an ineffectual motion that the motion to expunge be laid on the table-yeas, 19; nays, 28.
The motion to expunge was agreed to by yeas, 28; nays, 20.
On motion, by Mr. BROWN the bill [H. R. 381] to fix times of holding Courts in the Forty-second Judicial Circuit-affecting the Counties of Washington and Jackson-was read the first time and referred to the Senators representing the two Counties.
On motion by Mr. BUNDY the Senate proceeded to the consideration of the special order, being Mr. Rahm's bill [S. 87] for the location of a new Insane Asylum, and he moved to amend the report of the Committee which proposes to locate a second Asylum at Fort Wayne, by striking out the amendments recommended by the Committee so as to leave the bill as originally introduced. The cities of Elkhart, Richmond, Logansport, South Bend, and probably Peru, will or have made application; the necessity being so great for a location of at least one Asylum, in justice to the people of Evansville their bill should go through on its merits. After the location is made there a bill for a location north can be introduced.
Mr. FOULKE offered a substitute for the amendment to the report of the Committee so as to provide for three new Insane Asylums, to be located at Evansville, Richmond and Logansport. He declared the first duty of the State is to make adequate provision for the insane-and it ought to be immediate. The uniform result has been shown to be better for these helpless beings where they are not brought together in large numbers-300 or 400 at most are as large a number as should be put in one Asylum. We should provide for the accommodation of at least 1,000 more patients in Insane Asylums. He would guarantee them proper treatment as well at Richmond as at any point in the State. It is, among cities corresponding in size, the third in raying the least death rate among all others in the United States. It is wise policy to scatter the State institutions somewhat. Richmond has never yet been favored in this way, and is now willing, by its City Council, to appropriate $25,000 to secure the location of one of these Asylums there.
Mr. CAMPBELL offered a substitute providing for a Commission to consist of the Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Secretary and Auditor of State and Superintendent of the Insane Asylum to select a location for each of the Asylums, and that the bill be referred to a Special Committee to so amend the bill as proposed.
Mr. VOYLES favored this substitute as the only way to harmonize this matter. It is an easy way to get out of a dilemma; and a Commission may be better able to make a proper election than the General Assembly. He hoped the Senate will send this bill to a Special Committee with instructions similar to that last proposed.
Mr. HILLIGASS also favored the proposition of the Senator from St. Joseph [Mr. Campbell], venturing the assertion there were not less than 100 lobbies seeking the location of these Asylums. He opposed entertaining any pecuniary proposition from any locality for the location of such Asylums. They ought to be spurned and locations made where easy of access and for the health and comfort of these unfortunate people. He was unwilling to favor any but the cottage system. Those bereft of reason should have plenty of daylight, fresh air and sunshine.
Mr. BELL, fearing the building of any Asylum would be endangered, which would be a public calamity, moved to refer the bill to a Special Committee, to report at 2 o'clock, said Committee to consist of Senators Voyles, Campbell, Magee, Rahm, White, Foulke and Bell.
Mr. BROWN has been importuned by his constituents to put in a claim for one of the cities he represents as a location for one of these Asylums, but at the risk of displeasing them he would not endanger the passage of this bill by doing so, although his city is unsurpassed in many advantages by any other location named. This bill had better be passed than to get in a quarrel over locations. Let not this enterprise be imperiled by the tacking onto it a location for any other place, but stand by the original proposition to build one at Evansville.
Mr. MAGEE stated that in sixty days the building at Logansport can be ready for the reception of 300 patients, and if a speedy accommodation of these unfortunates be indeed desired, the Logansport proposition should be accepted at once.
Mr. WHITE opposed the substitute by the Senator from Wayne [Mr. Foulke] because in the northern part of the State there are several cities combining all the advantages of Richmond. No city in the Union, for healthfulness, excels the city of Elkhart. And as far as brick are concerned, no city can furnish as cheap and as good a quality. Then Elkhart will subscribe any reasonable sum of money to secure the location. The northern part of the State is entitled to a State building, and he pressed the claim of the city of Elkhart, which will do as much or more than any city of its size in the State.
Mr. RISTINE referred to a bill providing for Commissioners to be appointed by the Governor to locate a place in the northern and in the southern part of the State which claims his preference, but he was willing to favor the motion to refer to the Select Committee proposed by the Senator from Allen and Whitley [Mr. Bell.]
Mr. BELL feared if this discussion is kept up no location will be made this session. He favored his motion for the consideration of the bill by the Select Committee named in his motion. He believed the Committee could agree on a location in the northern part of the State.
Mr. HENRY favored passing the original bill as introduced. He opposed the tacking on a good bill something not conceded by all as a good measure. He favored making ample provision for the afflicted of the State.
Mr. ADKISON repelled the assumption that there are few who will vote again t a location at Evansville, and believed the first consideration should be as to the health of the location, the second drainage, and the third facilities for reaching the place. He favored an untrammelled Commission to select the location. Peru is the most central point in Northern Indiana, yet no body there seeking the location there. It immediate provision for the insane is desired Logansport is ahead of any other location. He opposed the appointment of a Commission.
Mr. WILLARD finds this Senate is but repeating the history often years ago. In 1872 there as introduced a bill for the erection of a Hospital for the incurably insane, which failed to puss after a 100 days session. In the closing days of this session we find ourselves in a similar position. It we are to give relief to a class which has suffered more and suffered longer that any other, we should strip the bill of all but the provisions embraced in it when originally introduced. Only eight or nine days of the working days of this session are left and it should be passed at once. The greatest demand of the State is for the building of an Asylum at once.
Mr FOULKE said that is the very reason he favored the reference of this bill to the Select Committee representing these different interests. He believed such action would facilitate the passage of the bill.
Mr. BROWN moved to add to the motion [Mr. Bell's] that Evansville be selected by said Committee as one of the locations.
Mr. MAGEE believed the sense of the General Assembly that two Insane Asylums shall be built. If the Senate will vote for Evansville simply because a lobby has been here from the beginning of the session urging her claims, he objected. He favored the motion without the addition.
Mr. JOHNSON, for the Select Committee on Prison Labor, submitted a report (which was, without being read, ordered printed), accompanied by a bill [S. 284] to abolish contracts for convict labor, and regulating the employment of convicts of our State Prisons and Reformatory Schools. The bill was read the first time. He made an ineffectual motion-yeas, 22, nays, 21-that the bill be made a special order for Friday at 2 o'clock.
Mr. VOYLES, as a privileged question, called up his motion, notice of which was given yesterday, to change the rule 54 so that the daily order of business shall be suspended upon a majority vote instead of a two thirds vote as now.
Mr. SPANN raised the point of order that this question can not be called up as a privileged question.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR believed that such a motion can be called up at any time.
By consent the Senate returned to the consideration of the subjection pending at the noon recess.
Mr. Brown withdrew his amendment pending at the noon recess.
Mr. BUNDY moved to refer the bill to a Special Committee of Six to be appointed by the Chair, with instructions to selection Evansville as one of the points, and that the Committee amend the bill so as to provide for an additional Asylum, the location to be left blank.
Mr. GRAHAM questioned the advisability of the Legislature traveling around to hunt up a location for any public building. The arguments are all against a location at Evansville, and he opposed such a location. The bill allowed the transportation to Evansville from all parts of the State. That is away down in the pocket on the Ohio River, a distance of 182 from here, the center of the State, and 320 miles from the north-east corner of the State. The Committee suggested by the Senator from Allen and Whitley [Mr. Bell] is a proper one and he desired that Committee should be untrammeled by instructions. He hoped it would thoroughly canvass all the places mentioned in connection with a location for the new Asylums.
Mr. VAN VORHIS also thought the Committee should not be instructed for Evansville-all locations should be considered together. He favored making provision now for the entire insane of the State. There is more interest manifested in securing locations than in the people who are to occupy the buildings when erected. The proposition of the Senator from St. Joseph [Mr. Campbell] is the wisest one yet advanced. He favored any number of Asylums required to take care of the insane of the State. It is well understood that it is not for the best interest of the insane people to mass them together-the literature on this question is full of good suggestions not mentioned in this discussion.
He thought there should be four or six different locations, putting probably not more than $100,000 at each location. There is no question but that the cottage plan should be adopted.
Mr. BUNDY withdrew his substitute, and offered in lieu an amendment, by providing that the Committee shall be appointed by the Chair.
Mr. CAMPBELL opposed the motion to change the composition of the Committee-thinking it best to have a Committee of those whose localities desire the Asylums.
Mr. RHAM objected from the start to any amendment to his bill. He replied to objections to locating the Asylum at Evansville, which lies on the Ohio River which skirts the borders of this State for some 350 miles, and a person can travel that entire distance on one of the Ohio River floating palaces for the sum of $5. Vanderburg County has formed no combination in this matter. He desired the Northern portion of the State compromise the differences. He introduced his bill the 12th of January and no other city in the Southern part of the State has applied for the location. Provisions and living are cheaper there than elsewhere in the State; for instance, coal is delivered for 90 cents a ton.
Mr. MARVIN did not like to see so little attention paid to the Committee report. He thought the General Assembly should select the location, and not trust that duty to a rambling Commission. These Asylums should be built immediately. Evansville is the next largest city in the State and Ft. Wayne comes next to Evansville, and he thought it to be to the interest of the State to locate these Institutions near the large cities.
Mr. FLETCHER took himself somewhat the credit of suggesting to the Senate Committee the idea of building Asylums throughout the State instead of massing the insane in one Institution as in Indianapolis-making a mass of insane humanity more calculated to breed insanity than to cure it. The sentiment of Superintendents of Insane Asylums throughout Europe is against the American plan, which is continued through the influence of the Superintendents who are personally interested in keeping the Asylums very large. We need a great deal of laid and a great many smaller Asylums-not gaudy with outside decorations and whited sepulchres within. Many of them he feared would be found very black. It is a shame to take insane persons from their families a long distance, and is more calculated to create permanent insanity than to bring relief. He favored the establishment of Asylums near the large centers of population, which shall have the appearance and comforts of homes. The things constantly going on within the wall of large Institutions no one man can possibly know. No doubt there are men confined in such Insane Asylums who are as sane as any man on this floor. Small Asylums will prove far more efficacious in preventing persons from being sent to these Asylums who are not insane. He opposed the motion for a Commission to locate these Asylums, but hoped this General Assembly as in duty bound, would carry the plan out of building many-seven or eight or ten if necessary-commencing at Evansville next Fort Wayne, as being accessable places and the centers of population.
Mr. MAGEE demanded the previous question which was seconded by the Senate and -
Under its operations the mot on [Mr. Bundy's] was rejected by yeas, 8; nays, 39.
The motion to refer to the Special Committee named by Mr. Bell was agreed to by yeas, 28; nays, 13.
Mr. BELL asked and obtained leave for the Committee to retire for consultation, and Mr. Fletcher was added to the Committee by unanimous consent.
The bill [H. R. 74] to amend Section 409 of the Revised Statutes of 1881-concerning trials-the civil procedure act was read the first time.
Mr. Van Vorhis called up the special order, the consideration of the bill [--] for the relief of Theresa and Charles Bachtel, the question being on concurrence in the minority report recommending indefinite postponement of the bill.
The report was rejected and the majority report recommending an allowance of $1,000 was concurred in and the claim was reported to the Committee for insertion in the specific appropriation bill.
On motion by Mr. Marvin the bill [H. R. 27] to make appropriations for the completion, construction and furnishing of the department for women of the Insane Hospital was read the second and third times under a suspension of the constitutional rule-yeas, 39; nays, 0-and passed the Senate by yeas, 36; nays, 0.
The bill [H. R. 5] concerning town elections [but one voting place in towns unless the Trustees decide otherwise] was read the first time.
On motion by Mr. McCULLOUGH the Constitutional rule was suspended by yeas 36; nays, 0; the bill read the second time by title, the third time by sections and passed by yeas, 35; nays, 1.
On motion of Mr. Van Vorhis the Constitutional rule was set aside and his bill [S. 244] to legalize certain records in the office of Town Recorder in all cities of 50,000 and over by the last census, was read under a suspension of the rule the second and third times and passed by yeas, 36; nays, 1.
The bill [H. R. 27] to legalize the acknowledgment and recording it or certain instruments of writing, the bill [H. R. 10] to amend Section 196 of an act concerning proceedings in criminal cases, the bill [H. R. 15] concerning the use of fire arms, were severally read the first time.
The bill [H. R. 22] to equalize the tax assessment of Winchester, Randolph County, was read three times under a dispensation and passed the Senate by yeas 36; nays, 1.
On motion by Mr. MACARTNEY his bill [S. 34] to legalize the incorporation of Angola, Steuben County, was passed to its final reading and passed the Senate by yeas, 34; nays, 1.
On motion by Mr. Ristine his bill [S. 105] to legalize the incorporation of Waynetown, Montgomery County, was pressed to the second and third reading and passed by yeas 42; nays, 1.
On motion by Mr. BENZ his bill [S. 200] to revive the act of May 14, 1860, for the assessment of lands for the benefit of certain roads, was read the second lime.
On motion by Mr. HILLIGASS the bill [H. R. 413] for the relief of Weems Heagy, an ex Treasurer of Madison County, and the sureties upon his bond, was read the three times under a suspension of the Constitutional rules, and passed the Senate by yeas, 41; nays, 3.
Mr. Henry, speaking for the people of his County, said they all desired its passage.
Ana then the Senate adjourned.
The session was opened with prayer by Representative Brazelton, of Jennings County.
On motion by Mr. Gordon the reading of the journal was dispensed with.
The following described bills were introduced, the first time and severally passed to the second reading, unless otherwise stated:
By Mr. CHANDLER [H. R. 430] to repeal Section 12 of an act to require macadamized, gravel and other road companies to record certain statements.
By Mr. MAUCK [H. R. 431] to repeal Sections 8 and 9 of an act-being Sections 4,868 and 4,888 of the Revised Statutes of 1881-concerning elections and their contest.
By Mr. DEEM [H. R. 432] to amend Sections 4, 5, 6 and 7-being Sections 5,115 to 5,118 inclusive of the Revised statutes of 1881-to legalize and license the sale of intoxicating liquors.
By Mr. DEEM [H R.i33] to amend Section 18 of an act concerning landlords and their tenants, being Section 5,235 of the Revised Statutes of 1881.
By Mr. ROBERTSON [H. R. 434] to suspend Section 1 of an act-being Section 2,636 of the Revised Statutes of 1881-to restrain stock from running at large, etc.
By Mr. WILSON, of Kosciusko [H. R. 435] to provide for a Hospital and Asylum for the incurably insane persons of the State be build on suitable grounds near the city of Indianapolis. [Adjacent to the present Asylum-to be large enough to accommodate 1,000 patients]
By Mr. McCLELLAND, by request, [H. R. 436] a bill for the relief of Isaac Brahann and Johnathan Walrey, sureties on the bond of James Ragsdale.
By Mr. McCLELLAND [H. R. 437] to legalize and license the sale of intoxicating liquors.
By Mr. SHAFFER [H. R. 438] to amend Section 8 of an act concerning taxation, approved April 29, 1881-being Section 6,276 of the Revised Statutes of 1881.
By Mr. HOWLAND, of Marion, [H. R. 439] to legalize certain records in the County Recorder's office, and to provide for the continuation of the records.
By Mr. W1LSON, of Marion, [H. R. 440] to appropriate money-$50,000-for the erection of additional building at the Asylum for the Deaf and Dumb.
By Mr. GORDON [H. R 441] to amend Section 1 of an act to amend Sections 13 and 14 of an act regarding the qualification of Justices of the Peace.
By Mr. SHOCKNEY [H. R. 442] to amend Section 12, being Section 4,283 of the Revised Statutes, of an act concerning drainage.
By Mr. KENNEDY [H. R. 443] to amend Section 18 of an act regulating descents and apportionment of estates, being Section 2,484 of the Revised Statutes.
By Mr. FRAZER [H. B. 444] to authorise County Boards of Health to procure vaccine matter for the purpose of vaccination.
By Mr. MUTZ [H. R. 445] to provide for the election of three additional members, from the District in which Indianapolis is situated, to the State Board of Agriculture.
By Mr. STEVENSON [H. R. 446] to provide for the removal and relocation of public
highways situated on the banks of rivers and other streams, where the same are made
dangerous by overflow or washing out by
By Mr. STEVENSON [H. R. 447] concerning County Surveyors.
By HENDERSON [H. R. 448] to give security to persons doing work on bridges, trestle works or grading of railroads.
By Mr. BEST [H. R. 449] to amend Section 291 of
By Mr. BEST, by request, [H. R. 450] to amend Section 8 of an act creating State Board of Health, being Section 4,994 of the Revised Statutes of 1881.
By Mr. SMITH, of Tippecanoe, [H. R. 451] to provide for the more profitable and equitable hiring out of convicts.
By Mr. CAMPBELL [H. R. 452] to facilitate detection and arrest of escaped prisoners.
By Mr. SHIVELY [H. R. 453] to provide for the relief of Edwin Kendell and Matilda Hall.
By Mr. WILEY [H. R. 454] to amend Sections 4,274, 4,276, 4,277 and 4,279 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, concerning drainage.
By Mr. WILEY by request, [H. R. 455] to amend Section 2 to regulate foreign Insurance Companies doing business in this State.
Pending the order for introduction of bills-
On motion by Mr. PATTEN the bill [S. 207] to define the Thirty-first and Forty-fourth Judicial Circuits [Lake and Porter the Thirty-first, and Pulaski and Starke the Forty-fourth Judicial Circuit] was read the third time and passed by yeas, 74; nays, 8.
Mr. Huston's joint resolution agreeing to and adopting an amendment to the Constitution proposed by the last General Assembly, by adding thereto Article 17, forever prohibiting the manufacture, sale or keeping for sale in this State spiritous, vinous, malt liquors or any other intoxicating liquors, except for medical, scientific, mechanical and wines for sacramental purposes, was read the second time and ordered engrossed on the third reading.
A motion by Mr. HEFFREN to suspend the Constitutional rules and read the bill [S. 6] to provide for the appointment of Supervisors of highways and prescribing their duties, the second time by title only, failed for want of a Constitutional majority-yeas, 66; nays, 22.
On a recount, subsequently, the motion was agreed to by yeas, 68, nays 25.
Accordingly the bill was read the second time by title only and referred to the
On motion by Mr. Mellett the bill [H. R. 412] to provide for regents for the State
University was read the second time and referred to the
Mr. HANSON introduced a joint resolution agreeing to and adopting an amendment to the Constitution proposed by the Fifty-second General Assembly [as amendment No. 4] to amend Section 2 of Article 2 of the Constitution so as to grant the right of suffrage to all citizens of twenty-one years of age, which was read the first time.
Mr. SHIVELY introduced a joint resolution agreeing to and adopting an amendment to the Constitution, proposed by the last General Assembly [as amendment No. 2] to amend Section 1 of Article 6 so there shall be elected by the voters of the State a Secretary, Auditor and Treasurer of State, who shall severally hold their offices for four years; no person being eligible to either of said offices more than one term of four years in any period of eight years, which was read the first time.
Mr. Best introduced a joint resolution agreeing to and adopting a joint resolution, proposed by the last General Assembly [known as amendment No. 3] by proposing an amendment to Section 2 Article 6 of the Constitution, so as to elect County Clerks, Auditors, Recorders, Treasurer, Sheriff, Coronor and Surveyors, who shall severally hold their office for a period of four years, and no person shall be eligible to either of said offices for more than four years in any period of eight years, was read the first time.
Mr. JEWETT made an ineffectual motion to suspend the Constitutional restriction, that these three resolutions be read a second time and ordered engrossed for the third reading. The vote resulting in each case yeas, 58; nays, 38.
Mr. SCHLOSS offered the following resolution:
Whereas, The plan of the State id letting convict labor at low rates has effect to decrease the wages of honest labor, and consequently diminishes the ability to educate their children and provide for those depending upon them; and,
Whereas. The present system of employing convict labor comes in conflict with the rights and interest of honest citizens who have devoted years of toil to become skilled workmen, and thus enable them to add to the revenue and welfare of thin State therefore
Resolved, That we regard the letting of convict labor at too low rates not only a great personal injustice to honest labor but a damage to the best interest of the State, and consequently should be discontinued; and,
Resolved. That a Special Committee of Five be appointed to whom the subj ct shall be referred with instructions to suggest some remedy for the present system of employing convict labor.
The resolution was adopted, and the Speaker subsequently made the Committee to consist of Messrs, Schloss, Gibson, Wilson of Marion, Smith of Tippecanoe, Mering.
Mr. HELMS offered the following resolution:
Whereas, The late freshets have swept away all the fencing along the principal streams throughout the State of Indiana; and,
Whereas, Many of the farmers are not financially able to repair their fencing in time to plant and save their crops; therefore
Be it resolved, That a Committee of five members of this House be appointed by the Speaker to draft a bill to temporarily prevent stock from running at large along and adjacent to all such streams and present the same to this House for its action.
Mr. GIBSON and Mr. PATTEN heartily second the resolution, which was adopted, and the Speaker made the Committee to consist of Messrs. Helms, Robertson, Patten, McMullen and Shively.
Mr. CABBAGE offered a resolution which was agreed to, instructing the
By Mr. HEFFREN [H. R. 456] to legalize the appointment of special Judges and the special acts in special cases.
By Mr. HEFFREN [H. R. 457] to allow a bounty for the planting of yellow willow along the streams of Indiana, a protection against floods.
By Mr. KIRKPATRICK [H. R. 458] to provide for the feeds and salaries of a County Treasurers in the State of Indiana.
By Mr. WHITSIT, by request, [H. R. 459] to provide for the fees and salaries of County Treasurers.
By Mr. WHITSIT, by request, a resolution instructing our Senators and requesting our Representatives in Congress to use their influence for the passage of a bill increasing the pension of one-armed and one-legged soldiers.
The bill [S. 102] for the reorganization of
said Institution was reported back from the
Mr. HEFFREN moved that the bill be read the third time and put upon its passage.
Mr. DEEM moved to recommit the bill with instructions to amend the bill as to
read, "Soldiers'
The motion was laid on the table by yeas, 57; nays, 39.
Mr. WILSON, of Kosciusko, moved that the further consideration of the bill be indefinitely postponed.
On motion by Mr. HEFFREN the motion to postpone was laid on the table by yeas, 53; nays 41.
Mr, HEFFREN moved the previous question, which was seconded by the House, and under the operations thereof the bill was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 56; nays, 37.
Mr. HEFFREN moved to reconsider the vote on the passage of the bill and lay that motion on the table, which latter motion was agreed to by yeas, 55; nays, 40.
Mr. GRAHAM called for the special order, being his bill [H. R. 256] to provide a fund for the permanent endowment of the State University, and it was read the third time.
Mr. GILMAN hoped the bill would not pass the House. He was not in favor of taking the people of the whole State to endow an Institution that does not benefit more than 30 per cent of the people of the Stale.
Mr. GORDON said: Before the members vote upon this it would be proper to pause a moment and consider the magnitude of this question. This bill ought not to pass, for it is not in the interest of the general educational interests of the State. An appropriation of $90,000 annually for twelve years would be equivalent to taking a fund that would run the Common Schools of the State for three months. It is wrong in principle to appropriate this money. It is not for the benefit of the people of the entire State, and his tax should not be collected from the people of the whole State.
Mr. Wilson, of Kosciusko, hoped this bill will not pass, and in opposing it trusted no one will change him with not having proper respect for our educational interests, the provision of this bill for the endowment of this University are not such as he could support. There are thousands of people all over this State who are in debt for their homes and it would not be good financiering for us to attempt to raise this appropriation by taxing these people, who are already paying from 6 to 8 per cent. on their indebtedness.
Mr. MONTGOMERY hoped this bill will pass. As has been stated, her education interests are the pride of the State of Indiana. It would be prudent for us to vote this money for the permanent endowment of this Institution. One per cent on the $100 is a very small tax, and it would be expedient for us as the Legislature assembled here to vote this appropriation, that this Institution may be made a permanent Institution.
Mr. McMULLEN did not desire to detain the House long, but it appeared to him that this bill should pass. He thought no member would say that Indiana ought not to have a permanent University, one that will be the pride of the State. We must do as other States have done. We must profit by their example. He desired to tale to the gentleman from Putnam [Mr Gordon] that the tax for the coming year is not to be increased one cent by the provisions of this bill.
Mr. STUCKER opposed the passage of the bill.
Mr. MELLETT said: I am in favor of the passage of this bill. I can say for one that when I believes a measure is right, and that it is just, and that it is for the best interest of the State, that I can not refuse to support it, because I must meet my constituents hereafter. I believe that this measure is in the best interests and welfare of the State, and for this reason I am in favor of it. I think the time has come when the people of this State should be willing to endow this Institution.
Mr. K ESTER thought that if it is right to maintain this Institution it should be done in a credit table manner. He did not apprehend that this bill would cripple or influence the Common School Interests of the State in the least. He hoped that the bill would pass.
Mr MOODY spoke in favor of the bill.
Mr JEWETT moved the previous question, which was seconded by the House, and under the operations thereof-
The bill was rejected by yeas, 44; nays, 47.
and ordered engrossed for the third reading, viz.:
Mr. Frazer's bill [H. R. 68] to amend Section 97 of the Common School law, and [H. R. 69] to legalize the sale of certain lands.
Mr Spain's [HR 116] to amend Sections 216 and 217 of the act concerning public offenses.
Mr Shockney's [H. R. 155] to authorize the purchase of fireproof safes for County offices.
Mr. Shiveley's [411] concerning foreign Insurance Companies.
Mr. Montgomery's [415] concerning the distribution of property purchased of husband or wife.
Mr -'s [H. R. 416] to authorize the State Librarian to purchase legislative laws and journals.
Mr. Tuley's [H. R. 417] to legalize the recording of plots of land and lots.
Mr. Carr'y [H. R. 418] to legalize the incorporation of the town of Cherubusco, Whitley County.
The
Mr. HOLLER offered a resolution that the House grant ten minutes to Professor Campbell in which to explain his map of the survey of the Kankakee River.
On motion by Mr. FRAZER the resolution was amended by providing that time be given immediately after adjournment of the House.
The resolution as amended was adopted.
The House then adjourned.
The Senate met at 9 o'clock a. m.
On motion by Mr. COMPTON, the reading of the minutes was dispensed with, and his bill [S. 174] to extend the office of Supreme Court Commissioners was read the second time, and with an amendment by Mr. Voyles requiring the Commissioners to be selected one from each Supreme Court Judicial District, the bill was considered as engrossed, and under a dispensation of the Constitutional restriction by a two-thirds vote, read the third time and passed by yeas, 34; nays. 7.
Mr. WILLARD voting "no," because the bill would practically establish a new Court unknown to the Constitution.
On motion by Mr. WHITE his bill [S. 163] concerning County Teachers' Institutes, was read the second time and ordered engrossed.
Mr. VOYLES, from a majority of the Special Committee thereon, returned the bill fs 87] for the location of a new Insane Asylumn at Evansville, Vandergurg County, recommending the substitution of new matter, authorizing the Governor to appoint two Commissioners from each of the two political parties, who, with the Governor, shall select suitable sites over fifty miles from Indianapolis for three new Insane Hospitals on not exceeding 160 acres of land, Commissioners to be allowed $5 per day and expenses; $300,000 appropriated for 1883 and the same amount for 1884. The Board to appoint Superintendents of builings and also Superintendents of the Hospitals. No patient to be discharged until permanently cured. The capacity of each to be from 200 to 700 patients.
Mr. BELL, for the minority of the same Committee, recommended the passage of the bill reported by the majority, with the provision that one of the Asylums shall be located at Evansville signed by himself and Mr. Rahm.
Mr. VOYLES opposed naming any place for a location, as is proposed by the minority, and favored leaving this question in the hands of the Commissioners.
Mr. YANCEY believed, in justice to all concerned, that the minority report should prevail, inasmuch as the citizens of Evansville seem to have taken more kindly to the proposition for establishing another Insane Hospital than any other city in the State. Though it be in the pocket, that city should have justice dealt out to it.
Mr. ADKISON opposed the minority report, and saw nothing in the argument just advanced. That city may be more enterprising than many others, but he denied it had more interest in the unfortunates of the State than many other places, mentioned or not mentioned. It can afford to enter into with other places desiring the location of this Institution.
Mr. VAN VORHIS regretted feeling compelled to vote against the minority report-thus encumbering the bill with the selection of one location which would be unwise. If one is to be selected, all should; if only one, then none should be.
Mr. BELL conceded some force in the last remarks, and yet the minority report commends itself above such reasoning. In the discussion yesterday there was a decided feeling expressed in favor of locating one of these Asylums at Evansville, and that being a large center of population, easily and cheaply accessible, with other considerations, influenced the minority to bring in its report. There seems to be an agreement upon Evansville all over the southern part of the State. While there are so many cities in the northern part of the State seeking the location it is better to leave that interest in the hands of the proposed Commission.
Mr. BUNDY supposed both reports and favored the bill as originally introduced. He objected to expending several thousand dollars just to locate these Asylums when it can be better done by the General Assembly. As between the two reports, he preferred the minority, because it definitely locates.
Mr. BROWN called up a special order for this hour, being the consideration of his bill [S. 1] for the better management of the Benevolent Institutions of the State, and moved the passage of the bill, the Governor's veto to the contrary notwithstanding; and on that motion he demanded the previous question, which was seconded by yeas, 28; nays, 17.
Upon the operation thereof the bill passed by yeas, 26; nays, 21.
Mr. BROWN moved to reconsider the vote just taken, and to lay that motion on the table. The latter motion was agreed to.
Mr. DUNCAN, from the
The report was referred tot he
was announced by the Executive Messenger, as follows:
The day before yesterday several gentlemen who were appointed for the purpose
by the Board of Trade of Indianapolis appeared before the
It was referred to the
Mr. MAGEE called up a special order-the general appropriation bill [H. R. 302]- and demanded the previous question on its passage.
The bill was read the third time and passed by yeas, 30; nays, 15.
Mr. FAULKNER saying this is one of a class of bills he disliked to vote against, but believed there are provisions in it that will cause a blush of shame to tinge the cheek of many members before two years pass away.
Mr. MAGEE, from the
Mr. BROWN stated that the State House Commissioners recommend the allowance of this claim.
Mr. BUNDY was sure the recommendation of the Joint Committee in this matter should be sustained.
Mr. MAGEE, of the
Mr. VAN VORHIS said by reason of these plans the Commissioners were enabled to save probably $10,000.
On motion by Mr. BROWN the report of the Committee was concurred in by yeas, 35; nays, 12.
On motion by Mr. BROWN the Joint resolution allowing $10,000 to Mrs. Sarah May, widow of Edwin May, was read the first time. He moved that the Constitutional rule be suspended that the resolution be pressed to its passage now.
Mr. McCULLOUGH resisted the motion, claiming the measure to be unjust in several particulars, which he mentioned. The administrator should be the applicant; then there is a gratuity in this sum of over $7,000. This estate should be as every other. Claims should be collected for the benefit of heirs and creditors-not for the widow.
Mr. BROWN explained that Mr. May contracted indebtedness by reason of a contract with the State. The State has been the gainer by his death, by the appropriation of his work.
Mr. HILLIGASS regarded the way in which this claim is pressed as begging the question, understanding the State House Commissioners can settle it. The heirs and creditors will be barred against this money which will go direct to the widow.
Mr. VOYLES opposed the claim.
Mr. Magee had investigated the claim, and would not have favored it for the reasons referred to by the Senator from Washington [Mr. Voyles]-that of outside influence. The Commissioners made a hard contract with Mr. May, knowing of his necessities and taking advantage of them. Now, the State of Indiana can not afford to be unjust.
Mr. CAMPBELL was convinced this is an equitable claim, because the Chairman of the Committee stated it would have cost the State this sum had the architect lived. This is simply a question of equity.
Mr. VAN VORHIS after investigation could corroborate what is said by the Senator from St. Joseph [Mr. Campbell] that it is a just one, and it ought to be paid whether it can be collected or not.
Mr. BUNDY understands this claim has the unanimous indorsement of both the State
House Commissioners and the
The demand was seconded, and under the operations of the previous question he motion to suspend the Constitutional rule was rejected by yeas, 31; nays, 15, two-third not voting in the affirmative.
On motion by Mr. BROWN, the special order was taken up, being the bill [S. 102] for the reorganization of the Asylum for Feeble-Minded Children. He moved to concur in the House amendments, and demanded the previous question on that motion.
The Senate seconded the demand, and under the operations of the previous question the House amendments were read and concurred in by yeas, 27; nays, 16.
Then came a recess till 2 o'clock.
Mr. NULL, by consent, introduced a bill [S. 282] to divide the State into Congressional Districts, which was read the first time.
Mr. BROWN moved to reject the bill.
Mr. BELL desired to see the Congressional Districts remain as they are, but the late law of Congress providing for the members of the Forty-eighth Congress is so framed that it requires each State to re-district for representative purposes. We ought to re-enact the present law, so that there shall be no mistake about Indiana's representation in the next Congress. He did not favor the bill.
Mr. WILLARD would not oppose a bill, if there be a necessity, re-establishing the old apportionment. He hoped this bill would be rejected.
Mr. BROWN was not troubled with the fears entertained by the Senator [Mr. Bell]. A
simple
The demand was seconded, and under the operations of the previous question the motion to reject the bill was agreed to by yeas; 24; nays, 23.
Mr. RAHM, from the
Mr. SPANN thought this commission should employ men at $1.25 a day and thus extend relief and work at the same time to sufferers.
The Senate returned to the consideration of Mr. Rahm's bill [S. 87] for the creation of an additional Insane Asylum at Evansville.
Mr. McCULLOUGH favored concurrence in the minority report, and the selection of the location by the General Assembly, rather than to delegate that species of legislation to four or five men. Evansville has many advantages among others the purchasing of supplies, probably, more cheaply than in any other portion of the State. If a location is selected in any other part of the southern portion of the State, it would be doing injustice not only to Evansville, but also to the entire State. There is no reason why the location for the southern part of the State should not be fixed at Evansville.
Mr. VOYLES did not like to be placed in the attitude of favoring any one locality over another, and it is unjust to designate but one point in the bill, leaving others to be selected by a Committee.
Mr. MAGEE favored the minority report, and was very anxious to see the bill advanced to the final vote and passed.
Mr. FOULKE opposed the minority report. The theory of referring the question of selection to a Commission is that the claims of every locality may be fairly and justly considered, and one locality should not have any advantage over another. The minority report does not propose a logical or fair solution of the question: it simply would shut out the presentation of claims from other cities in the southern part of the State.
Mr. SPANN could not see the force of the argument just made. There should be no Hesitancy in adopting the minority report. Evansville is located in the proper place geographically and has all facilities for ingress and egress, besides the advantage of climate. Conceding these facts why not concur in the minority report &s the necessity is apparant for more and better accommodations for the insane? The same movements will be made before the Commission proposed to be created as have been made before this Senate: and as no city in Southern Indiana has come up here asking for an Asylum, except Evansville, that locality might as well be adopted and without further delay.
Mr. FLETCHER regarded Evansville as the only place the southern portion of the State for the location of one of these Asylums, from the fact it has among other advantages cheap building material, and a large population about it. In the northern portion of the State there are several sides presenting equal claims, a selection from which it may be well to leave to the Commission. He favored the minority report.
Mr. Van Voorhis contended if such be the case the matter can be safely left to the Commission because it can not go around Evansville as a location.
The minority report was concurred in by yeas, 33; nays, 14, and the majority report, as amended by the minority, was recommenced.
The bill, as amended, was ordered engrossed.
On motion by Mr. YOUCHE the House amendments to the Lake and Porter and Pulaski and Starke Court bill [S. 257] were concurred in, also the House amendments to the qualification of Jurors bill [S. 20] on motion by Mr. Overstreet.
On motion of Mr. ADKISON the bill [H. R. 329] to authorize the Auditor of State to issue patents m certain cases to the purchasers of Wabash and Erie Canal lands was read the first time.
On motion by Mr. FLETCHER the Constitutional rule was dispensed with-yeas, 38; nays, 6-and the bill [H. R. 52] to construct a sewer from the Female Reformatory down Market to New Jersey, and down New Jersey to connect with the Washington street sewer, or at the eastern end of the Washington street sewer-appropriating $30,000-was read the first time, and again by title.
Mr. VAN VORHIS opposed the route named in the bill as entirely impracticable.
Mr. FLETCHER moved to strike out the words "Market street" and insert in lien the words "Washington street" and insert "Pine street" instead of "New Jersey street."
The motion was agreed to.
The bill was read the third time and passed by yeas, 29; nays, 14,
Mr. BROWN, by request, moved to reconsider the vote of this afternoon rejecting Mr. Null's hill [S. 282] to divide the State into Congressional Districts (notwithstanding his opposition to the bill.
Mr. BELL favored the motion, and called attention to the late law cf Congress concerning Congressional apportionment.
Mr. HENRY conceived the purpose of the bill to be to re-district the State for Congressional purposes. Where no change has been made in the number of members from any one State the late law of Congress does not apply. Indiana is not affected by it in the least.
The motion to reconsider was agreed to by yeas, 25; nays, 22.
Mr. BROWN withdrew his motion to reject.
The bill was referred to the
On motion by Mr. SAYRE the bill [H. R. 103] concerning liens of mechanics and laboring men was read the first time.
Mr. VOYLES called up his motion, notice of which he gave the other day, to amend Rule No. 54 so that the daily "order of business shall be suspended upon a majority vote of the Senators present," instead of a two-thirds vote, as the rule now requires. He demanded the previous question.
The Senate seconded the demand by yeas, 24; nays, 20 and under the operations thereof, the motion to change the rules was agreed to by yeas, 27; nays, 20.
Mr. BELL, by consent, introduced a bill [S. 283] to abolish the Criminal Court of Allen County on the first day of January, 1884, which was read the first time.
Mr. BELL moved for a suspension of the Constitutional rule, that the bill may be
pressed to the final vote now. The motion was agreed to-yeas, 44; nays, 0-
On motion by Mr. WHITS, the bill [H. R. 408] to amend Sections 7, 21 and 41 of the Common School law, was read the first time.
Mr. HOWARD, by consent, introduced a bill [S. 284] to amend an act amendatory of
the decedents' estates act, being Section 2,484 of the Revised Statutes. [Relating
to the protection of bona fide purchasers of real estate, where wife in second
marriage joins in conveyance, providing that she or her heirs shall not claim
interest in such estate after conveyance without restitution of payments made and
for value of necessary improvements thereon.] It was read the first time and
referred to the
Mr. VOYLES from a majority of the
Mr. VAN VORHIS from a majority of the same Committee, submitted a report declaring
that the bill proposes to take from Indianapolis the right of self-government, and
the right to choose the instruments by which good order may be preserved, and compel
them to submit to that most vicious, outrageous and unjust policy of taxation
without representation. It may force the city to expenditures beyond the limit
prescribed by law; it increases the public expenses of the city more than $25,000,
and thus reduces the outlay for fire protection, street lights, sanitary provision,
etc., etc. It is a plain and bold proposition to organize the police force for
partisan purposes, and to give the Democratic State officers control of a large
amount of money without accounting to anybody for its expenditure, which they may
expend without any pretext whatever in connection with the police. The bill is
vicious in principle and tyrannical in effect, loosely and imperfectly drawn so as
not in any way to protect the city. The report recommends its indefinite
postponement, and is signed by three members of the
Mr. BROWN moved to make the bill and reports the special older for 2:15 o'clock to morrow.
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. JOHNSTON offered a concurrent resolution to supply officers who may have lost the statutes by flood or overflow with other copies on application to the Secretary of State.
It was adopted.
The Senate adjourned.
The SPEAKER commanded order and announced prayer by the Rev. Mr. Mitchell, of Indianapolis.
On motion by Mr. GREEN, the reading of the Clerk's minutes of the previous day was dispensed with.
Mr. Gibson's bill [H. R. 222] concerning the sale of intoxication liquors, was
reported back from the
Mr. GIBSON moved that 200 copies of the bill "be printed, and that it be made special order for next Friday at 10 o'clock.
Mr. SCHLOSS demanded a division of the question.
The motion to print 200 copies was agreed to.
Mr. PATTEN objected to making the bill a special order unless it was a measure of great importance.
The motion to make the bill a special order was rejected.
The bill was read the second time.
Mr. SHOCKNEY made an ineffectual motion to reconsider the vote by which the motion to make the bill a special order for next Friday at 10 o'clock was rejected.
Mr. MELLETT offered an amendment to Section 9 by striking out;"200" and inserting "$1,000" in lieu thereof, so as to make County license $1,000 instead of $200, as in the original bill.
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. DEEM moved to amend the bill by inserting a provision to deny an appeal from the decision of the County Commissioners.
Mr. JEWETT moved to amend by striking out of Section 5 the following words: "But no appeal shall be had from said Board dismissing application."
the amendment was agreed to.
Mr. JEWETT moved to amend by striking out "200" in Section 9, and inserting "100" in lieu thereof.
Mr. HEFFREN moved that the bill and amendments lie on the table until the printed copies are before the members.
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. Thompson's bill [H. R. 349] to authorise the Auditor of State to issue patents in
certain cases, was reported back from the
Mr. THOMPSON explained that the persons to whom these patents are to be granted have-owned and held this land-Wabash and Erie Canal land for over forty years and have paid the taxes on said land, but have discovered that they have no title to the same.
On motion toy Mr. SMITH the Constitutional restrictions were suspended, and the bill was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 91; nays, 1.
On motion by Mr. HEFFREN the Constitutional rules were suspended, and the following described Senate bills were read the first and second time by titles only, and severally referred to appropriate Committees:
The bill [S. 136] to amend Sections 5,47 a ad 5,480 of the Code of 1881, regulating coal mines.
The bill [S. 107] to define powers of attorneys and concerning the recording of the same.
The bill [S. 57] to amend Section 280 of an act concerning proceedings in civil cases, approved April 1, 1881.
The bill [S. 52] to amend Sections 6,487, 6,496 and 6,497 of the Revised Statutes of 1881 of an act concerning taxation.
The bill [S. 72] to amend Section 2 of an act to provide for the establishment of a State Bureau of Statistics approved March 29, 1879.
The bill [S.
The bill [S. 27] to regulate the practice of medicine.
The bill [S. 43] to amend Section 30 of an act fixing fees of certain officers, approved March 12, 1875.
The bill [S. 196] to amend Sections 9, 38, 47 and 76 of an act to divide the State into Judicial Districts.
The bill [S. 17] to make a contract with the city of Michigan City for constructing a sewer from the Indiana Prison and emptying it into the harbor.
The bill [S. 47] to provide for the construction of a sewer from the Indiana Reformatory Institution to connect with a sewer of Indianapolis.
The bill [S. 114] to amend Section 6,454 of the Code of 1881, concerning the publication of delinquent tax lists.
The bill [S. 167] to define the Twentieth
Judi
The bill [S. 170] to create Forty-fourth Judicial Circuit, to amend Sections 22 and 23 of an act to divide the State into Judicial Circuits.
The bill [S. 234] to change the Second Judicial Circuit.
The bill [S. 244] to legalize certain records in the offices of Town Recorders.
The bill [S. 10] to legalize the incorporation of the town of Waynetown, Montgomery County, Indiana.
The bill [S. 174] concerning the Supreme Court.
The bill [S. 145] to amend Section 4,425 of the Code of 1881, concerning the granting of licenses to teachers.
The bill [S. 162] to create an Appellate Court.
The bill [S. 203] to authorize the Trustees of the Deaf and Dumb Asylum to convey a strip of ground on the south side of said premises.
The bill [S. 50] to extend the official terms of Directors of the Northern Prison, was read the third time and passed by yeas, 65; nays, 37.
The bill [S. 219] to authorize water and Gas Companies to extend their mains five miles beyond the corporate limit of cities and towns was read the third time.
Mr. WILSON, of Marion, favored the passage of the bill. He thought it would be of great value to the large manufacturing establishments situated outside of the limits of the city. Its benefit would extend to the Benevolent Institutions which were situated near the city.
Mr. SHOCKNEY hoped the bill would pass. It is a just and equitable measure. In his city the Water Works are located on the Indiana side, while nearly 2,000 of the population and many of their manufactories are located on the Ohio side, thus preventing the extension of mains across the line (as the law now is), and preventing protection to nearly one-half of their population. If this bill becomes a law under its provisions, large factories, machine shops, and suburban towns can be benefited by the Water Works of towns and cities.
The bill passed by yeas, 88; nays, 0.
The bill [S. 193] to extend the jurisdiction of Justices of the Peace to amend Section 1,418 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, was read the third time.
Mr. WILSON, of Marion, believed that a bill of much more merit was introduced by some members of the House a few days since. He was sorry that this bill has got as far as it has. It would only give such cities as Indianapolis, Fort Wayne, Evansville and New Albany one Justice of the Peace. That will not be sufficient. They must have more than that.
Mr. STERRITT was of the opinion that the bill referred to by the gentleman from Marion [Mr. Wilson] was of much more merit than the bill under consideration. It provides for one Justice of the Peace for every 20,000 inhabitants.
Mr. SMITH, of Tippecanoe, was opposed to this bill provided the bill referred to by the gentleman from Marion [Mr. Wilson] could be passed.
Mr. WHITSIT thought this was a good bill, and one that would suit the people of Indianapolis.
Mr. MELLETT thought the fewer the Justices the more highly they would be appreciated. One Justice of the Peace for each little incorporated town in the State is a nuisauce-one more than is necessary. It seemed to him that four Justices of the Peace in connection with the Mayor is sufficient in Indianapolis.
Mr. MONTGOMERY said: In my opinion this is a good bill and ought to pass this House. I think that a reduction of the Justices of the Peace would be equitable and desirable.
The bill was rejected by yeas, 29; nays, 58.
Mr. SHIVELY from the
The bill [S. 5] supplemental to an act concerning the publication of the Revised Statutes, providing pay for the Revision Commissioner, was read the third time and passed by yeas, 78; nays, 4.
The bill [S. 134] to permit municipal taxes to be paid in installments as County and State taxes are paid on the third Monday in April and November, was read the third time and passed by yeas, 76; nays, 17.
The
Mr. HEFFREN moved to take up the message of the Senate concerning the bill [S. 1] for the better government of the Benevolent Institutions of the State.
Mr. FRAZER moved to lay the motion on the table, which motion was rejected by yeas, 38; nays, 57.
The motion [Mr. Heffren's] was agreed to.
The message from the Senate stating that that body had passed the bill [S. 1] to provide for the better government and management of the State Benevolent Institutions, over the objections of the Governor, was read.
The message of the Governor to the Senate, containing his objections to the provisions of the bill, was also read.
Mr. HUSTON moved that the further consideration of the bill be indefinitely postponed.
The SPEAKER ruled the motion out of order, and stated that the question was on the
passage
The bill passed the House by yeas, 57; nays, 42.
Mr. Deem deemed to have a motion entered, on the journal to reconsider the vote by which Mr. Mellett's amendment to Section 9 of bill [H. R 222] and Mr. Jewett's amendment to Section 5 of the same bill were adopted.
The motion was entered on the journal.
By consent, Mr. COPELAND, from the Special Committee appointed to visit the flooded districts, exhibited a report of the conditions and necessities of the same, that the Committee had visited Jeffersonville, Aurora, Lawrenceburg and New Albany. He found in the several points visited hundreds of persons thrown out of employment and dependent upon charity for support, and recommend the passage of the bill appropriating $l00,000 for the relief of the flooded districts.
Mr. PATTEN introduced bill [H. R. 461] to create the Forty-third Judicial Circuit, and to amend Sections 15, 16 and 53 of an act dividing the State into Judicial Circuits. On his further motion, the Constitutional rules were suspended, the bill read the second time by title, considered engrossed, read the third time by sections and passed the House by yeas, 91; nays, 3.
The bill [S. 197] to amend an act to divide the State into Judicial Circuits, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 80; nays, 5.
The bill[S. 118] to amend Section 1,407 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, of the Justice's act, as applying to changes of venue, way read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 74; nays, 8.
The bill [S. 89] to amend Section 5,501 of the Revised Statutes of 1881 to provide for a general system of Common Schools was read the third time.
Mr. SMITH, of Tippecanoe, stated that the Committee was of the opinion that this bill is unnecessary, that it was superfluous and would only cumber the statutes.
Mr. TULEY stated that the Superintendent of Public Instruction favored the passage of this bill.
The bill passed the House by yeas, 71; nays, 12.
The bill [S. 192] to legalize the incorporation of the town of Cadiz in Henry County was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 69; nays, 5.
The bill [S. 22] to amend Section 5,097 of an act approved March 3, 1881, to authorize Boards of County Commissioners to construct gravel and other roads, was read the third time.
Mr. SHIVELY desired to state that under the present law a County is only allowed to issue $100,000 in bonds and that; many Counties had exhausted this amount. This bill would give relief to those Counties which desire to increase their bonds, and allow them to issue bonds not to exceed 1 1/2 per cent on the taxable property of the I County. He thought that the bill should pass.
Mr. SMITH had received quite a number of petitions from persons desiring the passage of the bill.
The bill passed the House by yeas, 69; nays, 19.
The bill [S. 2] to authorize Turnpike Companies in this State to connect their roads with turnpike roads in other States was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 77; nays. 3.
The bill [S. 203] to authorize the Trustees of the Deaf and Dumb Asylum to convey a strip of ground on south side of said premises, was read he third time.
Mr. JEWETT thought the bill ought not to pass. He was informed that it was an attempt on the part of the Pennsylvania Company to grab this piece of ground.
Mr. GIBSON stated hat the
Mr. MERING stated that this Company desire to lay a second track out to a point at which they propose to erect new shops. It will be necessary for them to secure this ground. The provisions of the bill are that the Trustees may dispose of this ground to the Company either for money or for improvements rendered by the Company.
Mr. HOWLAND was of the opinion that the wall which the Company agree to build would be of great benefit to the Asylum property, and it was not necessary for the Company to construct this was to protect their own property. He favored the passage of the bill.
Mr. SHOCKNEY believed that should this bill pass and the Pennsylvania Company erect the proposed shops it would greatly increase the value of the Asylum property. He favored the passage of the bill.
Mr. SUTTON believed that the bill bad never been before the
Mr. SCHLOSS thought that the proposition made by the Company to erect the stone wall along the grounds was a good one.
Mr. SMITH, of Tippecanoe, could see no objections to the measure if the Company desired to lay a double track. He was not certain but that the Company had adopted the proper plan in coming before the Legislature with their proposition.
Mr. ANTRIM was opposed to the bill not because it was a railroad that desires to purchase its ground, but because the bill did not specify the consideration to be paid for the strip of ground.
Mr. FRAZER thought simply because it was a Railroad Company that desired to purchase this ground that ought not to be an objection.
Mr; PATTEN was in favor of postponing this matter.
Mr. BEST did not favor the passage of the bill.
The bill was rejected by yeas, 34; nays, 62.
The bill [S. 88] to amend Sections 31 and 34 of an act to authorize the formation of companies for the detection and apprehension of horse thieves, approved December 21, 1865, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 62; nays 22.
The House adjourned until to-morrow at 9 o'clock.
The reading of the minutes was dispensed with.
On motion by Mr. COMPTON his bill [S. 45] to incorporate the Commercial Bank, was read the second time and ordered engrossed.
On motion by Mr. LOCKRIDGE his bill [S. 151] to amend Section 5,852 of the Revised Statutes was read the second time.
Mr. LOCKRIDGE explained the bill simply provides penalties in case Clerks, Treasurers and Sheriffs-officers having charge of public monies-fail to pay over such monies into the hands of their successors in office.
The bill passed the Senate by yeas,
Mr. VOYLES moved to dispense with the Constitutional rule that his bill [S. 173] supplemental to the fee and salary act, may be passed through two readings and to the final vote. He explained it would prevent, constructive fees-officers violating its provisions may be removed on application of any taxpayers. The charging of any constructive or excessive fee by a County or Township official is made a cause of civil action on the part of the person insured, who may recover damages, in addition to the amount overcharged, of not less than $10 nor more than $30.
The motion was agreed to-yeas, 36: nay, 4-and accordingly the bill was read the second time by title only.
Mr. GRAHAM moved to amend the bill by appropriately inserting the words; "Knowingly tax, receive or demand any fee to which he is not entitled by the law now in force," and substituting for "taxpayer" the words, "freeholder feud resident."
Mr. MAGEE favored the first eight sections of the bill, but objected to giving the right to every taxpayer to have an officer removed-the 9th Section should be amended as Section 8 provides sufficient penalties.
Mr SPANN moved to strike out Section 9.
Mr. GRAHAM opposed this motion. It seems certain no legislation will be had on the fee and salary question this session that will amount to much. The trouble has been the abuse of the fee and salary law. In some Counties officers are receiving three and four times as much as the law allows. Section 8 does not impose a sufficient penalty. This leaves the fee bill as it is but says if officers tax any more than they may be removed from office. If this amendment and this bill prevail, it will be sure to stop this evil so much complained of all over the State. He referred to the Clerk of a comparatively small County, who is receiving and demanding amount $15,000 a year. Under the present law these officers can demand almost any fee they choose to tax. He desired to do all he could to prevent these abuses and hoped there was virtue enough in the Senate to restrain the ravages of County officers upon the people of this State.
Mr. VOYLES referred to the fact that Section 8 provides for a civil remedy, and if it be the will of the Senate to strike out Section 9 still the bill will go a long way in advance. If that Section is retained it probably should be amended.
Mr. SAYRE regarded Section 9 as of not very great importance. If it be said this bill is accumulating penalties it is nothing more than what public officers have done by accumulating fees. Section 8 will be sufficient to restrain the taxation and collection of illegal fees. He favored the retention of Section 9, though the remainder of the bill will be productive of as much good as any law which has received the attention of the Senate this session.
The motion to strike out Section 9 was agreed to by yeas, 83; nays, 11.
The bill was considered engrossed, read the third lime and passed by yeas, 45; nays, 0.
Mr. GRAHAM regarding it as a piece of useless yet harmless legislation.
On motion by Mr. FLETCHER his bill [S. 101] to prevent frauds in the adulteration of sugars was read the second time, with Committee amendments.
Mr. VAN VORHIS questioned whether there is much to be gained by the bill, except a
lucrative field for the State Chemist, and whether there would be any benefit at all
to the consumer. He favored this class of legislation, but of all other
Mr. McCLURE, so far as this bill is concerned, could see no practical advantage to be derived from it. The retail merchants, to be safe from prosecution, would have to obtain an analysis of all syrups and sugars sold by them. In order to know they would not violate the law. He opposed the bill.
Mr. FLETCHER stated the following points in favor of the bill: There is scarcely a
pure syrup or sugar sold. Glucose and other matters of adulteration are frequently
injurious to health. Adulteration often exists in syrups as great as 90 per cent.
Sugar 10 to 20 per cent, one house in Chicago using 20,000 bushels of corn per day for
sugar and syrup adulteration. The starch sugar costs less than four centers per pound,
but used for adulteration sells for eight to ten cents per pound. The bill does not
make the adulteration unlawful. It demands that the quantity of adulteration shall be
made known to the purchaser. The method of securing analysis and labels is precisely
the same as on use for determining commercial fertilizers. It encourages the sugar
industry in Indiana, encourages home growth and manufacture, and enables the Indiana
farmer in making pure sugar and syrup and to dispose of such pure goods without the
competition of cheap adulterations, sold as pure, at fancy prices. It protects all
retail dealers. It works no hardship on dealers without the State who do an honest
business. There are not exceeding a dozen sugar refineries in the Union, and these
make perhaps six different grades of sugar. All the analysis any one refinery would
have to make would be these, and these once made would be good indefinitely for that
grade or brand. Grades of straight syrups are even fewer. Refiners would have, of
course, to make analyses for the various wholesale dealers using their goods in
Indiana. The bill does not take a single dollar out of the public treasury of Indiana.
After a careful examination by the
On motion by Mr. BENZ the Senate took up the bill [H. R. 419] for relief of sufferers by the flood.
Mr. VOYLES moved to amend by allowing of a reasonable sum to be applied in rendering habitable the recently overflowed houses of persons reduced to straightened and distressed circumstances.
Mr. SPANN offered a substitute, authorizing the employment of worthy persons to assist in restoring the sanitary condition of the flooded districts, and righting up the property of the destitute, thus accomplishing a double purpose-assisting the distressed, and at the same time relieving the wants of the worker's family.
Mr. HENRY thought the able-bodied citizens who receive relief should be required to assist the destitute to fix up their homes-that is a much better way. The Committees in the various towns can better direct the work in their own towns. It would be an unsafe thing to allow this Commission to hire men.
Mr. BENZ opposed the amendment. Each town has its own
Mr. McCLURE believed these matters should be left to the
Mr. BROWN was inclined to the opinion that the bill had better be left alone, having full confidence in the Commission. It is more capable of doing what ought to be done than the Legislature. These amendments may tend to defeat the bill. He desired to see the bill passed as it came from the House.
Mr. SPANN withdrew his substitute-not desiring to endanger the passage of the bill.
Mr. VOYLES explained the object of his amendment to be to fix more certainly some of the duties of the Relief Commission.
Mr. HENRY: The best argument that the amendment should not go in is that Senators representing the flooded district are opposed to it.
Mr. MAY, living in the flooded district, believed the appropriation should not be restricted by the proposed amendment; the local Relief Committee should be left free to act as they think best in such matters.
The amendment [Mr. Voyles'] was rejected.
Mr. RAHM had a talk with the Commissioners, especially the Governor, who recommended no greater appropriation than $60,000, which would be used in relieving the sufferers in any way the Commissioners may see fit, and that is the reason he consented to the reduction.
Mr. HENRY offered the Committee amendment adopted yesterday (but left out in the engrossment), reducing the amount appropriated from $100,000 to $60,000.
This amendment was agreed to by yeas, 21; nays, 20.
On motion by Mr. HENRY the bill was read the third time-
Mr. MARVIN voted against the other bill, for the reason lie didn't believe any law authorize the vote of a dollar in this way, and he should vote against this bill for this and other reasons.
Mr. VAN VORHIS thought it directly in the line of duty for the State to take care of her poor.
Mr. GRAHAM: It is the duty of the Legislature to practice economy, but not to shut its eyes to suffering.
Mr. DUNCAN: The duty of taking care of the poor devolves upon Boards of County Commissioners, but a great public calamity has befallen the people so that the local authorities can not provide for the wants of those persons; and in such cases the Legislature has the power.
Mr. SPANN had not seen anything to change his opinion, as a lawyer and as a Senator, that the principle of voting this money is a wrong one, and will return to plague the people of this State in the future.
The bill passed by yeas, 37; nays, 7, with an amendment of title striking out $100,000 and inserting $60,000 in lieu.
Mr. YOUCHE, by consent, introduced a bill [S. 285], to legalize a term of Court held in Pulaski County in June, 1881, which was read the three times under a setting aside of the Constitutional restriction by a two-thirds vote, and passed the Senate by yeas, 41; nays, 1.
Mr. BICHOWSKY stated that about eight days ago a bill was passed fixing a term of
the Vigo County Court on the 1st day of May, 1883. There is a term pending which the
provisions of the new bill cut off. There are from thirty to thirty-five prisoners in
the Jail awaiting trial, and on this account there was a supplemental bill [H. R. 461] introduced and passed the House
yesterday, providing that the first term for this year shall commence on the 1st of
March. As the time is short, he moved for a suspension of the Constitutional rule that
the bill may be passed the Sen
Mr. YOUCHE, by consent, introduced by a bill [S. 256] to provide for the drainage of
certain swamp lands, [to create a State Board of Drainage, viz: the Governor, Attorney
General and two citizens resident in the Kankakee Valley] which was read the first
time, no copies ordered printed, and referred to the
On motion by Mr. McCULLOUGH his bill [S. 19] defining unjust discriminations of railroads in rates of charges for transportation of freight or passengers, was read the second time with a Committee report recommending that it lie on the table.
Mr. McCULLOUGH: He nor the people he represented have no quarrel with the railroads, but there are many unlawful wrongs being perpetuated by Railroad Companies, which, the Legislature of Indiana must consider and right sooner or later, and the sooner the better in justice both to the people of the State and to the Railroad Companies. His bill does not propose to fix any rate per mile, but to prevent charging more for conveying twenty five miles than for conveying fifty miles, or as much for conveying twenty-five as for thirty miles. There is not a clause in the bill prohibiting a Railroad Company from doing anything but what is palpably unlawful tinder the present law. The person overcharged may recover that amount, and in addition a sum sufficent to pay the expenses of the suit. In the decision of all Courts, wherever the question has arisen, it has uniformly been decided, and the Courts have held that railroads have no right to make the discriminations they do make, and that everybody knows they make Railroad men generally admit that they do make discriminations such as are in violation of law, but there is no excuse for the Legislature to permit it. Every time a Railroad Company violates the provisions of this bill they violate the law as effectually as a mob that would stop their trains. It is not justice to the people of the State that they should come continually to the Courts, as they do, claiming the protection of the State. Why, they themselves say, "We will not obey the laws of the State." The Legislature will be recreant to its trusts if it does not come speedily to the relief of the people of the State and stop the gross, outrageous and unlawful discrimination continually being perpetuated by Railroad Companies. He spoke at length in opposition to concurrence in the report of the Committee.
Mr CAMPBELL cemented it was the duty of the General Assembly to throw round th
people a protection from outrages and unjust railroad discriminations. He bad no
desire to wage war upon the railroads, but the magnitude of this problem deserves
careful consideration, which urged the Senate to give to this Question, His bill
says but little on the railroad legislation, out proposes a Railroad Commisison with
instructions to prevent unjust railroad discrimination. There is a necessity for
arbitration between railroads themselves, as there is a necessity for arbitration of
railroads and the people. There is unjust and extortionate charges made between
intermediate points by nearly all Railroad Companies, and some thing should be clone
for the correction of the evil. Iowa, Illinois, Michigan, Ohio and various other
States have similar Commissions, but the best of all is the one in Georgia, from
which his bill is made up. This plan has been in operation in Georgia since
On motion by Mr. Rahm, the bill [S. 81] for the erection of three new Insane Asylums-one to be located at Evansville described in Senate proceedings early yesterday-was read the third time: and passed by yeas 37; nays, 8.
On motion by Mr. Voyles, the Governor's veto of his bill [S. 91] for the more efficient government of the Indiana reform School for Boys, was read. Some of His Excellency's objections are: The terms of office of all but one of the Trustees of the House of Refuge have expired. Dr. William Freeman runs under the appointment until as March 1, 1885 The present bill, however, puts an end to Dr. Freeman's term of office. I refuse to make myself a party to this proceeding, which I would do by giving my approval to the bill now returned. Section 13 provides that boys, for whatever cause committed, may at any time be discharged or released on trial by the Board of Control. In the case of a person convicted of crime, it not being treason or a case of impeachment, the power of pardon resides under the Constitution in the Governor. The Governor may pardon absolutely or conditionally, but the power can not be transferred by the Legislature to any other person or to any body of persons. It is not pleasant to be obliged to differ from a majority of the Legislature on the propriety of the passage of a bill, but it seems to me to be a plain duty to return this bill with an earnest expression of disapproval.
Mr. SPANN hoped the Governor's veto would be sustained. He could not sit by and see such a wrong perpetuated simply for party purposes. The history of this State has not shown so much iniquitous legislation purely and simply for partisan purposes as has been enacted this session. The bill legislates out of office men who have done their duty well and faithfully. There has been no charge against any of them one of them, in whom there is no guile, a brother of a former Governor, who has been honored since his inception into politics, and now in his old age when he asked as a crumb that he be continued in office; they turned out to die, because he would not be controled and whipped in like a dog by Democratic caucuses. Where is the necessity of legislating Finley Bigger out of office? Only for the purpose of satisfying the greed of a party which has been out of power for twenty years. Then it legislates out of office a soldier, who has done his whole duty. The history of the future will bear out toe prophecy that in the next two years soar reformatory institutions will need investigation. Then he believed the bill to be of doubtful Constitutionality.
Mr. FOULKE would leave to Democratic conscience the propriety of passing a bill which purpose it is to legislate out of office an old soldier, who has performed faithfully his duties: but there is a question beyond that the question of the Constitutionality of this bill. It has been claimed all doubt; should be given on the side of the Constitution and against our right to legislate, but in this case there is no doubt the provision against the Constitutionality of this bill is as plain as black and white. The lower of pardon is placed by the Constitution exclusively in the hands of the Governor, while under this bill the Board of Control of this Institution may discharge or release on trial. That can be done by no power in the world but the Executive, and by the letter of the law that bill is unconstitutional.
Mr. VOYLES was surprised any good lawyer would say there was any question at, all
of a Constitutional character. This section now objected to has been in the law for
sixteen years last past. This bill is a fair and just revision of all laws
Mr. YANCEY opposed the bill because it is not of his political complexion. He would not object go seriously in turning out Union soldiers occasionally if the Democratic party were not so much in the habit of turning in soldiers who fought on the other side. To day there are Benevolent Institutions governed by men who did everything in then power to destroy the institutions of their country.
Mr. BUNDY: Compared with some political measures thrust upon us this session, this is a small affair. It is not pretended that the provisions of this bill are an improvement upon the laws of the Statute books. It is policy of Democrats to fill the offices if they can get the. The Insane Asylum of the State of Indiana, so far as subordinate positions are concerned, is a House of Refuge for the Confederate Army. The bill is an outrage and ought not to pass.
Mr. GRAHAM made an objection to the bill when before the Senate originally, that it was in violation to the Constitution. It might prove a serious matter if by this bill this Institution should be left without any government at all. The Senator from Cass the other day admitted the purpose of the bill was to change its management. The Institution was going along very well and there is no complaint of the Statute. governing this Institution. Is not this bill an infamous and high handed outrage, and is there not virtue enough on the Democratic side of the Chamber to say we will go no further in this direction? In the light of this bill he felt like prophesying that in both ends of this General Assembly in two years from now instead of a Democratic a Republican majority will be found.
Mr. HILLIGASS deprecated the wide range of this discussion, especially its political direction. He referred to seven Democratic Senators with honorable discharges from the Union Army, and comes with bad grace for their fellow Senators to charge them with standing cheek by jowl with Confederate soldiers, and that there is nothing that can be admired in the Democratic party. WE have set patiently and listened to such tirades day in and day out till forbearance ceases to be a virtue. He demanded the previous question.
The demand was seconded by yeas, 28; nays, 19, and under the operations of the previous question the bill was passed, the Governor's objections to the contrary notwithstanding, by yeas, 28; nays, 20.
The Senate then adjourned.
Mr. HELMS introduced a bill [H. R. 462] to amend Section 2,537 of Revised Statutes of 1881, to provide for the running at large of all kind of stock.
Mr. CAMPBELL moved that the Constitutional rules be suspended that that bill be pressed to the final vote.
Mr. PATTEN opposed the motion. It is not such a bill as ought to pass this House. It is simply making bad worse.
Mr. CAMPBELL: If this bill is not such as should pass the House he would like for the gentleman from Sullivan [Mr. Patten] to tell the House what kind of a bill the House should pass for the relief of those persons who are petitioning for relief.
Mr. SHIVELY hoped that the rules would be suspended and the bill put upon its passage.
The rule was suspended by yeas, 70; nays, 17, and the bill was read the second time by title, and the third time by sections.
Mr. PATTEN did not think the bill would remedy the evil it was intended to. The bill preposes to prevent the County Commissioners from restraining animals running at large. Its purpose is to relieve those persons, who have lost their fencing by the floods, and when it is carefully examined it will be found to compel those men who have suffered from this flood to stop and make fencing to keep up their own stock. Whenever a true attempt was made to relieve the suffering he was always willing and ready to lend his assistance, but this bill will undoubtedly work a hardship on a great many persons. A great many tenant farmers have their hogs and sheep running at large, and it would be unjust to cause them to keep them up. It is the poor class of men and the tenant farmers that need legislation.
Mr. MUTZ was astonished that any member would get up here and oppose this measure in the favor of the poor man's cow. No good farmer or good tenant ever fails to have rails enough to fence up his own stock. The people along the Flat Rock and Blue Rivers, being his constituents, have appealed to him to secure the passage of such a law in order that they might have an opportunity to save their crops. He moved the previous question on the passage of the bill.
The demand was seconded, and, under the operations of the previous question, the bill was rejected by yeas, 41; nays, 52.
Mr. SHIVELY entered a motion to reconsider the vote.
The bill [S. 121] to legalize the acts of a certain voluntary association in Vanderburg County was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 88; nays, 4.
The bill [S. 17] to make a contract with Michigan City for the construction of a sewer from the State Prison North to Lake Michigan was read.
Mr. FRAZEE desired the bill should become a law, believing it to be an absolute necessity for sanitary reasons.
It passed the House by yeas, 81; nays, 8.
Mr. McMullen's bill [H. R. 4] to amend Sections 695, 696 and 697of an act concerning proceedings in civil cases was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 89; nays, 0.
Mr. Antrim's bill [H. R. 14] to require all companies and corporations to make settlement and payment to their employes at least once every thirty days, being read the third time.
Mr. ANTRIM stated that the bill was not introduced through any animosity to the companies or corporations, but it subject is simply to compel such companies and associations to settle with their employes at least once every thirty days. The employes in this part of the State had suffered great injustice by the companies, getting behind with said employes, and when they received their money not getting but a small per cent. of the amount actually due them for their labor. If this bill works any hardships it is simply a question of whether the Company is to sustain that hardship or whether it will continue to be imposed upon the laboring men, who are the least able to sustain it, and who can not command credit. The penalty is not to crush the Company, but simply to compel them to pay every honest debt to its employes. He knew men in his own County last winter to whom a certain company were owing $200 and yet that man did not have enough money to buy his family a turkey dinner on Christmas Day. He desired to ask if this is right? The bill is in the interest of a class of men who are not filling the lobbies and working in the interest of this measure, but they are our constituents, and we are here to work for them just as much as for the interests of the wealth of our State, and they deserve just as much at our hands.
Mr. WILSON, of Marion, was a sympathetic man
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, thought this unwise legislation. It smacks too much of that old English law of imprisonment for debt. He did not think the author intended any unwise or unjust legislation, but he was satisfied that the bill would work unjustly against the companies and corporations. A Railroad Company might have trouble in negotiating a loan or the pay can be unavoidably delayed, or the Company suffer temporary embarrassment, and in such cases the money that otherwise would go to the employes would go into the State Treasury or to pay an attorney fee.
Mr. MOODY could not see where the bill would work a hardship. It simply provides that these companies, corporations or associations should pay their employes once every thirty days. And why not, when the law presents a penalty for a man not paying his note when it is due? There is nothing wrong about this bill, and it should pass.
Mr. MONTGOMERY was one of the Committee that made a unanimous report in favor of the passage of this bill. He thought it should become a law. He thought it was in the interest of the laboring constituents of every member of the House, and he did not think it would be a hardship for the companies to pay once every thirty days.
Mr. PATTEN could not see anything very wrong in compelling companies and corporations to pay their debts once every thirty days- to pay for the labor that created their capital. He thought that the principle of this legislation is right. These employes furnished the muscle, the skill and the labor to create this capital, and they should have the first earnings.
Mr. JEWETT favored the principles embodied in this bill, and would very much like to see corporations and companies compelled to bay their debts in a reasonable time, but it appeared to him that this bill was not sufficiently guarded, and that the corporations, under the provisions of this bill, may be made liable for their own misfortunes.
With the consent of the House Mr. JEWETT offered the following amendment, by adding to the last section a proviso: "That any corporation, association or joint-stock company may be exempted from the penalties of the act upon application showing good cause by order of the Judge of the Circuit Court of any County in which said corporation, association or company may at the time be engaged in business." He was willing to take the statement of the gentleman from Miami [Mr. Antrim] who has by his course on this floor shown himself to be a good lawyer, that this is a good bill. This bill is just to the workingmen, and Heaven knows there is little enough legislation for these men.
Mr. MELLETT favored the passage of the bill with the amendment. He thought that some legislation on this subject was necessary. He believed that the sentiment of the House was in favor of the passage of the bill, and he hoped no copious objection would be made to any amendment that might be made.
Mr. Jewett's amendment was adopted, and on his motion the amendment was considered engrossed and the bill passed the House by yeas, 84; nays, 7.
Mr. McMULLEN moved to take up the bill [H. R. 91] concerning the relocation of County seats-Jennings County Court House bill-and which bill failed to pass on February 6 for want of a Constitutional majority.
The motion was agreed to and the bill passed the House by yeas, 54; nays, 35.
Mr. STEWART'S bill [H. R. 23] to amend Section 27 of an act concerning roads and highways, so as to permit of the working out of road tax in the same manner as the law provided previous to 1881, was read the third time.
Mr. STEWART explained that the bill simply amended Section 27, by providing that both poll and property tax may be paid in work, and that the Supervisor should issue certificates to such persons, which certificates the County Treasurer shall receive in payment of such taxes. He thought this bill should pass and not run the risk of another bill passing which would include the same provision.
Mr. JEWETT thought the passage of this bill might embarrass the passage of regular road laws and he would, therefore, vote against it.
Mr. MOODY said: I am opposed to the present road law, and my people, without any exception, are opposed to the law. During my entire campaign I heard no voice raised in favor of the law, and for this reason I am in favor of any measure that will relieve my people from the effects of the present odious law. I voted two years ago for the present law upon the understanding that the bill was amended just as this bill proposes to amend it. In fact, I refused to vote for the bill two years ago for the reason that the law would not permit persons to work out their road tax upon the highway if they desired to do so. An amendment was then proposed and agreed to, or rather a proviso, which gentlemen will find in Section 27 of the present law, that was intended to apply to Section 10 of the law instead of Section 16, enabling parties to work out their tax instead of paying the money by applying to the Superintendent. The present law is not what we want, and gentlemen say to vote for this amendment will defeat the Senate and House bills prepared on this question with great care, and for that reason we should vote against this bill. If I knew that the Senate or House bill would be passed, then I would not care for this amendment; but how can we defend ourselves before our constituents if we defeat this bill, which, if passed, will cure the most obnoxious feature of the present law, and neither of the other bills is passed? I promised my people all over my County to do all in my power to repeal the dog law, the decedent act, the road law, the oats bill and the proposed prohibitory amendment tot he Constitution, and I have done all in my power to carry out this pledge. I do trust that this bill will pass; and then, if we can pass the House bill, which is claimed to be an improvement on the present law, well and good, and if they fail, we can have the consolation at least, of knowing that when the opportunity presented itself to better the present law we did not fail to embrace it.
Mr. HEFFREN did not think it best to take favorable action on this bill. He favored having the Committee report at once on the road bill passed by the Senate, and take action on that bill without further delay.
Mr. SMITH, of Tippecanoe, was in favor of this amendment, and then he would favor a general road law.
Mr. BEESON thought that, in the interest of the people, this bill should not be voted down. He was in favor of passing the amendment to the present road law.
The bill passed the House by yeas, 69; nays, 26.
Mr. Muck entered a motion to reconsider the vote by which the bill passed.
Mr. JEWETT'S bill [H. R. 26] to repeal Section 6 of an act concerning promissory
notes, bills of exchange, bonds or other instruments in writing
Mr. SHIVELY hoped that the bill would not pass. He did not believe that the business or the farmers' interests demanded a repeal of that part of our statute; and he was satisfied it would result in more harm than good. Thirty-five- States have similiar laws upon their statute books and thus far there had been no effort to repeal said provisions of these statutes; and not only that, but every country of Europe have similar laws. In England and the German Empire, in every Nation, the commercial interests are protected by similar provisions.
Mr. GORDON stated that the bill had been discussed several days back, and he therefore moved the previous question, which was seconded by the House.
Mr. JEWETT desired to say that this bill to repeal this statute will not prevent the collection of any honest note in the State of Indiana. It will simply prevent the collection of notes obtained by fraud and crime. The State Grange, as an organization representing the farming element of the State, has asked me repeal of this law, and up to this, the 22d of February, every demand has been refused, and this is the last opportunity to make any response so this request. The only objection that has been raised against this bid has come from bankers and note shavers.
The bill passed the House by yeas, 64; nays, 34.
Mr. Henderson's bill [H. R. 29] to enable the several Counties in the State to sell and dispose of land for the benefit of the school fund, was read the third time.
Mr. HENDERSON stated the provisions of the bill granted a reappraisement of certain lands, once sold, but abandoned by the parties purchasing after they have deposited the land of timber. It was necessary that the land be reappraised, and he hoped that the bill would pass.
Mr. SMITH favored the provisions of the bill.
The bill passed the House by yeas, 87; nays 3.
Mr. HOLLER'S bill [H. R. 31] to authorize Boards of County Commissioners to grant bounties for the destruction of woodchucks, owls and hawks, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 66; nays, 19.
Mr. FRAZER'S bill [H. R. 38] for taxing the ownership of property for school purposes, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 80; nays, 11.
Mr. MOCK'S bill [H. R. 48] to provide for the election of Supervisors of highways, was read the third time.
Mr. MOCK thought it was the sentiment of the House that some road law should pass. He did not desire to stand in the way of any member voting for the bill which had passed the Senate on the same subject, but he hoped the members would vote for this bill for fear the Senate bill might not pass.
Mr. MONTGOMERY was in favor of any good road law, and therefore he would vote for this bill. The Senate bill only allows the Supervisor $1.50 per day, and he thought it was better in this respect than the bill under consideration.
Mr. BEESON did not favor the passage of the bill, and he was of the opinion that his constituents were willing give the present law a further trial.
Mr. SMITH, of Tippecanoe, was pledged to vote for a change in the road law, but as this bill had passed the point where it could be amended except by unanimous consent, he thought it ought not to be passed by the House at the present time.
Mr. MUTZ desired to state to the House that there had been a great cry going no all over the State for the repeal of this road law. Everybody is against it. The people can never be educated up to favoring the present road law. He moved the previous question on the passage of the bill.
The demand was seconded, and under its operation the bill passed the House by yeas, 70; nays, 7.
On motion by Mr. McHenry the bill [S. 283] to abolish the Criminal Court in Alien County was amended by striking out "January 1" and inserting in lieu thereof "October 31," and passed the House by yeas, 90; nays, 0, under a suspension of the rules.
The bill [S. 173] to fix the fees of certain officers was read the first time.
Mr. JEWETT called up the bill [H. R. 419] to appropriate the sum of $100,000 for the relief of the sufferers from the floods of the Ohio, Wabash and White Rivers, and the Senate amendments were adopted by yeas, 73; nays, 16.
Mr. WILSON'S, of Marion, bill [H. R. 52] to construct a sewer from the Female Reformatory to connect with a sewer in Indianapolis, was called up and the Senate amendments were adopted.
Mr. WESTFALL'S bill [H. R. 198] for the relief of Allen Lepten and his sureties, John J. Peters, Henry Edwards and Levy Holiday, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 86; nays, 3.
Mr GIBSON'S bill [H. R. 117] to amend Sections 255, 256 and 257 of an act concerning taxation was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 81; nays, 8.
Mr. McCORMICK'S bill [H. R. 308] to amend Section 2 of an act to incorporate the Trustees of the Hartsville Academy was read the third time, and passed the House by yeas, 82; nays, 2.
On motion by Mr. Williams, of Knox, the Special Committee to which was referred Senate Joint Resolution No. 1, to authorize the Auditor of State to audit and pay certain expenses of Superintendent of Public Instruction for the prosecution of a suit against John F. Williams, which were allowed, submitted a report recommending the allowance of $600, which on motion by Mr. Heffren was a mended by striking out $600 and inserting in lieu thereof $707.20.
The report as amended was concurred in by the House by yeas, 60; nays, 29.
Mr. HAM'S bill [H. R. 200] to provide for certain claims for labor performed in ditching and reclaiming land in Tipton County, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 78; nays, 10.
Mr. HOLLER'S bill [H. R. 286] to empower manufacturing companies to take and hold stock in corporations furnishing water power was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 71; nays, 8.
Mr. WHITSIT'S bill [H. R. 180] to abolish City Assessors was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 52; nays, 32.
The House adjourned until 9 a. m. to-morrow,
The reading of the minutes was dispensed with.
On motion by Mr. VAN VORHIS the joint resolution [S. -] to pay $10,000 to the widow of Edwin May, late architect of the new State House, was taken up-yeas, 26; nays, 13-and read the second time.
Mr. McCULLOUGH moved to reduce the sum to $3,000. There is no law, equity or common honesty in this resolution as it stands.
Mr. HENRY contended the claim was just, because the widow lost her interest in her home by reason of mortgage put upon it in order to enable Mr. May to carry out his contract with the State.
Mr. MAGEE repelled any insinuation of improper motives influencing the Committee.
Mr. VOYLES, while not willing to recognize that the claim should be more than $800, was willing to vote for the amendment out of a spirit of compromise.
Mr. SPANN and Mr. BELL favored the passage of the resolution.
Mr. HILLIGASS said it is not clear that the claim is equitable. Six thousand dollars was paid this architect by the State for those plans, and in addition near $3,000 for two years' superintendence of the work. He was willing to compromise on as much as $5,000.
Mr. VAN VORHIS demanded the previous question.
The Senate seconded the demand, and under the operations of the previous question the amendment to reduce the sum to $3,000 was rejected by yeas, 17; nays, 25. The joint resolution was ordered engrossed.
A message from the House requesting the appointment of a
On motion of Mr. BUNDY the House amendment to his bill [S. 192] to legalize the town of Cadiz, Henry County, was concurred in.
Mr. BICHOWSKY introduced a bill [S. 287] to declare exempt from taxation certain sums of money, choses in action held by executors devised to benevolent or charitable, or scientific or literary associations which, under a suspension of the Constitutional rule, by a two-thirds vote, was read twice by title, once by sections, and passed the Senate by yeas, 42; nays, 0.
On motion by Mr. WILLARD the bill [H. R. 51] to provide for the taxation of dogs, was read the first time and referred.
Mr. HOWARD offered a resolution that Vincent P. Kirk, late Doorkeeper of the Senate, be and is hereby exonerated from all charges of unofficial conduct while in the service of the Senate, which with the preamble, was read for information.
Mr. DUNCAN objected to its introduction.
On motion by Mr. HOWARD-yeas, 26; nays, 15-the rules were suspended for its consideration.
Mr. VAN VORHIS moved to strike out the preamble.
This motion was agreed to.
The resolution was adopted.
Mr. HOWARD had a resolution read for information, declaring that
whereas the Secretary of the Senate and Doorkeeper of the Senate have failed to do their duty, and have showed great inefficiency therein; therefore.
Resolved, That said offices be declared vacant and that Cyrus T. Nixon be declared Secretary, and Vincent P. Kirk declared Doorkeeper of the Senate.
He moved that the rules be suspended that the resolution may be considered now.
The motion was agreed to by yeas, 25; nays, 22.
Mr. HOWARD moved the adoption of the resolution and demanded the previous question.
Mr. BROWN made an ineffectual motion-yeas, 22; nays 25-to lay the resolution on the table.
Mr. WILLARD moved to adjourn.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR decided the motion out of order.
Mr. WILLARD appealed from this decision before the demand for the previous question is seconded-signed by himself and Mr. May.
On motion by Mr. YANCEY-yeas, 25; nays,22-the appeal was laid on the table.
The previous question was seconded by yeas, 25; nays, 22, and he main question was ordered by yeas, 25; nays, 23.
Mr. BELL demanded a division of the question.
The first part of the resolution declaring the office of Secretary of the Senate vacant was agreed to by yeas, 25; nays, 23.
The Lieutenant Governor in announcing the vote directed the Assistant Secretary to call the roll on the second division, declaring the office of Doorkeeper vacant.
This division of the question was agreed to by yeas, 25; nays, 23.
The next division of the resolution, that Cyrus T. Nixon be and is hereby declared Secretary of the Senate, was agreed to by yeas, 25; and nays, 23, as follows:
Ayes-Messrs. Adkison, Bischowski, Bundy, Campbell, Davidson, Fleming, Foulke, Graham, Henry, Hill, Howard, Keiser, Lockridge, Lindley, Macartney, Marvin, Overstreet, Ristine, Sayre, Smith of Delaware, Spann, Van Vorhis, White, Yancey, Youche-25.
Nays-Messrs. Bell, Benz, Brown, Compton, Duncan, Ernest, Faulkner, Fletcher, Hilligass, Hoover, Hutchinson, Johnston, Johnson, Magee, May, McClure, McCulloch, McIntosh, Null, Richardson, Smith of Jay, Voyles and Willard-23.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR declared Mr. Nixon elected as Principal Secretary of the Senate.
Mr. Nixon took the oath of office as Principal Secretary of the Senate at the hands of Hon. Daniel Waite Howe, one of the Judges of the Supreme Court.
The last clause of the resolution that Vincent Kirk be declared Doorkeeper was agreed to by yeas, 25; nays, 23, the roll being called by Principal Clerk Nixon.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR declared Vincent Kirk elected Doorkeeper of the Senate and called Mr. Kirk to stand at the Bar of the Senate and be sworn into office.
Mr. BELL raised the point of order that Mr. Kirk had been sworn once.
The Lieutenant Governor: "And he has been swearing ever since." [Laughter]
Mr. Kirk received the oath of office at the hands of Judge Howe.
The Senate took a recess till 2 o'clock.
Mr. GRAHAM moved to suspend the order of business that he may introduce a resolution for the appointment of a Committee of Five to proceed forthwith to examine the State Treasury, to investigate the condition of all funds with which the State Treasurer is charged, to ascertain if any of the public funds have been loaned in violation of law, the sum and security for such loan, and report the examination to the Senate at the earliest day possible. He referred to defalcations of Treasurers; in other States, and desired to prevent any such sorry experience in this State.
Mr. BROWN referred to the fact that a Republican Treasurer of State was in office when the Senate convened, and remained so until the past eight or ten days, and yet this sense of duty didn't arise on the part of the Senator from Hamilton [Mr. Graham.]
Mr. GRAHAM explained that the provocation for this resolution has come to light since the Democratic Treasurer' came into office.
Mr. Brown, resuming, was interrupted by
Chief Clerk Edwins announcing to the Senate that the House has no information that the person [Mr. Cyrus T. Nixon] bringing the enclosed message is a Secretary of the Senate, and the message is therefore respectfully returned to the Senate.
Mr. BUNDY moved that a Committee of Two be appointed to inform the House of the Hon. Cyrus T. Nixon's election as Principal Secretary of the Senate.
Mr. BROWN objecting to having his remarks interrupted by the motion-
Mr. GRAHAM withdrew his resolution.
The motion for a Senate Committee was agreed to, and the Chair made it to consist of Messrs. Spann and Brown.
Mr. CAMPBELL called up a special order, the bill [S. 138] concerning railroads crossing each other on a common grade, which was read the third time.
Mr. VOYLES moved to add to Section 1 a proviso that where the electric system referred to is adopted it shall not be put in unless with the consent of the Railroad Company.
It was so ordered by consent.
Mr. WILLARD would like to have them explained-it looks like a plan to get in a patent right.
Mr. FOULKE explained that the signal always set to danger. This is probably the only appliance that is in use When the train comes within about a mile of the crossing mere is an Insulated track which changes the switch by an automatic arrangement. The arrangement is such that two trains can not possibly meet each other at the crossing, and this will obviate the necessity of trains stopping at all crossings.
Mr. BROWN said this bill was similar to an Ohio law. The point is this: When a train comes within half a mile or so of a crossing it changes the switch so that were another train coming from another way and attempt to pass the crossing it would go into the ditch. This system has been adopted in the interest of preservation of life. This bill protects no inventor, but is rather an encouragement for it provides for the adoption of the best system.
Mr. BUNDY showed there is nothing mandatory about the bill. In Ohio the cost to railroads for stopping at crossings was $2,497,000 last year.
Mr. SPANN said this bill does not effect the old law, as where this protection is not adopted, the old law remains the same.
The bill passed by yeas, 36; nays 4.
A special order being the bill [S. 281] to abolish contract convict labor, and regulating the employment of the convicts of our State Prisons, and of the inmates of our Reform Schools, as well as providing for the maintenance of said Institutions; also repealing all laws in conflict herewith, and declaring an emergency, was read the second time, as was also the bill [S. 241] for the more profitable and equitable hiring by the State of the convicts in the State Prison, and to amend Section 10 of the State Prison act-See page 167 of the Brevier Reports.
Mr. JOHNSON said:
Mr. PRESIDENT-In the report accompanying this bill which has
been printed I have given most of the reasons which have induced the Committee
appointed to look into the subject of Contract Prison labor to recommend its
passage. There is not one Senator on this floor who does not know that the
complaints about our present system of convict labor have become so general that the
outcry against the wrongs inflicted by this system, both on manufacturers and
workingmen, has become so loud and persistent that this General Assembly ought to
heed this universal demand and apply the remedy, if it be possible to find one. Mr.
President, from all parts and sections of this State petitions, signed by hundreds
or thousands of legal voters, have come to this Senate and have been referred to
your Special Committee for action, and all these
In the report accompanying the bill I have already compared the prices of Prison
and free labor in various manufactures, and this comparison goes to show that the
Prison labor is so much cheaper that the manufacturer employing only honest and free
labor must either close his factory, because he is unable to compete with the
convict labor contractor, or he must press down the wages he pays to his men to the
starving point, and even then his profits will be so small and uncertain that it
hardly pays him to remain in the field. Mr. President, I have the honor to represent
on this floor a County where the ruinous effects of Prison labor have made
themselves felt. There are hundreds of workingmen in the city of Lafayette whose
hearts are throbbing with anguish and hope, and whose eyes are looking with intense
expectation towards this Assembly, waiting and waiting, whether anything will be
done to relieve their distress and help their wants. There are thousands of honest
workingmen in my County whose wages are cut down by the unfair competition of the
State, and who are on that account must not only themselves
There is but one claim which the advocates of Prison labor advance, which speaks in its favor- that contract Prison labor makes the Penitentiaries self-sustaining. But, Mr. President, this claim is a spurious one. It is rather based on the appearance of a reality than on the reality itself. The Prisons would be self-sustaining if the articles and labor produced there would really create the means needed for their support and maintenance, without detracting from other industries. This is not hte case. On the contrary, the money earned by the labor of the convicts is withdrawn from the free laborers and mechanics of our State employed in similar or like factories and workshops and from their employers. If the convict labor would cease to be employed in making barrels, chairs, carriages, cigars, boots and shoes, etc., the free laborers of our State would make them at a higher rate of wages than they at present receive, and consequently, instead of being self-sustaining, Penitentiaries are sustained by the money which this unfair competition takes out of the pockets of the honest workingmen and their employers. As it is the manufacturers and laborers in the above named articles are taxed solely and exclusively for maintaining the Penitentiaries; this tax imposed upon them houses, feeds and clothes the criminal and felon, but it ruins and breaks up the manufacturers, and it drives the honest laborer into poverty and sometimes into crime. Is it possible that a great State can sanction and continue this injustice and this wrong after its legal representatives have become aware and conscious of it? Such a presumption would be an insult to the State and its Legislative branch of Government. Your Committee has been guided by these considerations in seeking and applying the remedy.
Now, Mr. President, we know that this country has established a high tariff for the sake of maintaining and protecting American manufactures and industries. By means of this tariff we sustain home manufactures. Many millions of dollars are annually paid out by the citizens of the United States on articles of every day use and wear, and there is no other reason for it than this one, that every dollar paid out in this way helps to build up and support our own manufactures. And yet, Mr. President, it is not at all certain whether the mechanics and workingmen of this country are benfited in proportion to the protection which the tariff affords. The question is now, can not the State of Indiana, in behalf of its own industries and for the sake of protecting the laborers and mechanics of our State, impose a small tax upon every citizen, such as proposed in this bill by maintaining the convicts, which compared to the immense tax imposed upon us by the protective tariff, is very small and insignificant?
Mr. President, I have no time to exhaust this subject. But it is of serious importance and of urgent necessity. Let, through me, the many thousand laborers of this State, who are to-day poorly paid and only half employed, appeal to the Senate for help and redress. So far only the vast and exhaustless resources which Providence has poured out upon us, with lavish hands, have guided this land safely through the dangers and perils of social revolutions.
But, Mr. President, with increasing population and with the aggregation of many people at certain centers of trade and industry, the danger of social revolution increases. f in the distant horizon we perceive clouds which may contain the fatal thunderbolt which may at a given moment burst upon and destroy our social and political fabric of Government, then it is our duty to guard against it and dispel that cloud. The great mass of the people, the laboring element, that healthy, industrious, economical and noble element, upon whose strengths, intelligence and virtue this Republic rests, is no danger to our institutions, but let this great and strong and powerful element also know that the State protects, helps and sustains it in all its legitimate aspirations and demands.
Mr. CAMPBELL regarded this question as especially deserving of careful and deliberate consideration. The importance and magnitude of the problem demand immediate attention from a common sense, business standpoint. The difference between this bill [S. 241] and the bill [S. 281] is that the latter proposes to abolish contract convict labor, while this bill proposes to put ablebodied convicts in honorable competition so their product will bring as high a price as their products will bring in the market.
Mr. YANCEY moved to amend the bill [S. 247] by adding a section requiring a brand with these words, "manufactured by convict labor." in justice to honesty and fair dealing, as between man and man.
Mr. CAMPBELL believed that would depreciate the products of the labor, which is directly opposite to the object of the bill.
Mr. VAN VORHIS had looked somewhat into the manner in which the Reformatory interests are managed. He favored, as between these two, the bill S. 281. If there is any vicious thing in these Institutions above another it is the custom in vogue in some of them in places of hiring a teacher to instruct those put under them, they hire out the Mechanical Departments and require the inmates to work as the contractor directs. All incentive to educate them in the mechanical arts is taken away. The Institutions ought to be kept on such a basis as to educate these pupils, who have lost part of their senses, so they may be able to compete in their work with the more fortunate competitors.
Mr. WILLARD offered a substitute for the amendment requiring a stamp, "convict made goods," to be affixed on all Prison-made goods. He heartily approved of the bill introduced by the Senator from Tippecanoe [Mr. Johnson], but the contracts already made will not expire until 1887, and for that reason he offers this amendment so as to reach the immediate needs of the laboring men in this State. As he understood the bill S. 241 its provisions are not desirable. This substitute will not interfere with existing contracts, and will bring immediate relief, while not materially injuring the contractors, because they have already a sufficient protection in their enormous profits. Then his substitute requires the same rule to hold and effect Prison-made goods to go out branded from this time forth, just what they are.
Mr. GRAHAM moved to add to the bill [S. 241] a new Section so as to require the contract price for labor to be not less than seventy-five cents per day. Such labor should raise a fund sufficient to maintain the Prison. A large portion of this kind of skilled labor only brings to the State forty cents a day. Any ordinary labor should bring more than that. These contracts for Prison labor are strange things, no doubt, if the truth could be got at. This thing ought to be regulated by the Legislature, and there should be a fixed price.
Mr. VAN VORHIS moved to amend the bill [S. 281] so as to include the Benevolent as well as Reformatory Institutions, and authorizing these to employ teachers to instruct the pupils in such mechanical arts as may be most to the advantage of such pupils and inmates.
This amendment was agreed to.
Mr. SPANN was heartily in favor of the passage of the bill. He regarded it as doing a wrong to the laboring men of the State for the State to let out convict labor, as has been the custom. It is a broad and comprehensive bill. He would not compromise this proposition by letting out this labor on competitive contracts. He favored applying the principles of this bill to the Reformatory Institutions. The State ought to be proud enough and grand enough to give her prisoners employment. They had better be put to agricultural pursuits.
Mr. BROWN moved to strike out the third section of the bill S. 281, making each County liable for the support of convicts therefrom-less the amount earned by the convicts. He opposed both bills. All this talk about convict contractors having any effect upon the price of labor is absolutely ridiculous. It does not operate in the slightest degree upon the fixing of wages of laboring men throughout the State. Under Democratic management, for the past few years, the Penitentiaries are self-supporting, because the wise law on the statute book provides that convicts shall work as they ought to work. Shall it be said the State is to support felons in laziness or idleness? The amendment proposed by the Senator from Hancock [Mr. Yancey] is simply an indirect way to prevent the State from reaping any substantial benefit from its convict labor. Dicipline can not be maintained in the prisons unless the men can be kept at work. This bill is a bill of abominations and an injustice to the people of this State. He moved to refer these two bills to a select Committee of Five to see if they can not harmonize these conflicting interests.
Mr. BUNDY, while not objecting to the reference of these two bills, sated some objection to the bill S. 281. While now convicts are employed, this bill proposes to keep them in idleness. When the present contracts expire there is no provision in this bill for hiring the convicts, but they must remain in idleness. This convict labor question is one of the most complex questions that can arise. Who gets the benefit of cheapening manufactured articles? It is the laboring men. If that is not true, the reform should be in s system of contracts. A young man sent to the Penitentiary should be learned a trade if he has none before. Imprisonment at labor is a reformatory process. He favored letting contracts at such a price that the articles manufactured can not be sold at less than the market price of like articles made by free labor. He closed by making an ineffectual motion to adjourn at twenty minutes before 6 o'clock.
Mr. FOULKE opposed the motion to refer the bill to a Select Committee and indicated an amendment he desired to offer at the proper time to Section 3, authorizing the Directors to manufacture in the Prisons any class of goods, not manufactured elsewhere in the State. On the score of economy, this sort of provision should be established in lieu of the present law. It is our duty to protect free labor and at the same time protect the taxpayer of the State, and this amendment will do both.
A message from the House announced the disagreement to the Senate amendments of the
general appropriation bill [H. R. 302] and requested a
Mr. BELL moved to suspend the order of business in order that he might offer the following resolution:
Resolved, That the office of Secretary of the Senate is hereby declared vacant, and that Albert J. Kelley be and is hereby declared Secretary of the Senate for the remainder of this regular session of the General Assembly.
The motion to suspend the order of business was agreed to by yeas, 24; nays, 23.
Mr. BELL moved the adoption of the resolution and demanded the previous question.
The demand for the previous question was seconded by yeas, 24; nays, 23.
Mr. BUNDY: I was afraid this morning was most too beautiful to last. [Laughter.]
The main question being ordered, and a division of the question being demanded, the first part, declaring the office of Secretary of the Senate vacant, was agreed to by yeas, 24; nays, 23.
Pending the vote-
Mr. BENZ, when his name was called, said: There is no man I think more of than I do Mr. Nixon. I served in the House when he was Clerk, and in any business transaction I will do all I can for him; but this is politics, and not business, therefore I vote "aye." [Laughter.]
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR declared the first clause agreed to, and stating the question to be on the last clause of the resolution directed the Assistant Secretary to call the roll.
The last clause was agreed to by yeas, 24; nays, 23, as follows:
Yeas-Messrs. Bell, Benz, Brown, Compton, Duncan, Ernest, Faulkner, Fletcher, Hilligass, Hoover, Johnston, Johnson, Magee, Marvin, May, McClure, McCullough, McIntosh, Null, Richardson, Smith of Jay, Voyles and Willard-24.
Nays-Messrs. Adkison, Bichowsky, Bundy, Campbell, Davidson, Fleming, Foulke, Hill, Keiser, Lockridge, Lindley, Macartney, Overstreet, Ristine, Sayre, Smith of Delaware, Spann, Van Vorhis, White, Yancey and Youche-23.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR declared Mr. Kelly elected Secretary of the Senate, and requested Mr. Kelly to receive the oath.
The oath was administered by Hon. S. M. Hench, Judge of the Allen Criminal Court.
Mr. BELL moved that the vote last taken be re
The latter motion was agreed to.
Mr. BROWN offered a resolution which was adopted that the thanks of the Senate are hereby tendered to Hon. Cyrus T. Nixon for his brief, but faithful services, as Principal Secretary of the Senate-
Mr. BUNDY suggesting it be adopted standing and in silence.
Then the Senate adjourned.
The House was called to order with Representative Gibson in the Chair, in the absence of Speaker Bynum.
The session opened with prayer by Rev. Dr. R. C. Houghton, of the Roberts Park M. E. Church.
On motion by Mr. Schloss the reading of the Clerk's journal was dispensed with.
Mr. Wilson, of Marion, called up his amendment to the rules of the House, of which he gave notice heretofore, so changing the rules that a majority of the members present may take up any bill out of its regular order, and may make any bill or resolution a regular order after its first reading.
Mr. FRAZER, Mr. WILEY, and Mr. SHIVELY opposed the change of rules as entirely unnecessary, unjust, and unprecedented in the history of Indiana Legislatures.
Mr. HEFFREN and Mr. MONTGOMERY defended the change on the ground that there was no other way of brining up bills which had been too long delayed, or allowing the minority to control legislation.
Mr. GREEN demanded the previous question, which was seconded by the House by yeas, 44; nays, 34.
And under the operation of the previous question, the motion to amend the rule which was agreed to.
Mr. STERRITT moved to amend the rule by providing that at the morning session each day the roll of the House shall be called and each member may call up one bill, which shall be put upon its passage.
In pursuance with the rules of the House it was placed on the table for future action.
Mr. SMITH, of Tippecanoe, presented a memorial from Dr. E. E. White, President of Purdue University, indicating his purpose to resign and stating reasons for such action, being the "rider" placed on the Purdue appropriation bill which should be reconsidered in the interest of the University and the ensuing speeches made by members on the floor of the Senate. In the course of the letter Professor White denounced Greek Societies vigorously, alleging that their tendencies and effect are immoral and subversive of good discipline. As the Senate's "rider" to the appropriation bill will affect his authority among the students, he announces his determination to surrender the position.
Mr. HEFFREN was in favor of the right by all men to respectful petition, but when a memorial comes to this House in such disrespectful language it should not be received. He moved that the memorial be respectfully returned to Mr. White.
Mr. PATTEN desired to say that the author of that memorial is a demagogue of the first type, and that the memorial is an insult to this Legislature. It is from a demagogue who is so egotistical as to believe that Purdue University would go down should he resign.
Mr. SMITH, of Tippecanoe, had received the memorial and a letter requesting him to present the same to the House, which he did in what he considered a proper manner. The features of the memorial did not appear so objectionable to him as they did to the gentlemen [Mr. Heffren and Mr. Patten] who had just spoken.
Mr. JEWETT'S first impression was like that of the gentleman from Washington [Mr.
Heffren]. that this should be returned; but after hearing the memorial read it seemed
to him that it is respectful in tone, and that the House of Representatives can not
afford to get into a pout about this matter, so he moved to amend the motion by the
gentleman from Washington by referring the memorial to the
Mr. ANTRIM moved to amend by substituting the
Mr. PATTEN made an ineffectual motion to lay the amendment on the table.
Mr. Jewett's amendment was agreed to.
On motion by Mr. SCHLOSS, the Constitutional rules were suspended by yeas, 82; nays, 6; and the bill [H. R. 438] to amend Section 8,276 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, exempting the property of the United States, this State, and the property of any County, city, town or Township, all lands for the use of Common Schools, personal property and real estate of every manual labor school, when used and occupied for that purpose, not to exceed 300 acres, taken up and read the third time.
Mr. McMULLEN explained that the purpose of the bill is to settle certain disputed points in regard to taxing property held by religious bodies, Educational Institutions and Charitable and Benevolent Institutions.
Mr. PATTEN was opposed to the passage of the bill.
The bill passed the House by yeas, 51; nays, 33.
On motion by Mr. JEWETT the bill [H. R. 302] to make appropriations for the State Government and its institutions, was taken up and the Senate amendments read.
On Motion by Mr. JEWETT the Senate amendments were rejected.
On motion by Mr. JEWETT a
Mr. JEWETT called up his motion to reconsider the vote by which Mr. Graham's bill [H. R. 256] to provide a fund for the permanent endowment of the State University, was rejected on February 20.
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, made an ineffectual motion to the lay the motion to reconsider on the table.
The motion to reconsider was agreed to, and the bill was rejected the second time by yeas, 44; nays, 46.
Mr. HEFFREN moved to take up the bill [S. 91] to designate the name by which the House of Refuge shall hereafter be known, and the Senate message informing the House of the passage of the bill over the Governor's veto.
Mr. FRAZER made an ineffectual motion [yeas, 41; nays, 55] to lay the motion of Mr. Heffren on the table.
Mr. Heffren's motion was agreed to by yeas, 55; nays, 35.
Mr. HEFFREN demanded the previous question, which was seconded by the House.
Under the operations of the previous question the bill passed the House over the Governor's veto by yeas, 55; nays, 39.
The House took a recess until 2 o'clock.
Mr. ADAMS moved to take up his bill [H. R. 277] to authorize Boards of County Commissioners to straighten and change the course of the channels of bodies of water upon petition of persons living adjacent to such watercourse.
Mr. AKIN moved to amend by Including his bill [H. R. 40] to amend Section 4, the same being Section 4,556 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, requiring the State Superintendent of Public Instruction in his next apportionment of the school fund to get apart $10,000, and semi-annually deduct the same amount, and set it apart, to be known as the Normal School Fund.
On motion by Mr. JORDON, Mr. Akin's amendment was laid on the table.
Mr. GORDON made an ineffectual motion to lay Mr. Adam's motion on the table.
Mr. Adams' motion was agreed to and the bill was read the third time.
[Senators Brown and Spann appeared on the floor of the House to inform that body that Cyrus T. Nixon was duly elected Principal Secretary of the Senate]
Mr. ADAMS did not desire to take up the time of the House in discussing this bill. It is a bill that accords with the wishes and desires of a great number of persons who live along these rivers and streams. The damage resulting from a single freshet would more than pay the expense of straightening such streams.
The bill passed the House by yeas, 79; nays, 11.
On motion by Mr. Smith, of Tippecanoe, Mr. Akin's bill [H. R. 407] to amend 4,556 of Revised Statutes of 1881, requiring the State Superintendent of Public Instructions in his next apportionment of the school fund, to set apart $10,000, and semi-annually deduct the same amount and set it apart to be known as the Normal School Fund, was taken up and read the third time.
The bill passed the House by yeas, 64; nays, 26.
On motion by Mr. Patten, Mr. Mutz's bill [H. R. 333] to legalize the incorporation of the Marietta and Shelbyville Turnpike Company, was taken up and read the third time, and passed the House by yeas, 84: nays, 5.
Mr. HEFFREN entered a motion to reconsider the vote by which House Rule 77 was adopted.
Mr. SMITH, of Tippecanoe, entered a motion to reconsider the vote on House bill 461.
The special order being bill [H. R. 460] the specific appropriation bill, it was taken up.
Mr. FRAZER moved that the House go into
The motion was agreed to and accordingly the House of Representative resolved
itself in a
The Chairman announced the question before the Committee to be the specific appropriation bill, and ordered the Clerk to read the bill by items for amendment.
On motion by Mr MERING, the appropriation to Theo. A. Hough, administratrix of the estate Daniel Hough, deceased, was raised from $1,000 to $1,120.
Pending the vote on the adoption of the amendment, Mr MERING staled that the Legislature two years ago by joint resolution authorized the purchase of this library, but the specific appropriation bill failed to pass the Senate, and consequently this money was not paid at that time.
Mr WILSON, of Marion, thought that in granting this appropriation the State would simply be doing justice to private individuals.
Mr. JEWETT moved to amend by striking out item 4, being the claim of F. A. W. Davis. assignee of a claim of Mr. Reiley, former Treasurer of Marion County, for the sum of $579.75.
Mr, JEWETT thought it might be possible that the gentleman was entitled to the amount claimed, but was of the opinion that he should not have allowed the claim to lie until the limitation of the statute passed.
Mr. WILSON, of Marion, was in favor of allowing the claim. The Supreme Court had decided in favor of this gentleman, and it comes with poor grace for any Representative to oppose it The State of Indiana can not afford not to pay this claim. He was in favor of paying it and paying it with interest.
Mr. PATTEN was in favor of letting the Supreme Court take care of itself, and the Legislature doing the same thing.
Mr. SHIVELY thought that it was but just and equitable that this money, which is now in the Treasury of the State, and which rightfully belongs to this man, should be paid over to him.
Mr. STEWART thought that in the face of the decision of the Supreme-Court, this claim was a just one.
The claim was rejected upon a division affirmative. 50; negative, 31.
Mr. SCHLOSS moved to strike out the sixth item-being the claim of Baker, Smith & Co.
Mr. ADAMS had investigated this claim thoroughly, and felt in duty bound to say a few words to regard to it. As a member of the House he could not favor any claim unless he believed it was honestly due. After a careful examination of the facts he was satisfied this was a just claim, and one which should be allowed by the Legislature.
Mr. Schloss' motion to strike out the claim was agreed to.
Mr. PATTEN moved to strike out item seven being the claim of Simon Thompson for services rendered the State in the Newton Circuit Court.
Mr. GILMAN could not understand why the gentleman made the motion to strike out the claim. The claim was originally for $1,000 for services rendered to the State, and in Newton County for certain property. This gentleman was Prosecuting Attorney for that County at the time, and he became satisfied that this property under question was rightfully the properly of the State, He entered suit for the State and followed the matter to the Supreme Court, where finally the suit terminated in favor of the State, and the State is now holding property valued at $5,000 as the result of this claimant. He earnestly advocated the granting of the claim as one every way just.
Mr. PATTEN thought it was bad policy for the State to attempt to pay all attorneys' fees in the State. He was not in favor of granting the claim.
Mr. MOODY favored the allowance of the claim
Mr. SHIVELY understood that the
An amendment by Mr. GIBSON to make the claim $500 and allow the same, provided the claimant would give a receipt it full for all services, was adopted, after an ineffectual motion by Mr. SCHLOSS to lay the same on the table.
On motion by Mr. WILSON of Marion, the Committee rose, reported progress and asked leave to sit again to-morrow morning at 10 o'clock.
On motion by Mr. JEWETT the several House joint resolutions providing for a prohibitory amendment a woman's suffrage amendment, and providing for the tenure of office of several State and County officers, were each taken up, read the second time, ordered engrossed and made the special order for to-morrow at 10 o'clock.
The House adjourned until to-morrow at 9 o'clock.
The reading of the minutes was dispensed with.
On motion by Mr. BROWN a Committee of Two-Messrs. Brown and Spann-were appointed to inform the House that Mr. Kelley is Principal Secretary of the Senate.
On motion by Mr. CAMPBELL the Senate resumed the consideration of the convict contract labor bills, pending at the time of the election of Principal Secretary of the Senate last night the auction being on the motion to refer to a Select Committee.
Mr. CAMPBELL opposed the motion, as no serious objection has been made to the bill S. 147. This bill provides a remedy for the contract- lopping proceps, it also prohibits the employment of convicts outside of the Prison walls, etc. [See page 167 of the Brevier Reports.] The bill was been submitted to the scrutiny of some of the best lawyers on this floor and received their approval. The detriment comes to the laboring classes because of the low price convict labor products, are thrown upon the market, in order to meet which the free laborer must reduce his price. As soon as a brand of Cain is put upon Prison products it reduces the price, and can possibly have no other effect. The object of the bill is to enhance the values of convict labor productions.
Mr. HILL inquired whether these amendments were not intended to depreciate the price of articles manufactured by convict labor.
Mr. CAMPBELL could not answer for the motives of the movers of the amendments. He opposed establishing a fixed per diem for convict labor, because there are strong men and weak, decrepit and maimed, and a uniform price can not be made to work well.
Mr. HOOVER suggested there were but a small number of the latter classes.
Mr. CAMPBELL: Then the minimum price would be made to apply to such. He believed in an open competition in the Interest of the laboring men and taxpayers of the State, and it is only for such legislation should be had. He opposed creating an aristocracy in the Prisons, and feeding such at the expense of honest taxpayers of the State.
Mr. JOHNSON agreed with the Senator that the objects of the bills will be defeated by a reference to a Committee. At least 25,000 voting petitioners have come here praying for the abolishment of contract convict labor. If new provisions are to be introduced into the present system, they will be evaded and disregarded, as the present provisions have been. The system is pernicious, and ought lobe abolished as proposed by the bill [S. 281]. which will do for the State what the protective tariff is doing for the country at large. The National Government finds a protective tariff necessary to he interests of home manufactures. This bill proposes a like tax upon the people of Indiana in the interest of our own manufacturers and laboring men. An amendment made to the bill yesterday authorizes the employment of convict labor within the walls in the manufacture of articles not made in the State else where. He bad himself favored this plan in the Committee.
Mr. McCLURE, residing in the vicinity of the Prison South, said: Nearly every session there are moral and political philosophers proposing improvements in the management of our Prisons. When he first heard these bills read he was ready to vote against them, because they are both impracticable. Look at their contradictions in terms. The object of branding Prison-made goods is clearly to depreciate their market value, which should not be done, because if done, contractors can not afford to hire convicts at a fixed minimum price for such labor above what they would be able to give.
Mr. BROWN moved to add to the bill [S. 241] a clause that its provisions shall not apply to any existing convict labor contract.
Mr. FOULKE offered the substitue he explained last night, to go, with the other proposed amendments, to the Committee.
Mr. BROWN regarded it as apparent these bills should go to the Committee. The bill
[S. 281] proceeds upon the idea there is no labor to be performed by convicts except
on a Prison farm. The Senator from Wayne [Mr. Foulke] comes in with a proposition for
the manufacture of articles not now manufactured in the State. He condemned the bill
as the worst piece of legislation yet brought to the Bar of the Senate, and it
legisla
Mr. SPANN would not remain quiet under an imputation that vicious measures came from his side of the Chamber only, but repelled such statements.
Mr. HILLIGASS disliked to see every discussion worked into a political harangue. He proceeded to show there is a little vicions legislation in Section 3 of the bill S. 281, which will be an open bid in every County for changes of venue. The laboring men and farmers are not willing to pay for the maintenance of convicts in the Penitentiary in idleness. This bill will lay down the bars for those who committ petit larcenies to go acquit. He favored the motion to refer it to a select Committee, and demanded the previous question on that motion.
The demand for the previous question was seconded by the Senate-yeas, 24; nays, 20.
So, under the operations of the previous question, the motion to refer was rejected by yeas, 22; nays, 23.
The question recurring on the substitute [Mr. Foulke's] for Section 3-authorizing the Directors of Prisons to establish manufactories therein not at pesent established in the State, the profits of such to be paid to the State Treasurer, after deducting the expenses of managing said Prisons-
It was agreed to by yeas, 27; nays, 17.
The substitute was ordered to be incorporated in the bill.
The Senate refused to order the bill engross-yeas, 16; nays, 27.
The question recurring on the bill [S. 247]-
Mr. Brown's amendment to the bill that it shall not apply to existing contracts was agreed to.
Mr. Graham's amendment requiring the minimum price for contract labor to be seventy-five cents per day was rejected by yeas, 19; nays, 26.
Mr. Willard's substitute amendment requiring goods to be branded "convict made goods" was also rejected by yeas, 8; nays, 35.
Mr. Yancey's amendment requiring such goods to be branded "manufactured by convict labor" was also rejected by yeas, 12; nays, 33.
The report of the Committee embracing amendments proposing to reduce the time of contracts from seven to six years was also rejected by yeas, 37; nays, 27.
The Senate ordered the bill engrossed for the third reading by yeas, 34; nays, 11.
Mr. CAMPBELL moved that the Constitutional role be suspended ihat the &111 may be passed to the final vote '
The Senate took a recess until 2 o'clock.
The motion pending at the time of the noon recess to suspend the Constitutional rule was rejected by yeas, 22; nays, 26.
Mr. HENRY moved to reconsider the vote by which the Senate refused to order the bill [S. 281] to be engrossed.
The motion was rejected by yeas, 27; nays, 21.
Mr. VAN VORHIS moved to suspend the order of business, and take up the joint resolution [S. 2] to pay Mrs. Sarah May, widow of the late architect of the new State House $10,000.
On motion by Mr. BELL this motion was laid on the table by yeas, 25; nays, 21.
Mr. FOULKE made an ineffectual motion-yeas, 26; nays, 20-to adjourn.
Mr. McCULLOUGH moved to suspend the special order and take engrossed House bill
No. 133 and read it a second time, and concur in the report of the majority of the
After discussion of points of order raised on this motion-
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR decided the previous question if seconded would go only to setting aside the special order and taking up the bill.
The demand for the previous question was seconded by yeas, 26; nays, 19. The main question was ordered by yeas 25; nays, 19.
Mr. HENRY demanded a division of the question.
The first part of the motion was agreed to by yeas, 26; nays, 19-so the special order was set aside.
The second part of the motion was agreed to by yeas, 26 nays; 19-so the bill was taken up.
The bill [H. R. 133] to provide for a Board of Metropolitan Police Commissioners in all cities of 29,000 or more inhabitants was read the second time. See pages 46, 47 and 48 of the Brevier Reports-with a favorable majority report and a minority report-see page 234 of this report, recommending indefinite postponement.
Mr. VAN VORHIS: Much has been said in the last week or two about vicious
legislation, but of all the hills that have been introduced into this or the other
branch of the General Assembly, this is by far the most mischievous. It affects no
city in the State except the city of Indianapolis, and he could not sit still
without attempting to show up some of its vicious provisions. It will cost the city
$50,000 a year more to manage the affairs than heretofore. It is directly in the
interest of a few Ward politicians of the city, who among Democrats themselves, do
not occupy a position of even ordinary respectability. It has passed the House and
advanced so far in this Senate without the knowledge, on the part of many members
who have voters for it, as to what its real purposes are. He had sufficient
confidence in the fairness of many Senators on this floor to believe that if they
knew its vicious provisions they would not support it. As for a meeting of the
Mr. FLETCHER hardly thought it necessary to argue the question further. Expressing
confidence in the report, of the
Mr. SPANN, as a question of privilege, moved that the galleries be cleared, as there seems to be a Democratic mob there.
Mr. BELL hoped the belt will not get off-that the motion will not be pressed.
Mr. VAN VORHIS called attention to the fact that no such outburst occurred during all the time he was speaking.
The PRESIDENT pro tem. [Mr. Bundy in the Chair]: If it occurs again there will be no motion necessary to clear the galleries.
Mr. FLETCHER (resuming) was not a lawyer and not accustomed to public speaking, but believed in the efficiency of concentrated remedies and would get this down to as floe a point as possible. By this bill Governor Porter is made a member of the Police Board, who voted for a bill precisely similar to this in Washington, and believed it was a very good thing at that time. No doubt his influence upon the Board would be better than if there was no Republican upon it at all. In discussing this question he was not acting at all in a partisan manner, or in voting for this bill as he should outside of the pot-house politicians, both Republicans and Democrats, I have not seen any great manifestation of strength regarding this bill in public. A few wealthy men, who are heavy taxpayers, have said to me: "I want you to support that bill. because I believe under the present system our property, as well as all that pertains to the city, is not safe in the hands of the present management." And I find on speaking with men who hold small properties that when I explain to them the points in a bill of this kind and how it should be administered, that they are almost to a man in favor of it. It is only the extreme partisan that speaks strongly either for or against it. I think the partisans on both sides of the Senate should agree to this bill, for if what the Senator says is true, an outrage is perpetrated by it, it will certainly become so distasteful to the people that it will aid his side of the House in carrying the next election in this city.
Mr VAN VORHIS (interposing): We don't want to pay $50,000 for that; we can do it without.
Mr. FLETCHER: I don't wish to discuss that, but I have examined the city government in a political character and it is one mass of political gangrene and corruption, and it will be managed in the interest of extreme partisans, and not in the interest of the citizens generally. It is as foul, stinking, diseased mass of political corruption as has ever been concocted, and as a physician I would recommend a remedy, not asking what the remedy will cost. The citizens of Indianapolis are willing to take the remedy, and that is that we should concur with the majority report of the Committee and pass this bill. Therefore I move the previous question.
The demand for the previous question was sectioned-yeas, 22; nays, 14. The minority report was rejected-yeas, 15; nays, 22-and the majority report was concurred in by yeas, 21; nays, 14.
On motion by Mr. SPANN the House amendment to the joint resolution [S. 1] authorizing the payment of expenses of a suit by the Superintendent of Public Instruction against a Martin County School Superintendent, making the sum $707.20 instead of $600, was concurred.
On motion by Mr. MAGEE the joint resolution [S. 2] to appropriate $10,000 to Sarah May, widow of the late architect of the new State House, was read the third time, and failed to pass-yeas, 25; nays, 13-for want of a Constitutional majority.
And then the Senate adjourned until Monday at 2 o'clock p. m., in pursuance of an order adopted during the delivery of Mr. Van Vorhis' speech.
The House was called to order by the Speaker pro tem. [Mr. Gibson], who announced prayer by Dr. Moss, of the State University.
On motion by Mr. MONTGOMERY the reading the journal wan dispensed with.
Mr. ADAMS offered a resolution that
Whereas, the tenure of office is uncertain in the Senate: Resolved, that that Body be compelled to place statements of the officers of that Body, at least twice a day, on the desk of the members of the House.
The resolution was adopted.
On motion by Mr. FRAZER the House resolved itself into
Mr. CHITTENDEN moved to strike out item 8 of the appropriation bill-being the claim of John Martin for work and material furnished in the erection of the Insane Hospital at Indianapolis, for the sum of $46,736.40.
By consent a majority and minority report from the
Mr. ADAMS believed this is a question which ought to be considered by the members cf
the Legislature. He did not desire any claim or item 'Allowed that was not justly due.
He believed it WAS just as much the duty of members to pay these claims which the
State honestly owes, as it was for him to pay his private individual debts. The
Legislature ft few years ago, In 1875 he believed, decided the building of this new
Asylum. The properly appointed Board of Commissioners advertised for contracts, and
Porter came and contracted for this work: according to the specifications laid down by
the architect. This contract provides that the work shall be done and after it is
completed that it shall be measured according to mason's measurement. The bids were
received upon the principle that that measurement be adopted, and after that was done
these men refused to make the measurement. With the majority of the
Mr, GIBSON stated that this claim was before the Legislature two years ago. It was looked upon with a good deal of disfavor then, and he thought it was looked upon with a great deal more disfavor now. He understood that after the contract was drawn by the Provisional Board, the word "mason's measurement" was inserted between the lines, and was not a part of the original contract. During the life time of Mr. May, the architect of this building, nothing was heard of Mr. Martin's claim, but after Mr. May's death and a new architect was appointed, this gentleman comes in and demands a new measurment. He was obliged to say that he believed this claim should not be allowed.
Mr. McCORMICK, as one of the Committee who investigated this question, desired to say that he would vote for every claim that he believed to be lust and that the State should pay. We find that the Provisional Board employed a man to come from Georgia to make a measurement of' the number of brick in the Insane Asylum. This measurement, made the number of brick twenty-three million and some thousands. According to this gentle man's measurement the State has overpaid Mr. Martin some ten thousand and more dollars. Dr. Jamison was before our Committee, and he said that Mr. Martin was paid more money by the State than was due him, and he [Mr. Jamison] was a member of the Board at that time. Mr. McCormick did not believe that the Stale owed Mr- Martin one dollar, and that the State had paid him more money than he was entitled to, and that the claim is unjust and should not be allowed.
Mr. SHIVELY, like other gentlemen on the floor, did not desire, and he hoped that no unjust claim would be allowed by this House- But he did hope that, in their extreme desire to protect the State, they would not reject any claims that ought rightfully to pass. He had taken some little time to investigate the claim of Mr. Martin. He was not personally acquainted with Mr. Martin, but he 5mew that he was a citizen of this State, and that, he was a mechanic, and he further knew that he was a Democrat. He understood from his neighbor that Mr. Martin is an honest man. Here is a written contract signed by John Martin on the one hand and the State's Provisional Board on the other, in which Martin agrees to do certain work. This work was done in pursuance of the provisions of the contract, and the question now is what construction will you place upon certain words of the contract? It provides that the work, shall be done, Had that it shall be measured ac^ cording to mason's measurement. Now, then, the question comes to this House, how will you construe these words "mason's measurement?" We find that this Provisional Board, who were authorized to draw warrants for the construction of this building, did draw warrants in favor of John Martin tor the performance of this work in 1881 this Board issued to John Martin a warrant for forty-six thousand and some hundred dollars, which warrant Mr. Martin possesses to-day. These warrants were drawn in pursuance of the statute authorizing this Provisional Board to draw warrants. [Mr. Shively read the Statute giving the Board the power to issue warrants.]. He hoped that for the good name of the State of Indiana that this just claim would no longer late, denied or refused. Men who have devoted their time and their labor to the State should have their just remuneration. You must remember, if the claim is large, that the contract was large.
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, was at the beginning of the session favorably impressed with the John Martin claim, especially when the Governor: spoke of this man and his claim in a manner that brought cheers from the gallery and tears from the members of the House. But he believed was an open fact that this claim did not belong to John Martin, but that it belonged to the lobbyists on the floor of the House and to a large banking company in this city. He desired to state in regard to the number of brick in the building that according to the first measurement made by Mr. Worden, the gentleman whom the Provision Board employed to take the measurement, to the number of brick was 23,000,000, and that his second measurement he made it several millions more. When this gentleman was question concerning the difference in the estimate of the two measurements, he said be was a friend of Mr. Martin's and had not come there to do him an injury.
Mr. PATTEN wanted to say in reference to claim, and he got his information from
gentlemen who were here before, that this claim come limping into this House on
crutches. He deal to state that the contract brought into this House is not the
original contract between John Martin and the Provisional Board, and that the words
"mason's measurement" were not in the original contract but were Inserted between the
lines after the original contract was made. He was satisfied that John Martin knew
that he had received every dollar that was due him, and not only that by that he had
received some $10,000 more than was justly due him. Whenever any claim is presented by
the lobbyists as this claim has been you feel sure something is wrong about it. In
speaking of ex-Governor Williams' connection with the claim, Mr. Patten was of the
opinion that if Gov
On motion by Mr. PATTEN the Committee rose, reported progress and asked leave to sit again at 2 o'clock.
The report of the
Mr. WILEY called for the special order, being the several resolutions agreeing to the amendments proposed to the Constitution of the State by the last General Assembly.
The joint resolution proposing an amendment to Section 2, Article 2, of the Constitution of the State of Indiana and amending Section'2 of Article 2 thereof, so that it will read as follows:
Sec. 2 In all elections not otherwise provided for by this Constitution every citizen of the United States of the age of twenty-one years and upwards, who shall have resided in the State during the six months, and in the Township sixty days, and in the Ward or Precinct thirty days Immediately preceding such election, and every person of foreign birth of the age of twenty-one years and upwards who shall have resided in the United States one year and who shall have resided in the State during the six months, and in the Township sixty days and in the Ward or Precinct thirty days immediately preceding such election, and shall have declared his or her intention to become a citizen of the United States, conformably to the laws of the United States on the subject of naturalization, shall be entitled to vote in the Township, Ward or Precinct where he or she may reside, If he or she shall have been duly registered according to law, was read the third time.
Mr. JEWETT trusted that the House would bear with him only a few minutes. He thought that the members would remember that during the protracted argument which took place on the amendments he held his peace. It is also well known that he is one of the minority of the Democrats in this Chamber, respectful in number at least, who have from the first pursued a course which they believed would bring these amendments directly before the people. He would vote against this amendment at the polls, believing that 98 per cent. of the women of the State did not desire this privilege. Concerning the amendment in relation to the election of State and County officers he stated that he believed ministerial and judicial officers should be elected as frequently as would be consistent with the duties of the offices. The prohibitory amendment he was opposed to on principle, and in every way that is honorable and fair he would oppose this amendment. He did not question the right of the majority of the people to place this amendment in the Constitution if they desired to do so.
Mr MONTGOMERY had come into the Legislature unpledged to his people He did not pledge himself or tell his people that he would vote for or against this amendment. He told them that he was opposed to what was known as the prohibitory amendment, and also to the woman suffrage amendment, and that he was in favor of the other amendments. Two of the amendments he would cheerfully vote for, and two of the amendments he would heartily oppose. But he would so cast his vote on these resolutions that his constituents would have the privilege of voting their sentiments on this question.
Mr. PATTEN moved the previous question which was seconded by the House, and under its operations the resolution passed, the House by yeas, 51; nays, 40-as follows:
Yeas-Messrs. Adams, Akin, Antrim, Beeson, Best Brazelton, Campbell, Copeland, Deem, Fleece, Frazer, Furnas, Gants, Gilman, Graham, Hanson, Helms, Henderson, Holler, Huston, Jewett, Kirkpatrick, Knowles, McCormick, McClelland of Lawrence, Marsh, Mauck of Harrison, Mellett, Mering, Montgomery, Mozier, Patten, Pettibone, Pulse, Robertson, Robinson, Shaffer, Shively, Shockney, Smith of Lagrange, Smith of Tippecanoe, Sterret, Stewart, Straughan, Thomas, Thompson, Westfall, Wiley, Williams of Knox, Wilson of Kosciusko and Wooding-51.
Nays-Messrs. Barr, Bowers, Brooks, Bryant, Cabbage, Chandler. Chittenden, Davis, Ferriter Fisher, Gerber, Genung, Gibson, Gordon, Greene, Heffren, Howland, Kennedy, Kester, McHenry, McMullen, Miller, Mock of Wells, Moody, Mute, Nave, Peters, Price, Pruitt, Schloss, Shaw, Smith of Blackford, Smith of Perry, Spain, Stevenson, S tucker. Tuley, Weaver, Whitsit and Wilson of Marion-40.
So the joint resolution for a woman's suffrage amendment to the Constitution was adopted.
The joint resolution proposing an amendment to Section 1 of Article 6 of the Constitution, and amending Section 1 of the sixth article, was read the third time as follows:
Section 1 There shall be elected by the vote of the State a Secretary, an Auditor and a Treasurer of State, who shall severally hold their offices for four years. They shall perform such duties as may be enjoined by law, and no person shall be eligible to either of said offices more than on term, or four years in any period of eight years.
The joint resolution was passed the House by yeas, 55; nays, 38-as follows:
Yeas-Messrs. Adams, Akin, Antrim, Barr, Beeson, Best, Brazelton, Campbell, Copeland, Deem, Fleece, Frazer, Furnas, Gants, Genung, Gilman, Graham, Ham, Hanson, Helms, Henderson, Holler, Huston, Jewett, Kirkpatrick, Knowles, McCormick, McClelland of Lawrence, Marsh, Mauck of Harrison, Mellett, Mering, Montgomery, Mosier, Patten, Pettibone, Pulse, Robertson, Robinson, Shatter, Shively, Shockney, Smith of Lagrange, Smith of Tippecanoe, Sterret, Stewart, Straughan, Thomas, Thompson, Westfall, Wiley, Wilson of Kosciusko, Woodling and Wright-55.
Nays-Messrs. Bowers, Brooks, Bryant, Cabbage, Chandler, Chittenden, Davis, Ferriter, Fisher, Gerber, Gordon, Green, Heffren, Howland, Kennedy, Kesier, McHenry, McMullen, Miller, Mock of Walls. Moody, Mutz, Nave, Peters, Pruitt, Schloss. Shaw, Smith of Blackford, Smith of Perry, Spain, Stevenson, Stucker, Sutton, Tuley, Weaver, Whitsit, Williams of Knox and Wilson of Marion-38.
The joint resolution proposing an amendment to Section 2 of Article 6 of the Constitution, and amending Section 2 of the sixth article was read the third time, as follows:
Sec. 2. There shall be elected in each County by the voters thereof, at the time of holding general election, a Clerk of the Circuit Court, Auditor, Recorder, Treasurer, Sheriff Coroner and Surveyor, who shall severally hold their offices' for four years, and no person shall be eligible to either of said offices more than four years, or one form. In any period of eight years.
The resolution passed the House by yeas, 53; nays, 40, as follows:
Yeas-Messrs. Adams, Akin. Antrim. Beeson, Best, Brazelton, Campbell, Copeland, Deem, Fleece, Frazer, Furnas, Gants. Genung, Gilman, Graham, Ham, Hanson, Helms, Henderson, Holler, Huston, Jewett, Kirkpatrick, Knowles, McCormick, McClelland of Lawrence, Marsh, Mauck of Harrison, Mellett, Mering, Montgomery, Mosier, Patten, Pettibone, Pulse, Robertson, Robinson, Shaffer. Shively, Shockney, Smith of Lagrange, Smith of Tippecanoe, Sterret, Stewart, Straughan, Thomas, Thompson, Westfall, Wiley, Wilson of Kosciusko, Woodling and Wright-53.
Nays-Messrs. Barr. Bowers, Brooks, Bryant, Cabbage, Chandler, Chittenden,
Davis, Ferriter, Fisher, Gerber, Gordon, Greene, Heffren, Howland, Kennedy,
Kester, McHenry, McMullen,
The joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the State of Indiana by inserting Article 17, forever prohibiting the manufacture, sale or keeping for sale in the State of Indiana spirituous, vinous, malt or any other intoxicating liquors, except for scientific, medical, mechanical and wines for sacramental purposes, and providing for regulating sales for said purposes, so as to amend by adding thereto Article 17 was to read as follows:
Section 1. The manufacture, sale or keeping for sale in said State, spirituous, vinous, malt liquor or any other intoxicating liquors, except for medical, scientific, mechanical and wines for sacramental purposes, shall be and is hereby forever prohibited in the State of Indiana- Was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 56; nays 36, as follows:
Yeas-Messrs. Adams, Akin Antrim, Barr, Beeson, Best, Brazelton, Campbell, Copeland, Deem, Fleece, Frazer, Pumas, Gants, Genung, Gibson, Gilman, Graham, Ham, Hanson, Helms, Holler, Huston, Jewett, Kirkpatrick, Knowles, McCormick, McClelland of Lawrence, Marsh, Mauck of Harrison, Mellett, Mering. Montgomery. Mosier, Patten, Pettibone, Pulse, Robertson, Robinson, Shaffer, Shively, Shockney, Smith of Lagrange, Smith of Tippecanoe, Sterret, Stewart, Straughan, Thomas, Thompson, Weaver, Westfall, Wiley, Henderson, Wilson of Kosciusko, Woodling and Wright-56.
Nays-Messrs. Bowers, Brooks, Cabbage, Chambers, Chittenden, Davis, Ferriter, Fisher, Gerber^ Gordon, Green, Heffren, Howland, Kennedy, Kester, McHenry, McMullen, Miller, Mock of Wells, Moody. Mutz. Nave, Peters, Pruitt, Schloss, Shaw, Smith of Perry, Span, Stevenson, Stucker, Sutton, Tuley, Whitsit, Williams of Knox, Wilson of Marion-36.
So the joint resolution for the liquor prohibition amendment to the Constitution was adopted.
Mr. AIKEN moved to reconsider that vote and to lay that motion on the table.
The latter motion was agreed to.
A resolution, offered by Mr, Jewett, instructing the
The House adjourned until 9 o'clock Monday.
The reading of the minutes was dispensed with. On motion by Mr. FOULKE the Constitutional restriction was dispensed with by yeas, 34; nays, 7; and he introduced a bill [288] to amend Section 3,347 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, which was read twice by title, the third time by sections, and passed the Senate by yeas, 43; nays, 3.
Mr. FOULKE explaining that the bill is intended to appropriately insert the words " and in case there be no acting Justice of the Peace therein, then before the Justice of the Peace residing nearest to said town in the County in which such town is situated."
Mr. YOUCHE, from the
It was read twice by title.
Mr. SAYRE moved to amend by adding a section so the provisions of this bill as to the time in which a remonstrance may be filed shall relate to all proceedings now pending where a contract for the construction of the same has not been made.
Mr. HENRY stated objections to this amendment-it would open up every ditch proceeding where there is no contract made, though assessments are paid.
Mr. BELL thought adjudications under the law had better be left alone.
The amendment was agreed to by yeas, 21; nays, 18
The bill was considered engrossed, read the third time, an emergency clause added, and the bill passed by yeas, 39; nays, 2.
A Committee from the House of Representatives [Mr. Heffren Chairman] announced, because of the absence of the chief clerk, Mr. Emmet L. Rose, of the principal clerk's corps, has been designated by the Speaker to deliver messages to the Senate from the House.
On motion by Mr. BROWN the bill [H. R. 91] concerning the relocation of County seats-see pages 107 and 165 of the Brevier Reports-was read the first time and referred to a Select Committee of Five, viz: Messrs. Brown, May, Compton, Bundy and Spann.
Mr. WILLARD, from the
Mr. SPANN protested against this thing of reducing the pay proposed for a woman.
On motion by Mr. BELL the report of the
On motion by Mr. GRAHAM the bill [H. R. 200]
to provide for the payment of certain claims-over
Mr. McINTOSH, protecting against its passage, when his named was called, understanding these claims are fifteen years old and that they are in the hands of brokers. These claims were in the Legislature two years ago when the Legislature sat 101 days and they failed to get them through, and as far as he can find out, the parties who did the work will not get the money.
On motion by Mr. McClure his bill [S. 120] to amend section 8 of an act amendatory of the charter of Clarksville, in dark and Floyd Counties, was read the second time by title, under a suspension of the Constitutional rule by a two-thirds vote, the third time by sections, and passed the serial by yeas, 37; nays, 2.
Mr. McCLURE explaining his bill is the result of an amicable settlement.
Mr. SPANN opposed the bill. Being a member of the Committee to which this bill was referred, he declared there had been concealed the fact that that certain parties had bought 1,000 acres of land there and desired to lay out a town.
Mr. McCLURE conceded the fact that Wash C. DePauw and John H. Stotsenberg bed bought
&
Mr. BUNDY read the following, and moved for a suspension of the order of business and its adoption:
Whereas, The ex-State Treasurer who retired from office on the 37th of February was responsible to the State for about $700,000, which by law was required to be kept in the Treasury of the State and turned over to his successor in office in lawful money; and
Whereas, The said funds of the State of Indiana were not turned over to the present Treasurer of the State of Indiana in cash but in certificates and checks, and are not now in the vaults of the Treasury, but are loaned by the present Treasurer of State to certain banks of the city of Indianapolis; and
Whereas, By law the loaning of said funds by the Treasurer or keeping them elsewhere than in the vaults of the Treasury is a misdemeanor, and the funds of the State are in danger of being lost, as the bond of the Treasurer of State is only $150,000, while the funds for which he is accountable at this time amount to more than four times that 1 gum; and Whereas, The fact that said funds not being in the Treasury, as required by law, amounts to a defalcation which requires imediate action to protect the Treasury; therefore;
Resolved, That a Committee of three Democrats and two Republicans be appointed by the President of the Senate with power to examine witnesses to investigate the Treasury of the State count the funds found therein, and what deficiency exists, if any, as shown by the books of the Auditor of State, and report what steps are necessary to protect the public funds as required by law.
Mr. BUNDY offered this resolution for the purpose of protecting the State Treasury of Indiana. In the Treasury is $700,000, and suppose all that money is lost lo-morrow. what protection has the people of Indiana but the Treasurer'" bond for $150,000? He was informed and believed that this money is in banks and other places, instead of being in the vaults of the State where it be longs, and that the State Treasurer is loaning it at 4 per cent., and receiving the interest on it.
Mr. BELL (interposing) would be glad to know where the vaults of the treasury are located. There is an old safe in the State Treasurer's office which cost about $200.
Mr. BUNDY (resuming): There is a statute providing for the safe keeping of the moneys of of the State, and establishing a vault for that purpose, and to keep it any place else is a violation of law. He hoped the resolution would not be taken in a partisan sense.
Mr. MAGEE (interrupting) inquired if this thing has not existed for a year or two, and if the Senator had not been cognizant of the fact.
Mr. BUNDY (continuing): Did not ascertain until to-day that this money is loaned out in this way.
Mr. MAGEE (in his seat): You knew it in a general way. [Laughter ]
Mr. BUNDY (continuing): Whatever he knew on the subject, it is not possible now, by bringing up the fact that it has existed for two years, to make it right This Legislature is about to close its session, and something should be done to protect the State Treasury from the possible loss of half a million dollars. The fact that no member on the other side has introduced a resolution for the purpose of protecting the public funds is no argument why it should not be done now.
Mr. SMITH (interrupting) asked why the Senator did not introduce the resolution in the early part of the session.
Mr. BUNDY (resuming) had already stated he did not know until to-day that this money was loaned out at a specific rate of interest, and was not in the Treasury vaults. He asked if the Senator from Jay has known it?
Mr. SMITH (in his seat): I don"t yet.
Mr. MAGEE said the Senator ought to know that to make this examination thorough so as to acquaint this Senate with any facts that might come into its possession would take Committee a month or six weeks, so the pure motives of the author of this resolution should have been stirred up much earlier in the session. Admitting that $700,000 is, a good deal of money, and that $150,000 is not a sufficient bond for the officer having it in charge, yet to the credit of every Treasurer this State has had no one, either Democratic or Republican, has failed to account for every dollar of the public fun'-is that has come into his hands. He would join with the Senator in an investigation if there has been any wrong done on the part of any Treasurer, or if the public funds are not on hand and he thought the majority on this floor would aid in an investigation as soon as needed. If the Treasurer of State gets interest on the public funds that is a matter between himself and the people who pay the interest. Every officer in the State having charge of fiduciary funds does the same thing, and as he understands, the Supreme Court says they have the right to do it He opposed the resolution because he did not believe it was offered in good faith and he did not propose to give a vote that will cast reflection upon the conduct of an officer who has not had time to commit any wrong. He counseled Senators to sit down on this proposed investigation coming in at the heels of the session and for no other purpose than that gentlemen on the other side may go to their constituency and say that a Democratic Senate refused to investigate a Democratic officer for loaning the public funds, when at the same time every Republican official receives interest on public money.
Mr. BROWN also opposed the resolution. The Senator who offers it insists that the Treasurer of State shall keep $700,000 in the State's safe or vault, as he calls it, which the Senator from Allen and Whitley, who knows all about it, says is an old dilapidated safe which originally cost only $250.
Mr. VOYLES declared that in the absence of the statute to the contrary the Treasurer of State has the right to loan the public moneys and make a profit on it, and nobody can say him "nay."
The motion to suspend the order of business was rejected by yeas 7; nays, 25.
Pending the roll-call-
Mr. McMAGEE, when his name was called, said: Following the authority as laid down in the case of the State on relation of the Attorney General against Nathan Kimball, formerly a State Treasurer, I vote "no."
Mr. RAHM, when his came was called, said; I voted twice against suspending the rules in order that the special order may be taken up, and I will vote against it again. But I will vote for this resolution whenever it comes up at the proper time. I don't care if Governor Porter is a stockholder of the bank that borrows the State's money, any bank that will pay 4 per cent. on deposits is bound to break. I don't believe in depositing this money at 4 per cent.; better take 2 or 3 per cent., then the bank can live and the people' money be safe. I don't believe in putting the State's money in a safe that cost but $250; because it would be stolen in six months. I vote "no."
Mr. SPANN, when his name was called, said: We have heard recently from the States of Tennessee, Alabama and Mississippi on the question of State Treasurers, and now having a Democrat in that office In this State, and knowing the uncertainty of confidence to be placed in them in the light of that history, and knowing the statute on the subject of loaning this money, I vote "aye."
The result of the vote was then announced, so the motion was rejected.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR announced the special order being Mr. Campbell's bill [S. 101] and Mr. McCollough's bill [S. 19] defining unjust discriminations of railroads-see page 239 of the Brevier Reports-the question being on a Committee report, recommending that the bill [S. 19] lie on the table
Mr. BELL hoped the report of the Committee will be concurred in and thus the bill be laid on the table. The purpose of the bill is good enough, and if it, would accomplish that it should have his hearty support. The evils aimed ought to be controlled and prevented. The vice lies in the second section of the bill, which rests upon an assumption which is not true. It will not do to assume it is unjust to charge more for carrying a less distance than a greater. If this bill were to become a law it would deprive competing points of the benefit of competition, as he proceeded to illustrate. To stop and start an ordinary freight, train of say twenty cars on an ordinary grade costs from $1 to $3. Distance is not the main element to take into consideration when computing proper rate of charges.
Mr. FAULKNER cited unjust, discriminations by railroads as against the town in which he lived.
Mr. BELL: Such action is wrong and ought to be stopped; but for a few abuses he would not enact a law that would seriously affect places where there is competition. It would be unwise, injurious and injudicious to pass this bill. To a certain extent, a railroad ought to be under the control of the Legislature. What is set forth in the bill should not be considered as unjust discrimination; it would deprive people at competing points of an advantage. The policy of the State should be to encourage competition. There are very objectionable features in this bill. You affect injuriously the railroads of this country and you affect the very heart of business. This bill would injuriously affect the interest of thousands where it would advance the interests of one.
Mr. CAMPBELL: It has been stated that an Indiana Assembly has neither brains nor integrity enough to enact railroad legislation He believed the contrary to be true. It is a question of great magnitude, and one which demands specific legislation. A Railroad Company can transport ten car loads at a less rate per car than it can transport one, and the price may be based on cost and not go beyond what is equitable. If he received one car load and another ten cars the Company may make a difference as to Ac ex^ct cost, or percentage of cost. Mr. C. gave way for a motion to adjourn.
The Senate adjourned till 9 o'clock to-morrow.
The SPEAKER announced a quorum present and ordered he reading of the Clerk's minutes of Saturday's preceding.
Mr. CAMPBELL introduced a bill [H. R. 463] to Authorize the issuing of bonds by any Bridge Company incorporated under the laws of this State, which was read the first time.
On motion by Mr. KESTER the bill [S. 287] to exempt from taxation moneys and choses in action held by execution for scientific, benevolent or charitable institutions, was pressed to th9 final vote and passed the House by yeas, 66; nays, 4.
On motion by Mr. HEFFREN the Constitutional rules were suspended and the following described bills ware read the first and second times by title only, and ordered to the third reading:
The bill [S. 87] to provide for the location and erection of an additional Asylum for the Insane.
The bill [S. 285] to regulate the terms of the Circuit, Court held in the County of Pulaski.
The bill [S. 151] relating to County, State and other officers, and the paying over by them of all money in their hands at the expiration of their term of office.
The bill [S. 105] to legalize the incorporation of the town of Waynetown, Montgomery County.
The bill [S. 172] supplemental to an act fixing fees of certain officers, etc.-see page 120 of the Brevier Reports.
Mr. HEFFREN offered an amendment providing fee for Clerk's attendance, which, on his further motion was considered engrossed, and the bill read the third time and that the Constitutional rule be suspend so as to put it on its passage.
Mr. MOODY: I heartily indorse the statement of the gentleman from Washington [Mr.
Heffren], that some bill should be passed on this subject, but I go farther and say
that a bill should be passed by this Legislature that will in fact, and not merely in
fiction, cut off constructive fees. This bill, known as the Bayless bill, is a tub
thrown to the whale, and is expected to quiet the people in their demands for a
reduction of the fees of County officers The gentleman from Washington says he is
satisfied that this bill is the only bill hat can pass this Legislature. I do not know
by what authority members insist that this Legislature must accept this bill or
nothing. The House
Mr. HEFFREN was in favor of suspending the rules. He was in favor of the other bill but if he could not get the other bill he thought it would be best to take this one.
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, hoped that the Constitutional rules would not be suspended. He had examined both bills, and he believed the bill [H. R. 316] now in the hands of the Committee and ready to be reported was much better and wiser legislation. He did not believe and could not understand why some gentlemen state that no fee and salary bill could be passed by the Legislature.
Mr. MOCK was fully satisfied that no fee and salary bill could be passed. He was in favor of suspending the rules and passing this bill.
The motion to suspend the rules failed for want of a Constitutional majority-yeas, 59; nays. 26.
The bill [S. 174] concerning the Supreme Court
was read the second time and referred to the
Mr. HEFFREN, from a majority of the
Your Committee finds from the evidence that the prices of material and labor entering into the construction of the new State House are now, and have been for some time, at least 20 per cent higher than when the contract was awarded.
We also find that the work has been done in accordance with the plans and specifications on file in the Commissioners' office, the material and design being unexcelled.
We also find from the evidence that there have been many changes in the plans and specifications found necessary by the Board in the progress of the work that all the changes have been made by the Board i'i strict conformity with the contract.
The evidence further discloses that one William
While the evidence of the contractors allowed that they have expended upon the building $996,308.98, making an apparent loss of $287,434.10, this apparent lose Includes the 10 per cent. retained by the Board, together with all interest upon the amounts advanced over and above the amounts received by contractors upon estimates for work done, as well as plant, machinery, etc., reducing the total loss of the contractors on the building proper to $100,000.
In view of all the foregoing facts we are of the opinion that the State House can be built within the amount allowed by law if completed under the present management of Howard & Denig-$2,000,000-but not at the contract; price, $1,762,207.58. We are of the opinion, from the evidence, that if the contract is relet to the other contractors the building can never be completed within $2,000,000. We believe, further, from the evidence, that a reletting to new contractors will retard the completion of the building at least one year. We also find that Mr. Kanmacher is a non-resident and Insolvent, and that Mr. Denig has little financial ability, and that without pecuniary aid he can not complete his contract. We also find that the sureties are non-residents of Indiana. We also find by a communication from the Board of State House Commissioners that the contractors are desirous to be released from their contract, and that the contract be let to Howard & Denig.
We report resolutions for adoption, and recommend that the House take some action in regard to the preservation of the evidence in the case. We also report a bill for the consideration of this House.
The report is signed by Messrs. Heffren, Moody, Shockney and Huston. The bill, prepared by the Board of State House Commissioners, which the Committee will submit to the Legislature, is supplemental to the existing statute, and provides for the reletting of the contract to Howard & Denig, who will be required to give bond in a sum not less than $250,000, with ample and acceptable security, and one of the bondsmen shall be a resident of Indiana. The reletting of the contract is upon the condition that the State House Building shall be tally completed within the time specified by law and at a cost not exceeding $2,000,000, which shall include the expenditures already made upon work. The bill authorizes the Board of State House Commissioners to make the new contract. The resolution referred to provides for the payment of the expenses of the investigation.
Mr. McCORMICK submitted a minority report Betting forth that the entire management indicates a disposition to favor the contractors, and aid them in securing from this Legislature an additional appropriation; that the work has not been done in accordance with the plans and specifications as originally adopted, as many changes have been made on account of the incompleteness of the original plans and specifications; and that all of said changes have been made at an increased cost to the State in some cases three prices were paid. The management of the work team not been economical, costing more than was necessary. From the facts deduced from the evidence the Committee were of the opinion it was the duty of the contractor to proceed with the building according to the contract for the amount specified in the original contract.
These reports were made the special order for 2 o'clock Wednesday.
Mr. Frazer's bill [H. R. 37] to create the Court of Appeals it provides that the Governor shall appoint, to serve until the next general election, five Judges of an Appellate Court, one from each Supreme Court District, two of them to be Republicans, two Democrats and one National, their salary to be $3,500 a year] was read the third time.
Mr. FRAZER, after reciting the necessities that caused the creation of ^be Supreme Court Commission, stated that there could be no doubt that the Commission must be continued or an Appellate Court created. The Commission has only reduced the number of cases before the Supreme Court 500 in the last two years. He was of the opinion that at least one half more business could be dispensed with by the Court, should it be created, than by the Supreme Court Commission. The bill strong y advocated itself to him as an economical measure and it would in the various ways prove a saving to the State of some $11,000 per year. It would also save one-sixth of the time of the Supreme Court Judges for under the Commission the Supreme Court Judges expend about one-sixth of their time in reviewing the decisions of the Commission, This bill meets the approval of the people, and meets the approval of two out of the five Supreme Court Commissioners. The passage of the bill was preferable to the continuation of the Supreme Court Commission now in existence, for the further reason that the Appellate Court would not be subject to the provision of the Constitution, which required a written opinion in every case, but would only wire opinions in cases where the decisions of lower Courts were reversed.
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, thought the bill should not pass. It is too far from the people. It is as high in its provinces as the Supreme Court itself. This bill provides that in all cases where the amount does not exceed $3,000 it, should go to the Court of Appeals. An examination of the matters will reveal the fact that nine-tenths of the cases before the Supreme Court do not exceed that amount. Should this bill become a law this- would be the only State hi the Union that has two Courts of last resort. He hoped that the bill would not pass and that the Commission would continue for two years more.
Mr. JEWETT was of the opinion that that part of the Constitution which says that justice must be administered speedily and without delay is not faithfully carried out at present. It must be conceded that this bill must pass or the Supreme Court Commission must be passed. He knew that he voiced the opinion of the majority of the people when he asserts that the Supreme Court Commission has been a failure. It will require more money to run the Commission for the next two years than to create the Court of Appeals and keep it running for the next two years. He was in favor of giving this Court of Appeals a fair test for the next two years.
Mr. HAM was opposed to the bill. He feared that if this Court of Appeals was created, it would, be impossible for the people to get rid of it, even though it proved an unsatisfactory experiment.
Mr. WILSON, of Marion, believed that the Supreme Court Commissions were becoming more unpopular every day. When the Commission was created it was expected that it would clean up the docket in two years, but after a trial of two year they were only about 500 cages from where they were when the Commission was established. We have now reached a point where we must continue that Commission or create another Court. This Court is indispensible; the people want it: he was in favor of it.
Mr. HEFFREN: I have no right to speak for any constituency but my own. I believe that
I know their wants, desires and requirements. I know that they are opposed to any
increase of
Mr. GORDON was of the opinion that this bill, should it pass, could not afford immediate relief. It could not try the 1,000 cases now before the Supreme Court; it would only try new cases. In two years more the Commission, at the same rate, will have brought up the Supreme Court docket as nearly as it is possible to be done. He concurred in the remark previously made that this Court, should it be created, would assume nine- tenths of the business of the Supreme Court.
Mr. GIBSON stated that it was a mistake that this Court would get nine-tenths of the work of the Supreme Court. This question was carefully considered by the Committee, which divided this work so as to give about one-half to the Court of Appeals and one-half to the Supreme Court. He was informed that the Supreme Court was against the Commission and was in favor of the Court of Appeals. He thought the bill had better pass creating this Court.
Mr. PATTEN thought the bill was very fair and very reasonable, and that it would give great relief to the people of the State. He felt that the Supreme Court must have some relief. This relief must come by the Commission or by the creation of this Court. From a financial standpoint he was in favor of the creation of this Court. It would be a saving of $500 per year on each Judge. Should this Commission he continued it would require six years to clear the docket of the Supreme Court.
Mr. FRAZER was of the opinion that the opposition came from the Districts where the present Commissioners desired a continuance of this Supreme Court Commission that they might not lose their positions. He was forced to the conclusion that some members were working in the interest of members of this Commission and not in the interest of the people If any gentleman would prove to him. that the bill did not save some $11,000 to the people each year he would vote against the bill.'
The bill was rejected by yeas, 37; nays. 50, as follows:
Yeas-Messrs. Adams, Antrim, Barr, Best, Brazelton, Campbell, Copeland, Ferriter, Frazee, Frazer, Furnas, Genung, Gibson, Holler, Howland, Huston, Jewett, Kirkpatrick, Knowles, McClelland of Lawrence, McMullen, Mellett, Mosier, Patten, Pettibone, Robinson, Shockney, Smith of Lagrange, Smith of Tippecanoe, Spain, Sterret, Stranghan, Wiley, Wilson of Kosciuko, Wilson of Marion and Mr. Speaker-37.
Nays-Messrs Akin, Beeson, Brooks, Cabbage, Carr, Chandler, Davis, Deem, Fisher, Fleece, Gantz, Berber, Gilman, Gordon, Ham, Heffren, Henderson, Kennedy, Kester, McCormick, McHenry, Marsh, Mauck of Harrison, Mering, Miller, Mock of Wells, Montgomery, Moody. Mutz, Nave, Peters, Pruitt, Pulse, Robertson, Schloss. Shaffer. Shaw, Smith of Blackford. Smith of Perry, Stevenson, Stewart, Stucker, Sutton, Thompson, Tuley, Weaver, Westfall, Whitsit, Williams of Knox and Woodling-50.
So the bill was rejected.
The special order being Mr. Ferriter's bill [H. R. 316] concerning legal advertisements, it was called up by Mr. Shockney and read the third time.
Mr. GIBSON was opposed to the passage of the bill. He was satisfied that it is legislation that the people of Indiana are not demanding.
Mr. SUTTON thought that because the gentleman from Clarke [Mr. Gibson] had some private grievance against some gentleman, was no reason why this bill should not pass. He believed that most people read the daily papers and not the weekly papers, especially in the cities. He was satisfied that it is a good bill as far as it goes. The bill does not seek to increase advertisements. It simply gives the persons most interested the privilege of having the advertisement done wherever he desire. There is nothing wrong in the bill.
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, thought that the gentleman from Clark [Mr. Gibson] labored under a misapprehension in regard to the provisions of the bill. It simply provides that this advertisement shall be printed in a daily newspaper. It does not say that it shall be printed in the Sentinel, Journal, Times or News. It gives the man who has the advertisement to do to go to the paper where it can be done cheapest.
The bill passed the House by yeas, 58; nays, 31.
The SPEAKER announced that in the absence of Principal Clerk Edwins, Emmet L. Rose would assume the duties of Principal Clerk.
Mr. WILSON'S, of Marion, bill [H. R. 338] to abolish the office of City Treasurer in cities of 60,000 or more inhabitants was read the third time.
Mr. WILSON stated that the bill is not a political measure. The idea of uniting the office of City and County Treasurer emanated from a prominent Republican journal. It will save to this city about $100,000. It seeks to have but one assessment, but one duplicate, but one time and place of paying tax. It is a matter of economy. There have been a half dozen editorials in the Journal and In the Sentinel and one in the News asking why this bill has not been passed. He hoped, that the bill would pass and become a law.
Mr. MELLETT was tired of. hearing bill's advocated as good, wholesome measures for the city of Indianapolis. He was of the opinion that what was a good, wholesome measure for Indianapolis would be a good, wholesome measure for any other city in the State. He could not understand' why, in drafting these bills, they were not made? to extend to the o'l.aer c'Kies of tine ^tate
Mr. HEFFREN believed that Indianapolis was the only city that had, through its press, businessmen and Board of Trade, demanded such a measure. It is one of the measures that the people without distinction of party have asked for. He thought the Legislature should grant this request.
Kr. MOCK thought the bill was right in prince pie, and thought the House should accept it and get all the good possible out of it.
The bill passed the House by yeas, 69; nays, 28.
Mr. SHIVELY called up his motion to reconsider the vote by which Mr. Helm's bill [H. R. 462] to amend Section 1 of an act to provide for the regulation of stock running at large was rejected by the House February 22.
Mr. SHIVELY stated that in all fairness and justice this hill ought to pass. He was
at his home, on the Wabash last Saturday and yesterday. He talked with farmers
living along the Wabash and other streams, and they told him that something must be
done or they can not farm their ground this year. The argument that the poor man's
cow should be allowed to run at large should not be considered in this question.
There are these
Mr. McMULLEN hoped the bill would pass. It has been stated that the bill should simply apply to the valleys of the Ohio, Wabash and other large streams. Such a law would be unconstitutional. We could not make it apply to a single locality or any particular localities and make It constitutional. As soon as the cropping season of 1883 and 1884 are past, the provisions of this bill go out of force, and the present law comes into effect again. He knew of a strip of bottom land thirty miles in length where not a fence was left.
Mr. HOLLER said under the present law the line of toe owner of the lauds was recognized as his fence, and he was not compelled to enclose his lands with a fence to prevent the trespass of stock unless the Commissioners of the County grant the privilege of stock running at large. He believed the County Commissioners and citizens of any County of the State were more capable of judging whether stock should run at large in their Counties or not than the members of this House. He thought this bill if passed and recognized fully would work great hardship and inconveniences in some Counties.
Mr. SMITH, of Tippecanoe, had made a culculation, and of the 13,000 square miles in the State nearly one-thirtieth of this whole area is without fences. He desired to place himself on record as being in favor of the passage of this bill.
Mr. MOCK was from a County that was traversed by the raging Wabash, but he thought the Board of Commissioners of his County knew better than himself what the people warned in reference to the question. He hoped the bill would not pass.
Mr. MONTGOMERY lived In a County where they have a river. He desired to say that for the last few years they have had but little fencing along this river, but the people have been magnanimous enough to keep up their stock. He thought the people should appeal to the County Commissioners.
The motion to reconsider was agreed to by yeas, 57; nays, 30.
The bill passed the House by yeas, 55; nays, 29.
Mr. JEWETT, from the Committee of Free Conference on the general appropriation bill [H. R. 302], submitted a report of agreement on some eighteen separate items.
The report was concurred in by yeas, 51; nays, 43.
Mr. GORDON, from the
The report was concurred in by yeas, 82; nays, 5.
Mr. GILMAN'S bill [H. R. 7] concerning railroads and other corporations was taken up, and pending its consideration-
The House adjourned until to-morrow at o'clock.
The reading of the minutes was dispensed with.
On motion by Mr BELL the House amendment to his bill [S. 283] was concurred in, mailing the act take effect in October instead of January, as was originally set in the bill.
Mr. BROWN offered a concurrent resolution, which was adopted, for a Joint Convention to-day at 11 o'clock, for the election of a President of the Board of Trustees of the Benevolent Institutions, and one Trustee each for the Insane, Deaf and Dumb and Blind Asylums and three Trustees for the Asylum for Feeble Minded Children and Soldiers' Orphans' Home.
On motion by Mr. McCULLOUGH, the Constitutional restriction was set aside, by yeas, 44; nays, 0, and his bill [S. 178] supplementary to an act to establish Public Libraries, approved February 16, 1852, was read the second time by title, was considered engrossed the third time by sections and passed by yeas, 44; nays, 0.
Mr. McCULLOUGH explained so long as the Library is kept open and free to all the inhabitants of the town the tax may be levied-see page 121 of the Brevier Reports.
On motion by Mr. KEISER, the Constitutional rule was suspended by a two-thirds vote and the bill [H. R. 29] to enable several Counties in this State to sell and dispose of bonds for the benefit of the school fund, was read twice by title only, the third time and passed by yeas, 41; nays, l.
On motion by Mr. VOYLES a two-thirds vote again dispensed with the Constitutional restriction and the bill [H. R. 117] to amend Sections 365, 256 and 257 of an act concerning taxation was read twice by title only, the third time and passed by yeas, 33; nays, 7.
Mr. VOYLES explaining that it was to relieve the flood sufferers by allowing them to pay but 6 per cent. penalty on delinquent taxes instead of the heavy penalty allowed by law.
On Motion by Mr. SPANN another vote was taken on the joint resolution [S. 2] to allow $l0,000 to the widow of Edwin May, late architect of the State House, and it was passed the Senate by yeas, 29; nays, 16.
Mr. McCULLOUGH, since objecting to this claim the other day, has seen the contract between Mr. May and the State House Commissioner, and now has positive evidence that this claim is unjust. There is not $3,000 due this widow. He was creditably informed that the sons of the deceased are claiming the money as due to them: that they ought to have their share in their father's estate. If it is justice to pay $1,000 to the widow, it is justice to pay at least $10,000 to each of these children. This is so full of injustice to the State that it almost amounts to dishonesty.
Pending the roll-call-
Mr. VOYLES, in explaining his vote when his name was called, said: I want again to enter my earnest protest against the passage of this resolution allowing a bonus of $10,000 to the widow of the late Edwin May. There is absolutely no merit that I am able to see in the claim.
The vote was announced as above, and so the joint resolution passed the Senate.
Mr. WILLARD, from the
These reports were placed on the files, without reading, and ordered printed.
On motion by Mr. HOOVER two-thirds of the Senate let aside the Constitutional rule,
and his bill [S. 236] fixing commutations of terms of sen
On motion by Mr. BICHOWSKI, under a suspension of the rules, the bill [H. R. 407] amending the present law so as to set apart semi-annually $10,000 as the State Normal School fund, was read twice by title, the third time by sections, and passed by yeas, 30; nays, 10.
On motion by Mr. MAY the bill [H. R. 285] to give his Court four terms instead of three, was pressed to the final vote under a suspension of rules, and passed the Senate by yeas, 81; nays, 0.
Mr. CAMPBELL called up a special order, being his bill [S. 10] and Mr. McCullough's bill [S. 19] concerning unjust discriminations of railroads-see pages 28 and 239 of the Brevier Reports-the question being on a Committee report recommending that the bill [S. 19] lie on the table.
Mr. CAMPBELL insisted railroad discriminations are against, the interests of the entire Commonwealth, and it is but right they should be prevented. In some instances double tariff is charged for less than 100 miles as is charged for ten times the distance. Because of the shortness of time left this session, if anything is done in this matter, it should be done quickly. Rail roads are but public servants; they take so much of the public land, and they become nuisance in so far as they injure and destroy human life. In return for their services they demand what may be considered as fees, and there is unquestioned right, as well as a necessity for legislative action and control in the interests of the people at large Indiana is behind at least fourteen different states in regulating the tariff imposed op the people by railroad corporations.
On motion by Mr. VOYLES, the House amendments to the road and Supervisor's bill [S. 8] was taken up.
Mr. SAYRE thought it incompetent to give due consideration to the many amendments proposed to this bill at this time, There is an amendment proposed to Section 20 which should not be concurred in. There are some twenty-eight Townships in one of his Counties, and it would make a difference of over $20,000 in the State, which would go as extra compensation to County Auditors, and be taken from the taxpayers of the State.
Mr. VOYLES said the amendment to Section 20 strikes out all in relation to the County Auditor.
Mr. SAYRE insisted that he is right on this question. The Auditor should perform this duty under the salary now provided by law. A Committee from the House of Representatives announced that the House was ready to receive the Senate for a Joint Convention to elect officers of certain of the Benevolent Institutions of the State.
On a motion by Mr. BROWN the Senate repaired at once to the Hall 01 the House of Representatives.
When Senators returned to their Chamber-
The Senate took a recess till 2 o'clock p. m.
On motion by Mr. HENRY the Senate refused to concur in the House amendments to the
road and highway bill [S. 67] and asked for a
Mr. CAMPBELL resumed his remarks interrupted by the Joint Convention before the
noon recess. He said: It has been said to my knowledge by high railroad authority in
the hotel lobbies during the present session that no Indiana Assembly has brains
enough, or integrity enough, to pass a railroad bill. I confess that my ability as a
general has been such that with all my efforts and importunities I have but just
succeeded in getting this bill No. 10 from the hands of the
Mr. SPANN obtained the floor, but gave way for-
On motion by Mr. WILLARD the bill [H. R. 51] to provide for the taxation of dogs was read the second time.
On motion by Mr. VOYLES the Senate-concurred in the House amendments to his supplemental fee and salary bill [S. 173], allowing per diem to Clerk of Courts.
On motion by Mr. MAGEE the House amendment to his bill [S. 78] to amend the ace establishing a State Bureau of Statistics-striking out all that alludes to the Geological Department was concurred in.
Mr. BELL stating that but few would have voted for this bill had it been known it interfered with the tenure of office of Professor John Collett, which the House amendment makes right.
On motion of Mr. BELL the bill [H. R. 105] concerning the liens of laboring men,
mechanical and others-a bill prepared two years ago by the
Mr. SPANN, as a member of the
There are two sides to this question. He favored a just railroad bill. This bill would say to railroads they must charge for transportation the same rate for one hog as for 1,000.
Mr. McCULLOUGH objected to that kind of construction of his bill.
Mr. Spann (resuming) gave way for-
On motion by Mr. FAULKNER, the bill [H. R. 13] concerning the use of firearms read the second time by title under a suspension of the rules by a two-thirds vote, read the third time and passed by yeas, 43; nays; 3.
Mr. FAULKNER explaining the bill proposes to punish any person over tea years of age who shall point a gun, pistol or other firearm, whether loaded or unloaded, at another.
Mr. HENRY from the
On motion by Mr. W1LLARD the report was concurred in.
On motion by Mr. ADKISON the bill [H. R. 14] to require all Companies or
Associations to make settlement and payment to their employes at least every thirty
days-see page 240 of the Brevier Reports-was read the first time and referred to the
On motion by Mr. JOHNSTON the rules were set aside by a two-thirds vote and the bill [H. R. 198] for the relief of Allen Lepton and his sureties was read twice by title, the third lime by sections and passed by yeas, 85; nays. 6.
Mr. JOHNSTON explaining the money, $4,090, was lost by the failure of a bank, but over half has been restored by this honest officer, to whose relief the General Assembly should now come.
On motion by Mr. COMPTON the bill [H. R. 438] to amend Section 6,276 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, was by a two thirds vote suspending the rules read Twice by title only, the third time by sections, and passed by yeas, 33; nays, 8.
Mr. COMPTON stating is object was to exempt some property held by a Masonic Lodge in Terre Haute from taxation-the only change from the law as at present being it exempts real estate held by a charitable organization where there is no building on it.
Mr. HENRY, from The Joint
Mr. SPANN resumed his speech on the railroad tariff bill at quarter before 6 o'clock. He favored regulating the tariff on railroads, but would not refuse such corporations a hearing. He favored a law making the rates not only just to the shipper, but just to the corporations. The arbitration bill, S. 10, is something like what is needed; but the bill S. 19 has not the elasticity requisite-it seems to be almost an identical copy of a bill presented last session by Senator Menzies. He gave way for-
Mr. Benz on whose motion the Senate took a recess until 7:30 o'clock p. m.
Mr. SPANN resumed his speech. It a Railroad Commission be created it ought to be composed of a merchant, a manufacturer and a farmer; and no person should be on said Commission who was connected with or owned any stock, in any railroad That the Legislature has the power to regulate frame on railroads there can be no doubt. When he concluded, at 9:30-
Mr. HENRY spoke in favor of some legislation upon the proposition presented by both of these bills, and hoped to see the time when the Legislature would pass some carefully-considered and proposed bills, and hoped to see the time when the Legislature would pass some carefully considered and proposed bills regulating traffic over the railroads in this State. He spoke in opposition to the bill S. 19, an in favor of the bill S. 10, with some amendments which he indicated.
At 12:43 a. m. he gave way for a motion to adjourn, which came within one vote of being carried, but after several changes of votes the result was announced as yeas, 22; nays, 17; a recount showing yeas, 17; nays, 29. Mr. H resuming, concluded at 1:27 o'clock a. m.
Mr. GRAHAM was next recognized by the President protem [Mr. Spann], which recognition was resisted from the Democratic benches till 1:45 o'clock a. m., when Mr. G. proceeded to speak against the bill. At 2 o'clock he yielded to-
Mr. HENRY moved that the Senate adjourn till 10 o'clock, that the special order of business shall be the consideration of the House Bill No. 133 until 4 o'clock in the evening, and at that time the vote be taken upon the bill, and that no other business be allowed to interfere except by unanimous consent of the Senate, and that the Senator from Jay [Mr. Smith] withdraw his motion to restrict debate.
These motions were severally agreed to.
So at 2 o'clock and ten minutes a. m. the Senate adjourned.
The reading of the Clerk's minutes was dispensed with.
On motion by Mr. McCORMICK 500 copies of the stenographic evidence before the State House Investigating committee and the Attorney General's opinion on the same subject, was ordered printed.
By consent Mr. TULEY Introduced bill [H. R. 464] supplement to an act concerning the estate of persons who nave absented themselves from their usual place of residence and gone to parts unknown, which was read the third time.
On motion by Mr. TULEY the Constitutional rules were suspended [yeas, 79; nays, 6], the bill was read the second time, considered engrossed, read the third time by sections and passed the House by yeas, 84; nays, 0.
Mr. HEFFREN moved that the House take up the Senate concurrent resolution for a Joint Convention of the two Houses to convene at 11 o'clock, Tuesday, February 27, for the purpose of electing President of the Board of Benevolent Institutions, one Trustee for the Hospital for the Insane, one Trustee for the Institution for the Deaf and Dumb, one Trustee for the Institution fur the Blind, and three Trustees for the Soldiers' Orphans' Home.
The motion was agreed to by yeas, 53; nays, 37.
The resolution was read and adopted by yeas, 56; nays, 37.
Mr. Aikin called up the special order, the bill
Mr. Moody entered a motion to reconsider the vote just taken.
Mr. HAM made an ineffectual motion to suspend the rules and introduce the following resolution:
Resolved, by the House of Representatives, the Senate concurring, That authority is hereby granted for the location and construction of a public highway, sixty feet in width, across the north end of the grounds of the Asylum for the Deaf and Dumb, at a point nineteen chains and ten one-hundredths of a chain north to the center of the old National Road.
Mr. JEWETT made an ineffectual motion to go into
Mr. HAM, from the
Mr. STERRETT, from the same Committee, submitted a minority report, w th the recommendation that the bill be indefinitely postponed.
Mr. STERRETT moved the adoption of the minority report.
On motion by Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, the motion to adopt the minority report was laid on the table.
The majority report was concurred in, and the bill ordered engrossed.
Mr. HAM from the same Committee, submitted a majority report on Mr. Stucker's bill [H. R. 394] to amend Section 2,184 of the R.S. of 1881, concerning proceedings in criminal cases with the recommendation that the bill pass.
Mr. STERRETT, from the same Committee, submitted a minority report with the recommendation that the bill lie on the table.
On motion the minority report was laid on the table. The majority report was concurred in and the bill ordered engrossed.
The
On motion by Mr. Heffren, the bill [S. 52] to amend Sections 218, 227 and 228 of an act concerning taxation, approved March 29, 1881, was read the third time.
Mr. HEFFREN spoke in favor of the passage of the bill.
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, was of the opinion that the men who buy up these lands at tax sale are able to examine the title before making such purchases. He thought that the advantage should be given to the person whose land is to be sold.
Mr. ADAMS thought a man should know when he goes into the market to buy land whether or not the title is good. He was opposed to a man going into the Treasurer's office or the Auditor's office and buying land and then coming to the Legislature and demanding the return of his money with interest. He was opposed to the bill.
Mr. PATTEN did not like the feature of the bill It appeared to be too much in the interest of one class. He did not think it was a good bill, and he was afraid of it. It looked to him like it was created for the purpose of lifting some man out of a difficulty, and therefore he was opposed to it.
Mr. FRAZER believed that the persons opposing the bill did not understand its propositions.
Mr. SHIVELY said It occurred to him that this is a just proposition. The County offers land for sale under the provision of the law. Parties come and in good faith bid upon this land and purchase it. Now it seemed to him that if these parties pay their money over it is but just and fair that they should have the money back if they loose the title to this land.
Mr. MOODY: Under the present law, if a person buys up land and the title is imperfect, there is no way for him to get bis money back. This bill simply asks what is fair between the person who buys up this land and the County.
Mr. WILSON, of Kosciusko had examined the question and had given home attention to the discussion on this bill in the Senate. He desired that the tax law should be as perfect as possible. By an examination of the tax law he found that two sections are diametrically opposed to each other. He believed that this bill would remedy the defect. He was in favor of the bill.
Mr. SMITH, of Tippecanoe, was reliably informed that this is a good bill and he would support it.
The bill passed the House by yeas, 59; nays, 29.
On motion by Mr. TULEY, Mr. Huston's bill [H. R. 230] to legalize the sale of certain real estate in the town of Connersville, was read the third time. M
Mr. HUSTON stated that the State had a suit pending in the Courts at the present time for the recovery of the real estate. But he believed this was a just bill and one that should pass. He did not believe it was in the interest of the State to take real estate from parties who have paid the full value for it. It was represented to these parties that he would be perfectly safe in buying this land. He bought the land, paying the full value therefor, and he simply asked now to have the State quiet the title.
The bill passed the House by yeas, 77; nays, 10.
Mr. JEWETT, from the
On motion by Mr. Jewett the amendment was considered engrossed, the bill was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 66; nays 37.
On motion by Mr. GORDON, the Speaker appointed two members to inform the Senate that the House is ready to go into Joint Convention for the purpose of electing a President of the Board of Benevolent Institutions, etc.
When the Senate appeared and were seated, the Lieutenant Governor [on the right of the Speaker] called the Joint Convention to order, and stated the object to be as set forth in the resolution convening the body. He stated the first thing in order to be nominations for a President of the Board of Benevolent Institutions.
Senator BROWN nominated Dr. Thomas H. Harrison, of Boone County.
Representative FRAZER nominated Hon. John Coburn, of Marion County.
There being no other nominations, the ballot resulted:
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR declared Thomas H. Harrison elected for the term prescribed by law the President of the Board of Benevolent Institutions of the State, having received a majority of all the votes cast, and declared nominations for a Trustee of the Insane Asylum next in order.
Senator WILLARD nominated Philip M. Gapin, of Marion. Representative SMITH, of
Tippe
The ballot, resulted:
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR declared Philip M. Gapin duly elected a Trustee of the Asylum for the Insane, and declared nominations for a Trustee of the Asylum for the Deaf end Dumb to be in order.
Senator FAULKNER nominated Stephen E. Urmston, of Franklin County.
Representative ADAMS nominated Colonel James H Jordon, of Morgan County.
The ballot resulted:
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR declared Stephen E. Urmston duly ejected a Trustee of the Asylum for the Deaf and Dumb, and called for nominations for a Trustee of the Blind Asylum.
Representative GORDON nominated Howard Briggs, of Putnam County.
Representative SHIVELEY nominated J. H. Berick, of Lagrange County.
There being no other nominations the ballot resulted:
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR declared Howard Briggs duly elected a Trustee for the Blind Asylum, and called for nominations for three Trustees of the Asylum for Feeble Minded Children and the Soldiers' Orphans' Home.
Senator BELL nominated for the four-year twin John M. Goar, of Henry County.
Representative DEEM nominated Samuel Greene, of Rush County.
There being no other nominations the ballot resulted:
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR declared John M. Goar duly elected, and called for nominations for another Trustee of the same Asylum.
Senator VOYLES nominated Dr. Richard J. Wilson, of Washington County.
Representative STEWART nominated Dr. William Freeman, of Switzerland County.
There being no other nominations the ballot resulted:
For Mr Wilson-Senators, 26; Representatives, 54-total, 80.
Senator JOHNSON nominated Robert D. Brown, of Dearborn County.
Representative COPELAND nominated Peter E. Hoss, of Howard County.
There being no other nominations the ballot resulted:
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR declared Mr. Brown elected, and said the Joint Committee had completed the business for which it was convened.
On motion of Senator HENRY the Joint Convention adjourned sine die.
Thereupon the House took recess till 2 o'clock.
On motion by Mr. HELMS his bill [H. R. 61] to legalize certain acts performed by Township Trustees was read the third time.
Mr. PATTEN explained the bill was to legalize the acts of Township Trustees who had expended certain moneys in drainage under the provisions of two sections of an act which the Supreme Court subsequently decided were unconstitutional.
The bill passed the House by yeas, 89; nays, 0.
On motion by Mr. HEFFREN the Senate message was taken up and concurred in, informing
the House that the Senate had refused to concur in House amendment to the bill [S. 6] and that the Senate had appointed a
On motion of Mr. McCORMICK the bill [H. R. 420] to provide means for the erection of the new State House and the assessment and collection of taxes therefor was taken up, read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 85; nays, 5.
On motion by Mr. TULEY his bill [H. R. 161] to amend Sections 6,488 and 6,491 of the Revised Statutes of 1881 concerning taxation [the bill makes the city a party to any suit for delinquent taxes where there are both County and city taxes delinquent, and requires the City Attorney to appear and institute suit on the part of the city; under a suspension of the Constitutional rules was read the third time, and passed the House by yeas, 88; nays, 17.
Mr. HEFFREN moved that the following bills be set down as special orders and
continued until they are disposed of: Bills No. 55, 65, 81, 68, 69, 82, 85, 88, 89,
94, 95, 93, 10, 105, 106, 107, 110, 115, 116, 123, 132, 136, 149, 156, 160, 171, 173, 176, 190, 191, 224, 225, 227, 242, 269, 270, 290, 292, 294,
Mr. SHOCKNEY did not know who had been authorized to select a few bills, and say that they shall be made special order to the exclusion of all other bills. He made an ineffectual motion to lay the motion on the table.
Mr. HEFFREN demanded the previous question, which was seconded by the House.
Under its operations the motion was agreed to by yeas, 52; nays, 37.
Mr. HEFFREN moved to reconsider the vote just taken, and lay that motion on the table. The vote on the latter motion resulted-yeas, 35; nays, 46-and Mr. Heffren withdrew his motion to reconsider.
Mr. MOCK, from the
On motion by Mr. SUTTON his bill [H. R. 369] concerning the duties of County Township and State officers was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 77; nays, 6.
The following described bills were reported back from the Committees with the recommendation that further action thereon be indefinitely postponed:
Mr Mutz's bill [H. R. 284] to repeal Section 4 and amend Sections 47, 66, 165 of an act for the settlement of decedents' estates.
Mr. Fisher's bill [H. R. 318] to amend Section 71 of the Justices' act approved 1859.
Mr. Shockney's bill [H. R. 385] to amend Sections 6 and 7 of an act concerning proceedings in criminal cases.
Mr. Mutz's bill [H. R. 288] to amend Sections 94,
Mr. Cabbage's bill [H. R. 362] to regulate the transmission of messages by telegraph.
Mr. Barr'a bill [H. R. 6] to amend Section 1 of an act Authorizing Boards of County Commissioners to issue bonds for the construction of gravel, macadamized or paved roads.
Mr. Pulse's bill [H. R. 315] to amend Section 1 of n act regulating decadents' estates.
Mr. Hanson's bill [H. R. 326] to provide for the salaries of Circuit, Superior and Criminal Court Judges.
Mr. Bryant's bill [H. R. 300] to define the Twentieth Judicial Circuit and creating the Forty-third Judicial Circuit.
On motion by Mr. METING his bill [H. R. 366] to abolish the Maple Lawn Cemetery of Richmond, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 88; nays, 2.
Mr. HEFFREN called up his motion to reconsider the vote on bill [H. R. 256] to provide a fund for the permanent endowment of the State University. On his further motion the bill was recommitted to a Special Committee of Three with instructions to amend by striking out "one" and inserting in lieu thereof "one-half," making it read "one-half of one per cent.," and providing for the application of this fund should the school ever be consolidated with any other school.
The SPEAKER made the Committee to consist of Messrs. Heffren, Kester, and Stewart.
The motion to reconsider the vote by which was rejected the bill [S. 203] to authorize the Trustees of the Deaf and Dumb asylum to convey a strip of ground on the south side of said premises, was called up.
Mr. Patten made an ineffectual motion-yeas, 21; nay, 51-to lay the motion to reconsider on the table.
Mr. JEWETT desired to say a few words before the vote was taken, it was well known that when the question was first considered he opposed it, perhaps because he did not understand it. Since he cast his vote he had talked with the Superintendent, or the Assistant Superintendent, and also with citizens of Irvington, a nourishing suburb of Indianapolis, and they all assure him that will be necessary to build the wall which the Pan-Handle Company proposed to construct for the protection of the Asylum property The wall will be of much more value to the grounds than the strip of ground under consideration. The passage of this bill will also prove a source of great convenience to the people of Irvington. He was now ready to support the bill.
Mr. ADAMS, like the gentleman from Clark [Mr. Jewett], opposed the passage of the bill when it was before the House before. Since the vote was taken on the bill he bad taken some interest and examined the provisions of the bill. He had talked wish various persons in regard to the bill, and was now in favor of the bill.
The bill passed the House by yeas, 74: nays, 10.
On motion by Mr. PATTEN the bill [S. 170] to create the Forty-fourth Judicial Circuit, to amend Sections 22 and 23 of an act to divide the State into Judicial Circuits, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 81; nays, 2.
On motion by Mr. MOODY the special order-being the several bills set down by Mr. Heffren'a motion was postponed until 9 o'clock.
Mr. MOODY entered a motion to reconsider the vote by which the House rejected the Appellate Court bill [H. R. 37].
The House adjourned until 9 o'clock to-morrow
The Senate met pursuant to adjournment, Lieutenant Governor Hanna in the chair.
On motion by Mr. VOYLES the reading of the Secretary's minutes of yesterday's proceedings was dispensed with.
On motion by Mr. BENZ his bill [S. 200] to revive an act of May 14, 1860, for assessment of lands for the benefit of certain roads, excluding roads Incorporated after December 1, 1879, and legalize said assessments, and providing for collection of the same, was read the third time and passed by yeas, 39; nays, 0.
Mr. BENZ urging its passage because it will greatly benefit his County, where many roads are badly washed by the floods.
Mr. VOYLES also hoped the bill will prevail.
Mr. Bundy, by leave, introduced a bill [S. 290] appropriating $200 for the services of William H. Schlater in preparing a list of bills introduced into the last General Assembly, which was read the first time.
On motion by Mr. MAGEE his bill [S. 149] to authorize the Auditor of State to map sell and convey certain lands belonging to the State, was, under a setting aside of the Constitutional rule by a two-thirds vote, read the second time by title, the third time by sections and passed by yeas, 40; nays. 0.
Mr. MAGEE explained it authorizes the State Auditor to cause maps to be made of all forfeited or escheated to the State, in each County thereof, cause the game to be appraised and sold, the proceeds to go into the school fund.
Mr. FOULKE presented a petition on the subject of temperance from 37 voters of Ripley County.
On motion by Mr. McINTOSH the bill [H. R. 61] to legalize certain acts of Township Trustees, was, under a dispensation of the Constitutional rule, pressed through the three readings and passed by yeas, 39; nays, 0. Mr. Mclntosh explaining its necessity.
On motion by Mr. RISTINE his bill [S. 260] to legalize the incorporation of Darlington, Montgomery County, was read the second time by title, under a suspension of the Constitutional rule, the third time, and passed by yeas, 38: nays, 0.
Mr. HUTCHIN80N offered a concurrent resolution, which was adopted, that the Directors of the State's Prisons are directed not to permit, on any contract, the convicts of either of said persons to work outside of the walls or enclosures of said Prisons.
On motion by Mr. SAYRE the bill [S. 269] to regulate the business of Express Companies was, under a rule of suspension by a two-third vote, read the second time by title only, the third time by sections, and passed by yeas, 37; nays, 1.
Mr. SAYRE explaining the receipt described on page 161 of these reports shall be record evidence.
On motion by Mr. COMPTON his bill [S. 45] to allow the Commercial Bank of New Albany to have an office wherever the Directory may desire was read the third time and passed by yeas, 38; nays, 0.
On motion by Mr. ADKISON the bill [S. 278] supplemental to the drainage act of March 9, 1875, was, under the suspension of the rule by a two-thirds vote, read the second time by title, the third time by sections and passed by yeas, 46; nays, 0.
On motion by Mr. VOYLES the bill [H. R. 381] to fix Court Terms in the Forty-third Judicial Circuit was read the second time by title, under the Constitutional restriction, Committee amendments concurred in, the bill read the third time and passed by yeas, 38; nays, 0.
On motion by Mr. VAN VORHIS the bill [S. 250] to establish provisions respecting private corporations existing prior to 1852 was read the third time and passed by yeas, 36; nays, 2.
Mr. VAN VORHIS and Mr. MAGEE, explaining it embraces laws already passed, the legality of which are in some doubt-allowing the Bank of Commerce to become a banking institution, etc.
On motion by Mr. WILLARD his bill [S. 189] to
authorize Railroad Companies to guarantee the
Mr. W1LLABD explaining the bill will apply only to the L., N. A. and C. Railroad, allowing it to endorse bonds for a railroad to connect with the Cincinnati Southern.
Mr. YOUCHE opposed the bill-
Mr. VOYLES saw nothing in the objection. The bill will prove of great advantage to the people along the line of the read.
On motion by Mr. MACARTNEY the bill [H. R. 80] to amend Section 3 of the act of March 2, 1855, regulating the descent of heirs, was read twice by title only, under a setting aside of the Constitutional rule by a two-thirds vote, the third time by sections, and passed by yeas, 38; nays, 0.
Mr. MACARTNEY explaining it is a copy of a bill introduced by himself two years ago, but which failed to pass for want of time. It relates to the heirship of adopted children, property to descend to heirs of adopted parents the same as if the child was never adopted.
On motion by Mr. FLETCHER the bill [H. R. 346] concerning legal advertising in certain cases [relating to cities of 16,000 inhabitants or over, shall be done in one daily-the party interested shall have the right to designate the paper] was read twice by title, the third time by sections and passed by yeas, 36; nays, 0.
The Senate took a recess till 2 ;30 o'clock. >
On motion by Mr. WHITE the bill [H. R. 408] to amend Sections 7, 21 and 41 of the Common School law, was read twice by title only under a dispensation of the Constitutional restriction, by a two-thirds vote read the third time by sections, and passed by yeas, 43; nays, 1.
Mr. WHITE, explaining, it will give the County Superintendent better supervision over the schools, and changes the time of settlement to the first Monday in August-the school year ending July 31, etc, etc.
Mr. Yancey demanded the special order, but gave way for-
On motion by Mr. DUNCAN the [H. R. 308] to amend the act incorporation he Trustees of Hartsville Academy was read twice by tide only, under a suspension of the Constitutional rules, by a two-thirds vote the third time by sections, and passed by yeas, 42; nays. 10.
Mr. DUNCAN explained it was only to change the name of Hortville College.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR directed the reading of the bill [H. R.
Mr. GRAHAM resumed the floor to continue his speech commenced at 1:45 o'clock this morning. He would yield, however, to any arguments on the other side who had any arguments to advance in favor of the bill.
Mr. RAHM said he would like to speak about fifteen minutes.
Mr. FLETCHER felt more than ever convinced that this bill is desired by a majority of the voters of the city of Indianapolis. He had taken more pains than before to make careful inquiry as to the opinion of a majority of the people, and thought the bill absolutely fair, and could not see how Senators on the other side could object to it. If this bill is going to work wreck and ruin it is certainly for the benefit of the Republican I party. The people are willing to take t, they are willing to try it, and they are willing to pay for it. What more to say for the bill he didn't know.
Mr. YANCEY listened attentively to what ha just been said and obtained no evidence whatever that the bill should pass, unless it be that the Senator has gone around inferentially and drummed up certain citizens of this city who are in favor of the bill, not from that class of this great city of Indianapolis who pay the taxes of the city Government; but representing the bummer class who are al ways terror stricken at the sight of a policeman. These are the men who are clamoring for this bill-they ought to be on the stone pile of the city. This bill means nothing more nor less than the defeat of the Republican party and any Senator honest enough to acknowledge the truth will acknowledge that.
Mr. RAHM did not know whether the people of Indianapolis wanted this bill or not, but we down at the town of Evansville do want it-Republicans as well as Democrats, and they are not bummers or loafers, but there is a petition here signed by 442 of the leading voters and citizens of Evansville, including bankers, wholesale merchants, city and County officers. Republicans and Democrats. The Republicans don't believe what they say when they say if the bill passes, Marion County will go Republican. They know if the bill parses they will have a free fair and square election In Marion County, and that is what they are afraid of. He appealed to Democratic Senators to vote for this bill, because it will be blamed on us if we pass it, and let us get the credit fur it. The Democratic Senator from Marion [Mr. Fletcher] says the people of Indianapolis want it, and we ask it, without regard to party, for Evansville, where it is wanted to protect the lives and properly of citizens without regard to party.
Mr GRAHAM had already discussed the question, but as, the Senator from Marion [Mr. Van Vorhis] has more interest; In this matter than any other Senator, unless it be his colleague, he would yield his time to that Senator.
Mr. VAN VORHIS said the parties who are pushing this bill are the very off-scourings of the Democratic party, associated with an equally low class belonging to the Republican party. Among the best class of the citizens of this city nobody wants this bill. The Senator from Vanderburg [Mr. Rahm] says the people down there want it but the people of Vanderburg do not know the provisions of this bill or they would not want it. It practically opens the City Treasury without limit, let or hindrance to the Police Commissioners.
Mr. VOYLES said: I had not intended to speak to this bill, but since it has been so
vociferously asserted that, nothing can be said in support of the bill, I have
concluded to say a word. The Senator from Marion [Mr. Van Vorhis] has gone aside
from the question, and has made a tirade against individuals in the city who are for
the bill. I essay to teach the Senator a lesson in logic. I would remind him that
viturperation is not argument, it is malice. If the Senator can find no arguments,
and must resort to the abuse of individuals, he is hard pressed in his opposition to
the bill. The Senator from Hancock [Mr. Yancey] has said that this bill means to fix
things up in Indianapolis so that the Republican party can not carry the County. So
we have it. By this we are plainly told that the Republican party holds its majority
in this city by reason of the odious police force, and I say such a state of facts
is a shame to the city and it is reprehensible in the greatest degree. The Senator
from Marion denounces the bill as unconstitutional, yet he does not sate in what
manner the bill conflicts with any article or section or party of the Constitution.
It is a singular development when a Senator, who is a good lawyer, declares a bill
to be unconstitutional without even attempting to justify
The hour of 4 o'clock having arrived-
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR directed the foil to be called on the passage of the bill. The bill passed the Senate by yeas, 27; nays, 21; -9,8 follows:
Yeas Messrs. Bell, Brown, Compton, Davidson, Duncan, Ernest, Faulkner, Fletcher, Hill, Hilligass, Hoover, Howard, Hutchinson, Johnston of Dearborn, Johnson of Tippecanoe, Magee, Marvin, May, McClure, McCullough, McIntosh, Rahm, Richardson, Smith of Jay, Voyles, Willard and Youche-27.
Nays-Messrs. Adkison, Benz, Bichowski, Campbell, Fleming, Foulke, Graham, Henry, Keiser, Lockridge, McCartney, Overstreet, Ristine, Sayre, Smith of Delaware, Spann, Van Vorhis, White, Yancey-21.
Pending the roll call-
Mr. BUNDY, when his name was called, said i this bill contains that which, in a
Government like ours is a vicious principle, for it takes away from a people the
right to govern themselves. This Legislature has no right to determine for the city
of Indianapolis how that city shall be governed. If this principle can be sustained
every office not elective by the Constitution of Indiana can be placed in the hands
of the General Assembly to be filled. The principle can not be defended in reason.
There can absolutely be no justification for we, representing other districts in the
State,
Mr. FOULKE, in explanation of his vote when his name was called, opposed this bill because it is thoroughly vicious in principle. The people asking to be protected against crime is the proper tribunal to judge what kind of government it shall have. The constituency required to pay for the police force is the proper constituency to determine how the money is to be expended. If the people of Indianapolis have a bad police force they have the power to remove it, and in their hands it ought to be left. He voted " no."
Mr. MAGEE, when his name was called, said he did not see that this bill interferes with local self-government. Cities are distinctive from other political corporations. It has no other right than those conferred upon it by the Legislature. This Assembly has the right to pass this bill, which is demanded in the name of justice and fair elections. He voted "aye."
Mr. VAN VORHIS, when nil name was called, further opposed the passage of this bill because the law of the State limits the taxation of the city of Indianapolis, and it is almost Impossible for the city to live within that limit. This bill will increase that expense from $25,000 to $50,000. and provides no guarantee or safeguard in any way whatever for anything that may go into the hands of these Commissioners. He voted "no."
The vote was announced as above recorded.
Mr. YOUCHE moved to reconsider the vote just taken.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: Put your motion in writing.
Mr. WILLARD moved to reconsider the vote just taken and to lay that motion on the table.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: The Senator from Lake [Mr. Youche] has made that motion.
Mr. WILLARD insisted his motion was in order.
Mr. HENRY took a different view. When he concluded-
Mr. YOUCHE sent up his motion in writing In these words: "I move to reconsider the vote by which House bill No. 133 passed the Senate."
Mr. SMITH, of Jay, moved to lay the motion on the table.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR said the Senator from Lake [Mr. Youche] had the floor.
Mr. VOYLES insisted Mr. Willard's motion should be recognized by the Chair, and Mr. Willard desired to submit an appeal from the decision of the Chair.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR, declaring the Senator from Lake entitled to the floor, Mr. YOUCHE at 4:20 o'clock commenced a speech against the bill and in favor of his motion by saying that he voted in the affirmative for the purpose of moving a reconsideration. When he concluded.
Mr. SPANN obtained the floor and spoke in favor of the motion to reconsider. During his speech a message from the House announced that the Speaker had signed House enrolled act No. 133, when Mr. S. concluded at 6 o'clock.
Mr. VAN VORHIS commenced speaking in favor of the pending motion,
Mr. GRAHAM took the floor at 8:25o'clock, and he also spoke in favor of the motion.
Mr. HENRY at 10:10 o'clock p. m. proceeded to make his argument in favor of the motion to reconsider the vote by which the metropolitan police bill passed the Senate, closing at two minutes after 12 o'clock.
Mr. BUNDY was recognized by the Chair, but gave way for
Mr. MAGEE, who, after speaking in favor of the passage of the bill, moved to lay the question to reconsider on the table.
The motion was agreed to by yeas, 19; nays, 13 five Senators present but paired.
Mr. VOYLES offered a resolution, which was read for information, requiring the President of the Senate to sign the act at once, and announce the fact in open Senate.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR declared the resolution out of order.
Mr. SPANN then moved to adjourn, which was lost by a vote of yeas, 12; nays, 20.
Mr. VOYLES submitted a protest, which the Lieutenant Governor ordered spread on the records with a statement by the Chair.
And then, at five minuter past 1 o'clock a. m. on motion by Mr. BROWN the Senate adjourned i till 10 o'clock.
The House was opened with prayer by Rev. Mr Clark, of Indianapolis.
Mr. HENDERSON rose to a question of privilege, saying the journal failed to show him as voting for the joint resolution submitting a prohibitory amendment to the Constitution. He desired to be so recorded.
A resolution by Mr. GERBER that the House hold session each evening this week was rejected by the House.
A call of the House which was ordered and taken discovered ninety-one members present and answered to their names.
On motion by Mr. JEWETT the House resolved itself into
The question being on the motion to strike out the John Martin claim-
Mr. JEWETT confessed that up to yesterday he was under the impression that the claim was wrong. He desired, to say now that if no other argument could be produced than the argument offered by the gentleman from Knox [Mr. Williams] that the claim was the property of a certain bank or wealthy individual the claim should be paid. Such argument would sound better in the Sandlots of San Francisco than in this House, composed of Representatives of debt-paying people. When so eminent and philanthropic citizen, and one of his constituents [referring to Mr. DePauw], is attacked in the manner upon this floor he felt called upon to resent such attack. As this was the only way provided for these claims to be allowed he did not think the House could afford to reject a claim because parties have been pressing its passage. He hoped that when they came to act upon this claim it would proceed to consider the basis on its fairness as a claim. He entertained such doubts about the validity of the claim that he would not give it his support.
Mr. CAMPBELL thought that the manner in which the claim had been assailed reflected somewhat upon the Committee which reported upon this claim. He desired to have certain stenographic evidence taken before the Committee read. This evidence would amply justify the action taken by the Committee on the John Martin claim.
Mr. MOODY desired to call the attention of the House to the act under which the Board was acting when it issued this warrant to John Martin [Mr. Moody read the provisions of the act authorizing the Board to issue warrants.] If this Board had the power to issue that warrant in accordance with the provisions of an act, the State of Indiana is bound to pay the warrant. You may just as well try to avoid a promissory note properly signed as to get rid of this warrant. The question is simply this, whether or not we, as Representatives of the State, will refuse this warrant which the law authorized this Board so issue? Are we now going to undo this law? If there is any fault to be found it should be found with the Legislature that passed this law, granting this Board power to issue this warrant.
Mr. WILSON, of Marion, after giving a detailed statement of the disputed points, and the decision of the Court upon the same, stated that be had it directly from Mr. Mania himself that the money be obtained from the bank, and for which he gave this warrant for co lateral security, went to buy brick that entered into the construction of the new Insane Asylum.
On motion by Mr. HEFFREN the Committee rope and reported the recommendation that the further consideration of the bill be proceeded with in the House.
The report of the Committee was concurred in by the House.
On motion by Mr. SMITH, of Tippecanoe, the House took up the consideration of the specific appropriation bills.
A motion by Mr. AKIN to postpone the further consideration of the bill was laid on the table.
The question recurred on the John Martin claim.
Mr. SMITH, of Tippecanoe, thought the name of the State was pledged to the allowance of the warrant. The warrant was issued by competent authority, and is held by a citizen of this State. He believed this is a just claim, and in the namer of that justice which the State of Indiana has always exercised toward her citizens it should be allowed. Let us keep her escutcheon clear and untarnished, and let it be said that she has done- no injury to any one of tier citizens.
Mr. GIBSON thought it would not keep the escutcheon of the State clear by voting this appropriation of nearly $50,000. In his opinion it was nothing against the claim that the bank held this warrant as collateral, security. He stated that the content provided for masons' measurement, and that it was afterward inserted according to the "Indianapolis rules." When this change was discovered, Mr. Martin was informed that if he did not desire to accept masons' measurement he must stop work. If you are not satisfied with masons' measurement you must not go on. But in the face of this, Mr. Martin went on with the work. From that time until the close of the work Mr. Martin accepted this measurement and payment accordingly.
Mr. WILEY was, when the claim was first presented before the
The previous question was demanded on the motion to strike out the ninth "item," being the John Martin Claim, and it was seconded by the House-yeas, 68; nays, 27.
Mr. PATTEN, in speaking of the decision of the Court in favor of the Board issuing this warrant in favor of Mr. Martin, said he did not believe the Court had any right to compel this Board to issue said warrant. He knew the claim was unjust, and he knew it was so decided by men who were conversant with all the facts. It was so decided by a former Legislature. This Board claimed that every dollar due John Martin was paid. He had no objection to John Martin or any other man who has an honest claim.
The motion to strike out was agreed to by yeas, 58; nays, 38.
Mr. GIBSON moved to reconsider the vote to-strike out and lay that motion on the table.
The latter motion way agreed to.
A motion by Mr. PATTEN, the twelfth item of the bill was stricken out-being the claim of Perin & Goff Manufacturing Company of Jeffersonville, Ind., for $5,000 for work on buildings at the State Prison South.
On motion by Mr. SCHLOSS, the eleventh item of the bill was stricken out-being the claim of J. H. Warder of $250 for measuring the wall of the Insane Hospital in the interest of the John Martin claim.
Mr. JEWETT, on the adoption of the 14th item-being the claim to Teresa and Charles Bochtell for damages on account of the death of their father, caused by the negligence of the State for $1,000, desired that the claim would be allowed by the House. He was informed that the condition of the children is deplorable, and the damages asked are comparatively small.
Mr. HEFFREN'S amendment requiring the money to be paid to the legal representative of the said Bochtell was adopted by the House.
The item as amended was adopted.
Mr. SCHLOSS moved to strike out the 15th item.
A division of the item was demanded.
The question being first upon the appropriation of $500 for the purchase of books for the library of the Northern Prison-
Mr. HUSTON was a member of the
Mr. FRAZEE was also conversant with the facts of the condition of the library. He thought the House could not do a wiser thing than to allow this $500 for the purchase of these books.
This appropriation was allowed, and the other divisions of the same items were adopted.
In the specific appropriation for the Southern Prison the allowance of $15,000 for the finishing of the Hospital building was cut down to $1,500.
The appropriation of $5,000 the construction of a building to connect the cell house with the office, was struck out on motion by Mr. Huston.
The House took a recess untill 2 o'clock.
A motion by Mr. SPANN to postpone the further consideration of the specific appropriation bill until 4 o'clock was lost by yeas, 19; nays, 45.
The appropriation of $3,300 for the purchase of three and one-half acres of ground for the Southern Prison was on motion of Mr. MOODY stricken out; also the appropriation of $35,000 for the purpose of building a wall along said ground.
The appropriation of $500 for the repair of the Battle Grounds in Tippecanoe County, was on motion of Mr. AKIN adopted.
The appropriation of $1,000 to the First National Bank of Indianapolis for money borrowed on account of the contingent fund of the Supreme Court, and the appropriation of $5,000 to the State Board of Agriculture, were adopted.
A motion was made to strike out the appropriation of $234 to B. Rosenthal & Co., of Jeffersonville, Ind., for money paid out on account of the State Prison South.
The motion was agreed to.
The appropriation of $200 to Isaac Taylor for services as architect and Superintendent of the Soldiers' Orphans' Home was adopted.
The appropriation of $1,013.13 to Carlon & Hollensbeck for binding Brevier Legislative Reports of the Fifty-second General Assembly was adopted.
The appropriation of $1,974.12 to Reuben Marvin for supplies furnished the State Prison South was on motion by Mr. PATTEN stricken out.
The appropriation of $,439.76 to J. H. and H. L. Talbott for the State proportion of the improvement of North Meridian Street was adopted.
Mr. PRICE moved to strike out the appropriation of $1,200 for Clerks' hire in the Adjutant General's office. The motion to strike out was rejected.
Mr. HEFFREN offered an amendment providing that the amount should not be paid except upon a voucher sworn to by the Clerk who does the work.
The amendment was adopted.
The appropriation of $23 to W. B. Burford for articles furnished the Supreme Court was adopted.
The appropriation of $14,000 for deficiencies in the appropriation tor public printing for the fiscal years beginning November 1, 1881, and November 1, 1882, was adopted.
The appropriation of $129.96 to Samuel A. Bonmer for services as special Judge in the Switzerland, Circuit Court was stricken out.
The appropriation of $120 to James Y. Allison for services a Special Judge of the Clark Circuit Court was stricken out.
The appropriation of $72 to John D. Harris for services as Special Judge of Switzerland Circuit Court was adopted.
Mr. FRAZEE moved an amendment to appropriate $5,500 to purchase seventy-five acres of round for the Asylum for Feeble Minded Children and the Soldiers' Orphan B' Home.
Mr. FRAZEE, pending the adoption of the amendment, stated the necessity of purchasing more land for these Institutions.
Mr. DEEM said that the object of this appropriation is to enable the Trustees of the Asylum and Home to purchase seventy five Acres of land adjoining the present grounds, and which additional grounds are to be used for agricultural and dairy purposes. At present, only fifty-six acres are owned by the Home, but a small portion of which can be cultivated, and the Trustees often find it difficult or inconvenient to lease lands in the vicinity. There will be an actual saving to the State by purchasing the proposed farm, and will give the officials an opportunity to train the orphans of suitable age in industrial pursuits.
The amendment [Mr. Frazee's] was adopted.
Au amendment by Mr. STEWART to appropriating the sum of $147 to the heirs of George B. Hutch, the sum of $156 to John B Workes, the sum of $153 36 to Augustus Hustiner, and the sum of $50 to Albert F. Ayers for services, was adopted.
Mr. GREEN moved to reconsider the vote by which the appropriation of $5,860 to the Perin & Goff Manufacturing Company of Jeffersonville, Ind., was struck out of the appropriation bill.
Mr. McCORMICK stated that these men replaced the old shops with good, substantial brick shops. He considered this a just claim, and one that should be passed.
Mr. GIBSON stated that the claim was before the Commitee and was allowed. He hoped that the House would reconsider the vote. These men are simply asking reimbursement for money paid out.
Mr. CAMPBELL had full confidence in the justice of the claim.
The motion to reconsider was rejected.
Mr. HEFFREN offered an amendment to the bill appropriating $500 to defray the expense of transporting the books and records of the canal lands from Terre Haute to Indianapolis.
The amendment was adopted.
Mr. ADAMS moved to amend the bill by appropriating $800 to pay for the services of Caleb Henry, James Henry and Daniel Burns, rendered in a suit against the County of Johnson.
The amendment was rejected by yeas, 41; nays, 42.
Mr. JEWETT moved to amend by appropriating $800 to pay John Craig for four years' service as Deputy Warden in the Southern Prison.
On motion by Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, the amendment was laid on the table.
Several other amendments were offered and rejected, whereupou Mr. Gibson moved that the bill be considered engrossed and put upon its passage, and demanded the previous question on this motion.
The previous question was seconded by the House by yeas, 61; nays, 30, and under its operation-
The bill was read a third lime and passed the House by yeas,54; nays, 40.
On motion by Mr. HEFFREN the bill [H. R. 466], supplemental to an act to authorize and provide for the erection of a new State House, etc., was taken up and read the first time.
The bill [S. 87] to provide for the location and erection of an additional Asylum for the Insane and providing for th management thereof was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 66; nays, 16.
On motion by Mr. HEFFREN-
The Home took a recess until 7:30 p. m.
The following described bills were read the third time and put upon their passage:
Mr. Weaver B bill [H. R. 55] to prevent
Mr. Gordon's bill [H. R. 56] to authorize Boards of County Commissioners to construct gravel and other roads upon petition of persons living adjacent thereto, was read the third time, and was rejected by yeas, 34; nays, 42.
Mr. GORDON entered a motion on the journal to reconsider the vote.
Mr. Heffren's bill [H. R. 81] to protect the elections by voluntary Political Associations was read the third time and passed the House by yeas. 72; nays, ll.
Mr. Graham's bill [H. R. 85] to legalize plats of towns and plats additional thereto; the bill was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 77; nays, 2.
Mr. Huston's bill [H. R. 88] requiring Joint Stock Telephone Companies organized under the laws of any other State, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 65; nays, 13.
Mr. Jewett's bill [H. R. 89] to amend Section 346 of the Civil Procedure act, being Section 510 of R. S. of 1881, was read the third time and passed by yeas, 69; nays, 19.
Mr. Frazer's bill [H. R. 94] to provide for the sale of lands purchased on the part of the State at judicial sales, was read the third time and passed by yeas, 71, nays, 2.
Mr. Adams' bill [H. R. 95] concerning taxation was read the third time and passed by yeas, 66; nays, 5.
Mr. GIBSON entered a motion to reconsider the vote just taken.
Mr. Adams' bill [H. R. 96] to repeal Section 40 of an act regulating prosecuting of claims against County Commissioners was read the third time and passed by yeas, 68; nays, 3.
Mr. Heffren's bill [H. R. 105] concerning changed of venue from Justices' Courts to the Superior Court was read the third time and passed by yeas, 54; nays. 24.
Mr. Mock's bill [H. R. 106] concerning certain criminal cases before Justices, was read the third time-and failed for want of a Constitutional majority-yeas, 42; nays, 33-of two-thirds.
The House adjourned.
The Senate met, pursuant to adjournment, Lieutenant Governor Hanna in the Chair.
The reading of the minutes was preceded with at the request of the Lieutenant Governor.
The Secretary, reading as part of the minutes the remarks of Mr. McCullough, reflecting upon the Lieutenant Governor, the reading was interrupted by-
Th9 LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR (to the Secretary): Are yon putting the Speeches of Senators in the minutes?
Mr. WILLARD replied: The Chair ordered them to be taken down.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR responded: Not to be put into the minutes.
When the reading was renewed-
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR said the minutes are not correct. The minutes show that a Senator on this floor was elected President; pro tem. last night, and that there was a time during the session of the Senate last night when there was no President of the Senate, and I desire to have the minutes corrected as to that. I will call attention to the rules on that subject. Rule 6 reads: "The President shall have the right to name any Senator to perform the duties of the Chair, but such substitution shall not extend beyond an adjournment." You will remember, and the minutes show, that at the convening of the Senate yesterday afternoon the Lieutenant Governor was in the Chair. About 9 o'clock I called the Senator from Rush [Mr. Spann] to the Chair, and was sitting in the cloak room close by. I went out for a few minutes, and when I came into the Senate Chamber the Senator from Rush was still in the Chair. The Chair had the power, under this rule of the Senate, when the Senate met yesterday afternoon to call any Senator to the Chair, and that Senator for the time would have the same rights as the Lieutenant Governor-the President of the Senate proper. Therefore, that part of the minutes which declares there was no President of the Senate, does not speak the truth, and that part of the minutes ought to be corrected I desire to have this statement of the Chair taken down and go into the records. Just before the adjournment the Chair made a statement of some length that would occupy some three or four pages of that journal, stating the position of the Chair about what purported to be an enrolled act of the House. I see the Secretary has only a few lines on that subject. I desire the remarks of the Chair on the point of order to go upon the journal The Secretary states in the minutes that Senator Voyles offered a resolution. There was no resolution offered to the Senate. The record as to that is incorrect
Mr. WILLARD (interposing): In what respect?
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: The Senator from Washington [Mr. Voyles] rose in his place and asked leave of the Senate to introduce a resolution. Several Senators objected, and the Chair stated that the Senate refused leave. Then the resolution was read for information-that is to see whether the Senators would give their consent.
Mr. WILLARD: That is what the journal shows.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: If that is the way it is, it is right. The Chair stated to the Senator who one red the resolution that the Senate refused to permit him unless the rules of the Senate be suspended. There was no motion made by any Senator to suspend the rules for the Senator to offer the resolution. The minutes do not show that. The resolution as submitted or offered by the Senator from Washington ought not to go on the minutes for the reason that it was not before the Senate in any manner, shape or form.
Mr. BUNDY thought what the Chair has said about the minutes being incorrect is true: especially that part which relates to the explanation the Chair made early this morning at time of the protest was entered by the Senator from Washington. It is the business of the journal, if it states anything, to state the exact facts. It is the duty of the Senate to arrive at the exact facts as nearly as possible, and when so arrived at it can do no one any harm. He moved that the minutes be corrected in that particular in the particulars the Chair has named.
Mr. VOYLES moved to lay the motion on the table, which motion was seconded by Mr. Willard
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: The minutes have to be corrected.
Mr. BUNDY thought that a question of the
Mr. McINTOSH Didn't you suggest to correct the minutes as the President stated?
Mr. BUNDY: If so it was not properly stated. In the particulars in which the journal is incorrect he moved it be corrected. If there is any- thing in the journal not correct it ought to be corrected-that is nothing more than fair.
Mr. McINTOSH thought the motion should be put in writing.
Mr. BUNDY: I will examine the journal and put my motion in writing in the particulars I think incorrect.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: The order for correcting the minutes will stay in abeyance until the motion is made in writing.
On motion by Mr. RISTINE the House amend merits to his bill [S. 170] to create the Forty-fourth Judicial District-the County of Montgomery-was concurred in.
On motion by Mr, CAMPBELL his bill [S. 247] to provide for the more profitable and equitable hiring by the State of the convicts in tn.e State Prison-see page 215 of the Brevier Reports-was read the third time and passed by yeas, 36; nays, 4.
Mr. CAMPBELL having this bill provides for a thorough system by which to put the contracts for convict labor m the most open competition, the object being to have the convicts bring the highest price in the market that competition can force, and the result must be to raise the prices paid for convict labor so much as to make the Prisons bring an income to the State, and also to overcome very largely the depressing influence upon free labor, which the present system of low prices for convict labor has caused.
On motion by Mr. DUNCAN his bill [S. 85] to amend Section 2,155 of the act concerning public offenses and their punishment; was read the third time and passed by yeas, 38; nays, 0.
Mr. Duncan explained the bill was intended to relieve the Trustees of Townships of the necessity of changing doors of one-story District School Houses so as to swing outward, and providing they shall not be prosecuted for not doing so.
On motion by Mr. OVERSTREET the bill [H. R. 277] to authorize Boards of County Commissioners to change the course, direction or location of the channels of any stream or body of water, upon petition of a majority of resident land owners adjacent, whose lands are to be affected by the dame, and authorizing the taxation of such lands to keep in repair such works, was read twice by title under a setting aside of th Constitutional rule by a two-thirds vote. The bill read the third time and passed by yeas, 39; nays, 0.
announced its reconsideration of the vote concurring in the agreements of the
On motion by Mr. YANCEY the bill [H. R. 333] to legalize the incorporation of the Shelbyville and Marietta Turnpike Company was read twice under a suspension of the Constitutional rule by a two-thirds vote, read the third time by section and passed the Senate by yeas, 34; nays, 1.
Mr. YANCEY is assured there is no pending lawsuit or anything of that kind; the bill is local in its character and is all right.
On motion by Mr. WILLARD the Constitutional role was dispensed with and the bill [H. R. 369] concerning the duties of Township, County and State officers was read twice by title, the third time by sections, and passed by yeas, 40; nays, 0.
Mr. WILLARD, explaining. The bill provide that officers' percentage on monies due estates and not paid over for a certain number of years, unclaimed monies; fees etc., shall go into the school fund Instead of the pockets of these officials
Mr. BELL, stating that the bill [H. R. 329] to provide that where patents have been issued for Wabash and Erie Canal lands and been lost, and while mistakes have been issued for lauds sold prior to 1847, and where continuous possession and full judgments have been made, the Auditor of State may issue patents, is a bill very much needed, and on his motion the bill was read twice by title, under a setting aside of the Constitutional restriction, by a two thirds vote, the third time by sections, and passed by yeas, 38; nays, 0, with a Committee amendment.
Mr. HENRY entered a motion to reconsider the vote by which the Senate agreed to and
concurred in the report of the
Then came a recess till 2 o'clock.
On motion of Mr. MAY the House amendments to the bill [S. 121] to legalize the acts of a certain voluntary association in Vauderburgh County were concurred in.
Mr. SAYRE offered a resolution, which was adopted, that the Johnson vs. Overstreet contest case be and the same is hereby made a special order before the Senate for to-morrow at 10 o'clock a. m , and that at 4 o'clock p. m a vote shall be taken as if the Senate was operating under the previous question, and that no other business until 4 o'clock p. m. shall be considered, except by unanimous consent.
On motion by Mr. RAHM, his bill [S. 187] to amend Sections 1 and 3 of the repair of turnpike road act-being Sections 5,104 and 5,106 of the Revised Statutes of 1881]-was read the second time by title, considered engrossed, under a suspension of the rules by a two-thirds vote, read the third time and passed by yeas, 34; nays, 1.
Mr. RAHM explaining the bill strikes out, the sixty days, so any County can avail itself of the present law to make a small levy to keep gravel roads in repair. It is much needed in the southern part of the State where the floods have badly washed many roads.
Mr. BENZ introduced a bill [S. 291] supplement al to an act concerning the
publication of the Revised Statutes of iy81, [to authorise the Auditor of State to
draw his amounts in favor of Cyrus T. Nixon and Orson M. Tyler for a per diem equal
to two dollars per day for extra work as clerks, and George H. Cleming as proof
reader-making the pay of clerks five dollars and of proof reader seven dollars per
day for the term actually employed on the
On motion of Mr. ADKISON the bill [H. R. 351] to provide for the removal of mill dams and other obstructions from water courses to prevent the overflow of lands, and declaring an emergency, was tinder a suspension of the Constitutional rule by a two-thirds vote read the second time by title only, the third time by sections.
Mr. ADKIS0N explaining the author of the bill stated to him there are several old dilapidated mill dams, and there are no means under the present law by which the mills or dams could be removed. This law is to remedy that defect.
Mr. SAYRE suggested objections.
Mr. HENRY could gee no need of this bill being enacted into a law. Why multiply these kinds of laws and thus make a conflict? There is nothing in the bill requiring it to be taken as a cumulative remedy.
Mr. VOYLES desired to know the effect of the provisions of the bill.
Mr. BUNDY replied that by its operations where there is a dam by a mill site, there would soon be no mill by a dam site [Laughter.]
On motion by Mr. ADKISON the bill was referred to the
The amendment was agreed to, and the bill passed by yeas, 30; nays. 19.
Mr. FLETCHER introduced a bill [S. 292] to pay I. F. & W. L. Talbott $4,439 79 for paving in front of the State's property on Meridian street, which was read twice by title only, the third time and passed by yeas, 37; nays, 5-under a suspension of the rules.
On motion by Mr. WHITE the bill [S. 217] to authorize the Willard Library of Evansville to sell certain real estate, was read the second time by title, under a suspension of the Constitutional rule, considered as engrossed, read the third time and passed by yeas, 38; nays, 2.
On motion by Mr. MARVIN the House amendments to his bill [S. 167] to create the Forty-third Circuit-the amendment changing the number to Forty-fifth Judicial Circuit.
On motion by Mr. WILLARD a favorable report from the
Mr. WILLARD said the present dog law has proved very unpopular. Now dogs by hundreds are umtagged and untaxed, the law being practically a dead letter. The provision will come in 1884. As the owner has been taxed doubly, the law has an emergency clause so the assessment will be made this spring, as was in the old law previous to 1881. Then the Assessors did not practically carry out and enforce the law. If the Assessor knows the man assessed has not listed his dog the Assessor is fined $5, it is a doubtful question whether a tagged dog can be killed under any circumstances, but this law allows that where the dog is known to have killed or maimed a sheep. Unless a law of this kind is passed within a year there will not be a penny of revenue derived from this source.
The bill passed by yeas, 30; nays, ll.
On motion by Mr. SPANN the Senate concurred in the amendments to the bill [S. 196] which gives more time to a Court in his District,
On motion by Mr. Magee his bill [S. 273] concerning foreign Insurance Companies-authorizing service of legal process upon Insurance Companies doing business inside of the State of Indiana-was read the second time by title only, the Committee amendments agreed to, and made a dispensation of the Constitutional restriction by ft two-thirds vote the m was read the third time and passed by yeas, 36; nays, 1-to take effect forty days after its passage.
On motion by Mr. GRAHAM his bill [S. 275] to require certain officers to keep cash books, was read the third time and passed by yeas, 85; nays, 1.
Mr. VOYLES, favoring its passage: It is due to the public that items of money paid in and paid out should be set down in writing.
On motion by Mr. Duncan the bill [H. R. 256] to provide a fund for the permanent endowment of the State University was read the first time and referred to a Special Committee of Five, with instructions to report at - o'clock to-morrow. The Committee is made to consist of Messrs, Duncan, Magee, Spann, Bell and White.
On motion by Mr. JOHNSON the Constitutional rule was dispensed with by a two-thirds vote, and his bill [S. 206] to require County Auditors to quarterly advertise the amount of school fund remaining unloaned in his office, was read the second time by title only, Committee amendments agreed to, the bill considered as engrossed, and passed by yeas, 36; nays. 4.
Mr. JOHNSON was sure the provisions in this bill will prove very advantageous to the school fund. A number of Counties are now complaining that the school fund can not be loaned, when by advertising in all probability borrowers could be found.
Mr. VOYLES offered the following as a new section to the Senate rules and as an amendment to said rules, and gave notice that on to-morrow, March 2, he will move its adoption:
Section 61. That whenever the Senate shall be notified that any bill that originated in the House and that has passed both branches of this General Assemlby, and that has been delivered to the Governor, and that has by him been returned to the House in which it originated with his objections thereto, and that has been by such House reconsidered and passed over such veto of the Governor, all debate, upon whatever subject or question, shall at once cease, and all other business shall be suspended, and the Senate shall at once, as if the Senate was operating under the previous question, proceed to consider whether such bill shall pass, notwithstanding such veto of the Governor.
On motion by Mr. Bell the Constitutional rule was dispensed with by a two-thirds vote, and the bill [H. R. 230] to legalize the sale of certain real estate in Connersville to Edward F. Claypool, was read the second time by title, the third time by sections, and passed by yeas, 32; nays, 8.
On motion by Mr. Foulke the bill [H. R. 366] to abolish the Maple Grove Cemetery, of Richmond, was read twice by title, the third time by sections, and passed under a suspension of the Constitutional rules by yeas, 39; nays, 0.
On motion by Mr. Smith, of Jay, the bill [S. 280] contemplating a change in the County lines of Grant, Blackford, Warren and Fountain Counties, was read the second time with a majority report favorable, and a minority report recommending its indefinite postponement. Pending the consideration of which the Senate adjourned.
The session was opened with prayer by Representative Frazee, of Rush County.
Mr. STERRITT called up his amendment to the rules of the House providing that at each morning session a call of the House shall be taken, and each member shall have the privilege of calling up one bill and putting it upon its passage
Mr. GIBSON moved an amendment to the motion by striking out House rule No. 35, which provides that motion to reconsider shall be entered the same day or the next day alter the vote is taken upon any question. The amendment to the motion was agreed to and the motion as recommended was adopted.
Mr. HEFFREN moved to reconsider the vote by which the report of the
Mr. FRAZER stated by way of explanation that the purpose of the motion was to
reconsider the report of the
Mr. HEFFREN said: I had hoped that I would not be compelled to make this motion. I am opposed to an extra session. But circumstances have occurred in the other branch of this General Assembly that Imperatively call for this motion. To any one who has witnessed the scenes in the Senate during the past twenty-four hours he would be recreant to every principle of duty to his Democratic brethren of the Senate if he did not do this. Could the people of this State have seen the presiding officer by brute force trample under foot every rule of that body, every principle of parliamentary law: could they have seen him take an enrolled bill passed by both Houses of this General Assembly, and deliberately thrust it into his pocket and declare it never should become a law; when I am credibly informed that another functionary still higher than the President of the Senate is also of that opinion, and will interpose a veto so late that this General Assembly can not act upon it, and when there could have been seen a Superintendent of Police, two Captains of Police, and twenty-one policemen, backed up by the Sheriff of Marion County, on the floor to overawe the Democratic Senator, and to give moral and material aid to the conspirators, I am ready to let the Governor of Indiana assume the responsibilities, and say to him: "You shall not thus obstruct legislation, and if you do you shall have no appropriation." I shall stand by my party and unequivocally support its policy.
Mr. SHIVELY had hoped that this part of the General Assembly would endeavor to take care of its own proceedings, and that fairness and justice should prevail at all times. He thought the gentleman from Washington [Mr. Heffren] had violated all parliamentary law in his criticism upon the acts of the presiding officer of the Senate of this General Assembly. It illy became the gentleman from Washington to criticise the action of the President of the Senate since he himself was a party but a few days ago to acts equally as malicious as those he now charges upon that officer. When this metropolitan police bill and several other bills were read the third time and put upon their passage, the Democratic Speaker of this House persistently refused to recognize Republican members on this floor although they eagerly sought such recognition. If the Democrats wish to take the responsibility of an extra session, by reconsidering the action on the appropriation bill, why very well, go on. The Senate has been guided in its ruling by the precedent set by the Democratic Speaker of this House.
Mr GIBSON was very much surprised that gentlemen should be worked up over a little thing of this kind. Members are very much mistaken if they think there is no reason for this consideration but to force an extra session of the Legislature. It is simply because there are some provisions in the bill which are objectionable. He desired to second the criticism of the action that bag been going on lit the other end of the building. Such action would justify any action on the part of the members of this House. He was willing, taking into consideration the action in the Senate, to share his part of the responsibility of an extra session. Whenever a man has not brains enough to comprehend what is just to the majority of the Senate-overriding the majority by infamous decisions-he should be criticised. Such a brainless coward is the man who occupies the Chair in the other end of the building.
Mr. HUSTON was of the opinion that the minority might as well look at this thing calmly and not get into an ill humor about it; but he thought every member should have the privilege of expressing his opinion. The question before the House is whether or not we shall reconsider the vote on the general appropriation bill. Now, there Is no member on this floor who will not readily admit that the result would be to force an extra session. He believed that the attempt was to defeat the appropriation bill-to get it in such a condition that the Democratic members of this General Assembly may say to the Governor: "If you dare not sign and return to us this metropolitan police bill, which was crowded through the House under the 'gag-law,' at once, we will defeat the appropriation bill." If the Democrats had alternated to reconsider this question at the proper time he would have voted for such reconsideration. He thought, with the precedent the Speaker of the House had set in refusing to recognize Republicans on the floor of this House, the Democratic members should not wince nor complain of arbitrary ruling in the other end of this building.
Mr. BOWERS voted for the appropriation bill, and had been since that time frequently importuned by Republican members to move to reconsider the vote. He was now ready and willing to vote for such reconsideration.
Mr. COPELAND thought it came with very poor grace for a Democratic member to charge open handed revolution against the Republican party or its representatives on this floor; that it ill becomes the Democratic members on this floor to denounce Lieutenant Governor Hanna, a gallant soldier in the late War, as a brainless coward, a revolutionist and dictator. It ill becomes you, who from the beginning of the session have embraced every opportunity to thrust on the minority of this House that most infamous of all rules, the gag-law, under the leadership of a rampant, unrepentant ex-Son of Liberty.
Mr. HEFFREN rose to a question of order and demanded that the words just spoken by the gentleman from Jefferson [Mr. Copeland] be taken down, and declaring the language used unparliamentary.
The Speaker commanded the Clerk to take down the language used by Mr. Copeland, which the Speaker decided to be unparliamentary, and ordered Mr. Copeland to sit down.
Mr. COPELAND answered that in Russia it might do to order a man to sit down, but that such tyrannical methods would not be tolerated in the General Assembly of the great State of Indiana. When you gentlemanly rule that I am out of order I shall take my seat, but not until then.
The SPEAKER declared the gentleman to be out of order.
Mr. HEFFREN said: I merely rise to make a single statement. I do not propose now to so into political or a political discussion-time enough for that yet. I have to say of the intemperate language of the member from Jefferson [Mr. Copeland] that it reminds me of an occurrence I witnessed last summer. I was reposing on a grassy plat and looking up into the foliage of a pine tree, a little bird alighted on the top-most swinging bough and sang out, "Tom-tit," "torn-tit " In an instance he threw his head down and his tall up and sang out, "Tom-tit." I must say that I could not tell "which end the song came from." and I am at equal loss to tell where the clamor and noise. In unparliamentary language, comes from that was poured forth by the member from Jefferson. I pose him.
Mr. PATTEN was one of the members who vot
Mr. JEWETT was of the opinion that in all the discussion there had been no reason advanced why this motion to reconsider should prevail. He coined heartily in what gentlemen had said about the scenes in the other end of the building going down in history as one of the worst exhibitions of petty tyranny ever perpetrated. He believed that the members were not in the right mood to discuss this question further at present, and made an ineffectual motion to postpone the question until 10 o'clock to morrow.
Mr. SMITH, of Tippecanoe, believed that such a thing as repealing the general appropriation bill had never occurred. He hoped that the second step would not be taken in this revolutionary measure,
Mr. WILS0N, of Marion, had likened to the discussion of this question and had heard, he was sorry to say many things that had no bearing upon the question under consideration. He hoped there would not be an extra session. He could not see that any good would come of an extra session, and if the Senate and Governor would act promptly and without delay there will be a way out of this difficulty. He moved the previous question, which was seconded by the House.
The previous question was ordered by a vote of yeas, 54; nays, 33.
Under the operations of the previous question the motion to reconsider the vote on
the concurrence in the
On motion by Mr. HEFFREN the report was laid on the table by yeas, 57; nays, 40.
The bill [S. 167] to define the Twentieth Judicial Circuit and creating the Forty-fifth Judicial Circuit was read the third time.
Mr. FRAZER noticed by the provisions of the bill that it makes two Circuits out of the Counties of Boone and Clinton, both small Counties Two-thirds of the Counties of the State would be entitled to separate Circuits if these two Counties are. Mr. Bryant stated that in Clinton County they had a population of 21,000, and in Boone County a population of 27,000, and that the Court was now behind 1,000 cases.
Mr. PATTEN was one of the Committee who investigated this matter and felt it his duty to support this measure. The bill passed the House by yeas, 54; nays, 26.
Mr. Robinson's bill [H. R. 224] to regulate the Incorporation of the town of Carbon, Clay County, was read the third time and by yeas, 68; nays. 8, passed the House.
Mr. Carr's bill [H. R. 418] to legalize the incorporporation of the town of Churubusco, Whitley County, was read a third time and passed the House by yeas, 85; nays, 1.
Mr. Mellitt's bill [H. R. 380] to leagalize the inporation of the Daleville and Mill Creek Turnpike Company was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 78; nays, 4.
Mr. Montgomery's bill [H. R. 415] concerning the distribution of property when divorces are granted, either to husband or wife, was read the third time and failed to pass-yeas, 44; nays, 36 for want of a Constitutional majority.
The House took a recess until 2 o'clock.
Mr. FRAZEE offered a concurrent resolution, which was referred to a Committee of Three, returning thanks to James Gordon Bennett for his princely gift to the sufferers from the Ohio River floods.
Mr. SCHLOSS offered a resolution, which was laid on the table, granting aid to persons rendered destitute by the floods on the Wabash.
Mr. HEFFREN called up the special order, being Mr. GRAHAM'S bill [H. R. 256], to provide a fund for the permanent endowment of the State University which was read the third time.
Mr. SUTTON favored the passage of the bill with the prevent provisions. This bill seeks to give five cents en the $1,000. A man who pays a tax of $10,000 would pay a tax of fifty cents to this institution. But this tax as provided under the previsions of this bill will raise a tax of $45,000 yearly. He understood that overtures had been made to some of the Professors by Eastern Colleges and he favored placing the school in such a concition that these men would be retained.
Mr. HEFFREN. I have said nothing upon thi bill in its various stages, and shall say but little now. I perhaps am differently constituted from many on this floor. 1 have never yet learned to weigh dimes and dollars against education, knowledge and science. For half a century Indiana has had a University with no endowment fund. It is time she had such an Institution well endowed, where her sons may achieve distinction in the battle of life. I would have one Institution, where we might point in after years and say, there was another Galileo or another Herschel brought forth to the world; one who, pointing his telescope into infinite space, could make new discoveries; where comets and planets perform their stupendous revolutions, that would ennoble the name and fame of Indiana. I would have another Cuvier produced, who, by comparative anotomy, can reconstruct the monsters of ancient times from a single bone. I would have a Hugh Miller, with his geologist's hammer in his hand, standing fit the loot of some mighty cliff, roll back the curtain of time, and, as he laid bare the rocks, read of ages long since passed and gone, and what and who inhabited this world of ours. I would have one place where Indiana's sons and daughters could store the mind with knowledge, civilization and science, find where they might go forth from and flaunt their names high up on the ladder of fame where their attainments, knowledge and genius should stand as beacon lights to a lesser informed world. This would I have Indiana do for her children, and thus would I rear a monument of science and intelligence that would stand out in all the glory and splendor that could encircle go noble and glorious a purpose. Endow this University, pass this bill, and Indiana's name will be honored when our bodies shall be dust and we gathered to our rewards. I hope the bill will pass.
Mr. JEWETT demanded the previous question, which was seconded by the House.
Under the operations of the previous question the bill passed the House by yeas, 78; nays, 61.
Mr. HEFFREN moved to suspend the rules and read the following Senate bills the first and second time, by title only.
The motion was agreed to by yeas, 95; nays, 0:
The bill [S. 45] to incorporate the Ohio Insurance Company.
The bill [S. 278] supplemental to an act concerning drainage.
The bill [S. 250] to establish provisions respecting private corporations.
The bill [S. 236] to fix commutations of terms of sentence on account of good behavior of persons confined in the State Prisons.
The bill [S. 178] supplemental to an act to establish public libraries.
The bill [S. 229] to regulate the business of Express Companies.
The joint resolution [S. 2] to provide for the payment of a claim to Mrs. Edwin May.
The bill [S. 189] to authorize Railroad Companies to guarantee the bonds of any other Railroad Company, etc.
The bill [S. 120] to amend an act amendatory of the charter of Clarksville, in Clark County.
The bill [S. 200] for assessment of lands for the benefit of certain roads.
The bill [S. 260] to legalize the incorporation of the town of Darlington, Montgomery County.
The bill [S. 140] to authorize the sale of certain lands in the State of Indiana.
The bill [S. 12] to define the crime of false pretense was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, -; nays, 0.
The bill [S. 74] to authorize any Manufacturing or Hydraulic Company to erect a dam across the St. Joseph River in Elkhart County was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 75; nays, 7.
The bill [S. 196] to amend an act to divide the State into Judicial Circuits was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 65; nays, 25.
The bill [S. 138] concerning railroads crossing each other on a common grade was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 85; nays, 5.
The bill [S. 67] to authorize municipal corporations to invest their sinking funds in Government, State and County bonds, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 78; nays, 5.
The bill [S. 285] to legalize the term of Court held in Pulaski County in June, 1881, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 70; nays, 10.
The bill [S. 105] to legalise the incorporation of the town of Waynetown, Montgomery County, Indiana, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 75; nays, 6.
The bill [S. 151] to amend Section 5,852 of the code of 1881, concerning the election of Clerks, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 81; nays, 0.
The bi 1 [S. 114] to amend Section 6,464 of the code of 1881, concerning the publication of the delinquent tax list, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 85; nays, 2.
The bill [S. 57] to amend Section 280 of the civil procedure act was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 76; nays, 4.
The bill [S. 162] concerning deeds executed by administrators executors, guardians, Sheriffs and Commissioners of Courts was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 77; nays, 9.
The bill [S. 174] concerning the Supreme Court, and providing for the continuation of the Supreme Court Commission for two years, was read the third time.
Mr. PATTEN was opposed to the continuation of this Supreme Court Commission, and moved to postpone the bill indefinitely, which he subsequently withdrew.
On motion by Mr. FRAZER the further consideration of the question was postponed until ft o'clock to-morrow morning.
The bill [H. R. 456] to provide for the erection of the new State House was read the second time and made the special order for to-morrow morning at 9:30 o'clock.
The House adjourned until 9 o'clock to-morrow.
The Senate met at 9 o'clock, Lieutenant Governor Hanna in the Chair.
Prayer by S. T Gillett. D. D.
On motion of Mr. CAMPBELL the reading of the Secretary's minutes of yesterday's proceedings was dispensed with.
On motion of Mr. DUNCAN the bill [H. R. 256] to provide a fund for the permanent endowment of the State University, under a setting aside of the Constitutional restriction, by a two-thirds vote was read the second time by title, the third time by sections.
Mr. DUNCAN explained: It authorizes a levy of one-half cent on each $100 valuation for twelve years. It passed the House by a vote of 70 to 21. The bill, as a matter of economy and good mannagement of the State's indebtedness, and put into a non-negotiable 5 per cent University endowment fund bond. We appropriate annually $23,000 for the management of the University, and at the end of twelve years this plan would amount to but $4,000 more than under the present plan. By the levy of this tax the annual appropriation would be done away with, thus, making a large saving. This would place the University on a firm foundation, so it will not hereafter be the creature of every Legislature. It would have an annual revenue derived from interest on this non-negotiable bond. Such an interest should be kept free from sectarian basis. We owe a duty to the people of the State to place that Institution on a permanent foundation. The bill provides the fund shall follow the Institution should it be consolidated with another or removed from the present location.
Mr. HENRY moved to amend so that the fund would be held for a consolidated institution should the University ever be consolidated with another. He was a friend of the Institution. The word "thereafter," an indefinite term, is probably wrongly used, and this amendment proposes to make that word "hereafter," thus making it definite. The time will come when the Educational Institutions of the State should be consolidated. This is a way to prevent the constant changes made by every Legislature.
Mr. BROWN said there was no better friend on the floor to this Institution than himself. He favored the amendment and hoped it would be adopted, with the assurance from the author of the amendment, if the House refuses to concur, he was willing to have the Senate recede therefrom.
The bill,as amended, passed by yeas, 37; nays, 4.
On motion by Mr. COMPTON the bill [H. R. 224] to legalize the incorporation of Carbon, Clay County was read twice by title, the third time by sections, under a setting aside of the Constitutional rule by a two-thirds vote, and passed by yeas, 40; nays, 0.
Mr. McCULLOUGH called up the special order, being the consideration of the majority
and minority report of the
Mr. VOYLES in view of all the evidence he had heard believes this seat in all justice and right belongs to the contestor in this case, and the conduct of the sitting member has been such as should deprive him of his seat as Senator. There were thirty-two illegal votes cast for Overstreet in Morgan County, and some seventeen or twenty-one in Johnson County. Then there was a corrupt bargain by which the contestor was defeated made with a man by the name of William Rude. He claimed that Richard M. Johnson was elected, but is barred out by eighty-five votes resting upon fraud and illegality. There were at least fifty votes illegally cast for Overstreet through fraud and intimidation, which are twin brothers. He hoped Richard M. Johnson would be seated. He spoke with considerable difficulty on account of not feeling well.
Mr. LOCKRIDGE, a member of the Committee to whom the contest was referred, declared
that simplifying the grounds of contest, they are but two-the first and fourth clauses
under Section 4,756 R. S. 1881. But at the eleventh hour of this third cause of contest, in
direct violation of the statute providing for the manner of proccedure in contested
cases in Section 4,747 R. S. And what is the nature of this amendment? That the
contestee bribed or offered to bribe, on the 7th of November last. There are no
specifications, but only a vague and indefinite charge. A cloud of witnesses are
subpenaed at the expense of the State, and all this time the contestee is denied his
right to have his specifications of the charge against him made known - a right that
is denied to no defendant, in any Court of Justice in Christendom outside of an
autocratic form of Government. He asked whether such a proceeding is in the interest
of justice and fair play. Whether the admission of the amendment to the grounds of
contest at the late hour it was done, and in the face of the statute which prescribes
that it shall be done within ten days after the election, and the refusal of the
contestor to furnish specifications of his charge against the contestee, is in accord
with the spirit of the Constitution, which says that "justice shall be administered
freely and without purchase; completely and without, denial; speedily and without
delay," and that the accused shall have the right "to demand the nature and cause of
the accusation against him, and to have a copy thereof " Under the sanctity of his
oath he bad reached the conclusions embodied in the majority report, that the charge
is not sustained by sufficient evidence to entitle the contestor to a seat in the
Senate.
Mr. McCULLOUGH confined his remarks more particularly 10 the charge of bribery. Were he sitting as a Juror to try the question he would hare to conclude that the contestee had violated the law of the State in that particular and should suffer for the crime. He regarded the testimony of the contestee as a sham, and the testimony of a guilty man-having no mild words for a man who will use such means to secure an election, for if there is one danger above another that threatens our institutions, it is the danger that threatens the corruption of the ballot-box. Before he concluded-
The Senate took a recess till 2 o'clock
Mr. FOULKE, rising to a question of privilege, said he had the authority of the Senator from Crawford [Mr. Benz] for the statement that he was approached by a party asking him how much he would take to vote for the metropolitan police bill. Therefore Mr. F. moved that a Committee of Three be appointed to inquire into it, with power to send for persons and papers.
The motion was agreed, to, and subsequently the Lieutenant Governor made the Committee to consist of Messrs. Foulke, McIntosh and Youche
Mr. McCULLOUGH resumed his speech interrupted by the noon recess. He quoted very largely from the testimony taken before the Committee, and favored the adoption of the minority report submitted by himself, declaring that the charge of bribery is fully made out and sustained by evidence.
Mr. FOULKE spoke in favor of the majority report. His remarks will be printed hereafter.
Mr. SAYRE contended that the action of the sitting member was not bribery, even if taken in the sense the Senator from Gibson [Mr. McCullough] wants to give it. Instead of there being testimony that would convict Senator Overstreet of the charge. It is not even a contract that could be enforced in a Court of Justice, where the plaintiff is required only to establish his case by a preponderance of testimony. So far as illegal votes are concerned there were just as many on one side as on the other, and neither will exceed a half dozen or ten when the proof comes to be examined closely. But even if there were forty or fifty illegal votes as the Senator from Washington [Mr. Voyles] has said, Mr. Johnson would not be entitled to the seat, for Mr. Overstreet's majority was eighty-five, and if even fifty votes were taken therefrom there would still be left a clear majority of thirty-five. His judgment was that neither of these majority reports should be sustained by the Senate, but that the majority report should. The three Republican members of the Committee, and the Senator from Allen and Whitly [Mr. Bell] and the Senator from Marion [Mr. Fletcher], who signed that report after listening patiently to the testimony and able argument, have submitted it to the Senate, as their judgment justified by the facts in the case.
Mr. WILLARD spoke in favor of the substitute report [Mr. Voyles']. His remarks will be printed hereafter.
Mr. OVERSTREET spoke in his own behalf. His remark i will be printed hereafter. The
question being on the report submitted by Mr. Voyles-see page 221 of the Brevier
Reports as a substitute for the majority and minority reports from the
Yeas-Messrs. Benz, Brown, Compton, Davidson, Duncan, Ernest, Faulkner, Hilligass, Hoover, Howard, Hutchinson, Johnston of Dearborn, Johnson of Tippecanoe, Marvin, May, McClure, McIntosh, Null, Richardson, Smith of Jay, Voyles and Willard-21.
Nays-Messrs. Adkinson, Bichowski, Bundy, Campbell, Fleming, Foulke, Graham, Henry, Hill, Keiser, Lockridge, Lindley, Macartney, Magee, McCullogh. Rahm, Ristine, Sayre, Smith of Delaware, Spann, Van Vorhis, White, Yancy and Youche-24.
So the substitute report was rejected.
The minority report was also rejected by yeas, 2; nays 40.
The report of the majority of the Committee was concurred In by yeas, 24; nays, 22, as follows:
Yeas-Messrs. Adkinson, Bichowski, Bandy, Campbell, Fleming, Foulke, Graham, Henry, Hill, Keiser, Lockridge, Lindley, Macartney, Magee, May, Rahm, Ristine, Sayre, Smith of Delaware, Spann, Van Vorhis, White, Yancy and Youche-24.
Nays-Messrs. Benz, Brown, Compton, Davidson, Duncan, Ernest, Faulkner, Hilligass, Hoover, Howard, Hutchinson, Johnston of Dearborn, Johnson of Tippecanoe, Marvin, McClure, McCullough, McIntosh, Null, Richardson, Smith of Jay, Voyles and Willard-22.
So the majority report was concurred in.
Mr. SPANN offered a resolution which was adopted allowing the pay of a page for twenty-eight days to Arthur Moody.
Mr. VOYLES offered a resolution authorizing to pay Albert J. Kelley and Harry Huffstetter-$300 each for preparing an index and calender for the journals, when the work is completed.
On motion by Mr. McCULLOUGH the resolution was referred to the
On motion by Mr. Campbell, the Constitutional rule having been heretofore suspended for that purpose by a two-thirds vote of the Senate and the bill [H. R. 286] to empower manufacturing companies to take and hold stock in corporations furnishing water power, was read the third time and passed by yeas, 85; nays, 2,
On motion by Mr. VAN VORHIS the specific appropriation bill [H. R. 460] was taken
up, read twice by title, under a suspension of the Constitutional rule by a
two-thirds vote, and referred to a
On motion by Mr. RISTINE the Senate refused to concur in the House amendments to
his bill [S. 88] to amend the Horse-thief Detective Company Organization act, and
asked for a
Then the Senate took a recess till 7:30 o'clock.
Mr. FOULKE moved to take up the prohibition amendment joint resolution [H. R. 1].
Mr. JOHNSON moved to lay the resolution on the table.
This motion was agreed to by yeas, 22; nays, 15.
Mr. VAN VORHIS, by consent, introduced a bill [S. 293] to repeal a act concerning legal advertising in certain cases requiring publication to be made for twenty-one consecutive days, approved yesterday, was read the first time and referred to a Select Committee of Three-Messrs. Van Vorhis, Fletcher and Bell.
Mr. BROWN moved that the relocation of County seats bill [S. 9] be taken up.
Mr. MAY made an ineffectual motion-yeas, 11; nays, 26-to lay this motion on the table.
The motion was agreed to and the bill was read the second time.
On motion by Mr. JOHNSON the further consideration of the bill was postponed till to-morrow.
Mr. BELL, under a suspension of the Constitutional rule by a two-thirds vote, introduced a bill [S. 294] to make the general index of a deed or mortgage prima facie evidence of the record to which it refers, when the destruction of the record by fire and loss of the original instrument is made to appear, which was read twice by title only, the third time by sections, and passed by yeas, 40; nays, 0.
On motion by Mr. VOYLES the bill [H. R. 464] supplemental to an act relating to the disposal of estates of persons who have absented themselves from their usual places of residence and gone to parts unknown, under a dispensation of the Constitutional restriction by a two-thirds vote, was read twice by title only, the third time by sections and passed by yeas, 41; nays, 1.
On motion by Mr. SMITH of Delaware, the bill [H. R. 380 ] to legalize the Daleville and Bell Creek Turnpike Company, in the County of Delaware, under a suspension of the Constitutional rule, was read twice by title only, the third time by sections and passed by yeas, 34; nays, 0.
On motion by Mr. MAGEE the Senate resolved itself into the
Mr. VOYLES moved to add to item 157 $2,000 for gas, replacing wornout fixtures for the Asylum for Feeble-Minded Children.
The amendment was agreed to.
When the $16,000 deficiency in the public printing was read-
Mr. MAGEE complained of the padding out practiced in the public printing. The Bureau of Public Printing should not overdraw by issuing vouchers in advance of the appropriation. He protested against this, and if there is any way to prevent this growing abuse it should be adopted.
Mr. BELL called the of the
Mr. VAN VORHIS moved to add Section 25, to David V. Burns, $400; and to Caleb S. Denney, $200, in full for services rendered in the case of the State vs. the County of Johnson.
The amendment was adopted.
Mr. BUNDY moved to add, to Samuel A. Bowen, $129 96; and to James Y. Allison, $120, for services as special Judges.
It was rejected.
Mr. SAYRE moved to allow $360 for similar services to the estate of John U. Pettit.
It was agreed to.
Mr. BELL moved to add $46,736 46 to John Martin.
Mr. McINTOSH opposed the amendment, and read an objection made to it as printed in the Brevier Reports, volume xx, page 180, by a member of the last House of Representatives.
Mr. WILLARD said this claim was founded on a technicality of measurement.
Mr. Voyles also opposed it.
Mr. Graham, Mr. Bundy, Mr. Van Vorhis, Mr. Fletcher and Mr. Foulke regarded it as a just claim.
It was agreed to upon a division-affirmative, 20; negative, 14.
Mr. RICHARDSON moved to add $5,152 69 for lightning rods place don the Insane Asylum by David R. Munson.
It was rejected.
Mr. MAGEE moved to strike out $1,200 for clerk hire in the Adjutant General's office.
Mr. VOYLES offered a substitute for the item and the assessment
The substitute was adopted.
Mr. OVERSTREET moved to add $1,300 to M. M. Campbell for extra services as teacher in the State University.
It was agreed to.
Mr. FOULKE moved to amend by allowing William H. Shclater for preparing a list of bills for the last Senate Journal.
It was adopted.
Mr. YOUCHE moved to add $250 to the J. H. Warden for measuring wall for the Insane Hospital in the John Martin claim.
The amendment was agreed to by affirmative, 17; negative, 10.
Mr. McCLURE moved to amend by adding $38,333 for buying three and one-third acres of ground and building a wall along side of it.
Mr. BENZ said the fence was rotten, it is twelve years old; more ground is needed, and it is offered cheap.
It was adopted upon a division-affirmative, 22; negative, none.
Mr. BUNDY offered an amendment allowing $500 for extra pay to Clerk of the
It was adopted.
On motion by Mr. Magee, the Committee rose, reported progress and instructed the Chairman to report the bill to the Senate at 10 to-morrow.
The report was concurred in.
The Senate adjourned till 10 a. m. to-morrow.
The session was opened with prayer by Representative Brazelton, of Jennings County.
Mr. Schloss' bill [H. R. 290] to repeal Section 105 of an act concerning taxation, being Section 373 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, was read the third time.
Mr. WILSON, of Marion, was in favor of the passage of this bill. He believed as the
statutes now stand, the men who form these Associations
Mr. McMULLEN was from a County in which several such Associations exist. They are composed entirely of poor, laboring men, who can pay only up one or two dollars per week. By joining these Associations and paying a small assessment into the general fund of the Association, a member may draw from the fund a stipulated Amount. With this amount he can purchase a Sot or build for himself a small house, and this is the object of these Associations. This bill is simply to relieve the shares held in such Associations from tax.
Mr. STERRITT stated that several of the Associations exist in the County which he represents. He thought it was unjust to tax the men upon the shares held in such Association and at the same time tax him upon the property that he buys with the money secured on these shares.
Mr. MONTGOMERY said these Building Associations loan all their money each Monday and take a mortgage upon the property purchased by the member securing the loan. He did not think it just to tax he property and at the same time tax the share-holder in such Association. It was simply to avoid double and triple taxation, and he, therefore, thought the bill should pass.
Mr. SHOCKNEY said; This bill ought to become a law. It is directly in the interest of a large number of laboring people who are striving to obtain a home of their own by depositing small pittances of their meager earnings with these Association's, and investing the same in small houses. Under the law as it now is these poor people are compelled to pay taxes on shares of stock they hare surrendered as well as on the property they buy, while the Associations, also, are compelled to pay taxes on the mortgages lead to secure the payment of dues-making treble taxation upon a needy class of industrious, but poor, laboring people.
The bill was rejected by yeas, 40; nays, 45.
Mr. Shively's bill [H. R. 293] concerning Mutual Life Insurance Companies was read the third time [The bill provides, first, that all Insurance Companies doing business on the assessment plan shall issue a bond payable to the State of Indiana for the faithful performance of their contract with their policy-holders. It makes it a felony for any Insurance Company doing business in this State to take out a policy on the life of an infirm, aged or crippled person. It also compels all such Companies doing business in this State to make a report on or before the 31st day of August of each year to the Auditor of State, giving a detailed account of its business. And a failure to do so will work a forfeiture of its charter.]
Mr. SCHLOSS said Building and Loan Associations are in existence all over the State for the purpose of mechanics and laboring men to acquire homes by monthly payments into the Society of $15 per month each month. Two shares are drawn for, $500 each, and such shares are given to such members as are applying for them. They will have to buy lots or build houses for such money and give real estate security. In this way poor people will get homes. This bill will do away with taxing the shares, but all money drawn is put into property, and such property is taxed according to law.
Mr. SHIVELY believed that all the members would agree with him that some legislation
was necessary upon this subject of insurance. If there has been more complaint about
one than another it has been about this matter of insurance, and the matter of doing
business for the last few years. The bill was drawn up by the
Mr. MELLETT agreed with the gentleman from Wabash [Mr. Shively] when he says that there is demand for protection against fraudulent Insurance Associations, and if this bill provided such protection he would heartily indorse it. He called upon the members to examine it can fully before they indorsed it to see whether or not it does provide this protection. This bill seems to be entirely different from the one offered by the gentleman from Wabash at the beginning of the session. He did not believe this bill would give satisfaction to the people of the State. In the first place it, confers too much power upon the Auditor of State. So far as that is concerned, you might strike out all but he one section and leave the whole matter with the Auditor of Stale. He also e is to say whether or not a Company shall do business in this State. The bill provides that any ten members of any corporation may upon demand request the Auditor to make an investigation of the affairs of such Association. Now, if ten men are sufficient to require an investigation, why not say that one man may demand an investigation? Under the provisions of this bill no man is allowed to renew his Insurance, it matters not how long he has been injured in the Company, or how prompt he map have been in his payments, though it has relapsed, because of failure to pay an annuity for a single day or even an hour, for that matter. The previsions of this bill make it a felony for that, man or any of his friends, to renew that policy. If this bill becomes a law, so far from protecting the people, so far from giving satisfaction to the people, it will be the means of crushing out every organization of this kind organized in this State, and turning this business over into the hands of foreign Insurance Companies.
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, was satisfied that the reason why the gentleman from Delaware [Mr. Millett] was opposed to the bill was because he did not, understand the provisions of the bill. There is a demand from every part of the State that the "Death Rattle" Insurance Companies should be cut off. Representatives of the leading and solvent Insurance Companies are here in the interest of this bill. The only objection they have against this bill is that it discriminates against foreign Companies in favor of Companies in this State. The objection is that this bill gives the Auditor of States too much power. This objection comes from these "Death Rattle" Companies that shrink from an investigation. In answer to an objection made against the bill that it did not require a foreign Company to give resident security on their bonds, he did not think it would be just to require them to do so, for the reason that it might be difficult for them to do so, even though they are good, solvent Companies. This bill simply provides that Companies doing business on the assessment plan shall not issue endowment certificates. These Companies can not do a fair business and issue endowment certificates.
Mr. HEFFREN bought the matter was fully discussed, and therefore moved the previous question, which was seconded by the House.
The bill passed the House by yeas, 67; nays, 21.
On motion of Mr. HUSTON the joint resolution [S. 2] for an appropriation of $10,000 to Mrs. Sarah May, wife of the late architect of the new State House, was read the third time.
A motion by Mr. SCHLOSS to recommit with the instruction that the amount be reduced to $5,000, was laid on the table by yeas, 52; nays, 40.
The resolution failed to pass-yeas, 49; nay, 47-for want of a Constitutional majority.
The special order was called up [Mr. McMullen in the Chair] being bill [H. R. 466] supplemental to an act to authorize and provide for the erection of a new State House and for matters incident thereto.
The question recurred on the amendment offered by Mr. McCormick striking out all
after the
Mr. HEFFREN hoped that the amendment should not prevail for the reason that there is nothing in it farther than to strike out all after the reacting clause and insert entire new matter. There is nothing in the proposition to provide tor the continuance of these bonds given by the old State House Commissioners. He believed the State should get through this matter and keep within the $2,000,000, and according to the evidence before the Committee he believed that it coul4 be built with that amount. He was of the opinion that no public building in the United States was ever constructed with more economy and better management than has this building so far as the work had progressed, and if constructed within the $2,000,000 it will be the cheapest public building in the country. He added that although the bond of the present contractors was good, it was doubtful if there could be any recovery upon it until the building was completed.
Mr. MOCK was in favor of holding to the original contract, and in holding the present contractors to their contract. He thought they had no right to change that contract. The change in the price of labor and material, of which we have heard so much, should, have nothing to do with the original contract. If these men do not desire to stand by their contract, let them give it up.
Mr. SMITH, of Tippecanoe, was impressed with the question whether or not, like Shylock, we were going to hold every man to his pound of flesh. Whether the State of Indiana, whether it be right or wrong, will require the pound of flesh from every man? If this contact was made at a time when material and labor was at a low price, and it has since advanced, in consequence of which three men have been great losers, the State of Indiana should not say there is your bond, now we want the pound of flesh cut from next your heart. He was on the floor when the bill was passed for the erection of the new State House, and the prevailing opinion then was that the State House could not be built for $2,000,000. Viewing this matter as he did and taking into consideration the fast that the provisions of the bill of the gentleman from Bartholomew-[Mr. McCormick] are for $4,000,000, he was in favor of the bill that did not break the original contract.
Mr. HAM did not understand that the amendment proposed that the State House shall cost two million dollars. His understanding was that if this amendment is adopted it will simply re-enact the old law with one or two exceptions. Now the original bill provides that it may be relet the same contractors, that the Commissioners may relet this contract for a sum not to exceed two million dollars, but no other persons shall be allowed to put in a bid. He was of the opinion that if this contract was relet to the same parties they might be knocking at the door of the next Legislature for another appropriation.
Mr. HUSTON was a member of the Committee which investigated this question, and he was opposed to the adoption of this amendment. He was opposed to the amendment because it required the reletting of the contract, thereby causing great delay in the work and injury to the building in its present condition. Mr. Huston continued at some length.
Mr. HEFFREN moved to postpone the further consideration until 2 o'clock, which was agreed to.
Mr. Bowers' bill [H. R. 191] to regulate the practice of medicine, mid wifery and surgery, was taken up, read the third time, and postponed until 3 o'clock this afternoon.
The House took a recess until 2 o*< look,
The special order being the bill [H. R. 466] to authorize and provide for the erection of a new State House, is was called up.
Mr GIBSON moved to postpone the further consideration until 9 o'clock to-morrow.
Mr. HEFFREN made an ineffectual motion-yeas, 21; nays. 54-to lay the motion on the table.
Mr. GIBSON was of the opinion that as the House had appointed a Committee, had employed a stenographer, had rented rooms, had incurred the additional expense of having the sworn testimony taken before that Committee printed, it should postpone this question until to-morrow, when this printed testimony and evidence would be before the House.
Mr. MOODY regarded this proposition as one of the most important questions that was before the House this session. He was not in favor of waiting for the printed evidence, or postponing this matter tor that purpose.
Mr. JEWETT was in favor of considering the question now. He was not in favor of retarding the matter by any subterfuge, and desired to meet the question fairly and, without delay. He was satisfied that the members would not have time to examine the printed evidence at this late hour.
Mr. PATTEN was in favor of postponing the question until to-morrow. He thought the discussion had gone far enough and demanded the previous question.
The previous question was seconded by the House-yeas. 66; nays, 31-and under its operation the motion to postpone was agreed to by yeas, 52; nays, 44.
Mr. ROBINSON called up the bill [S. 139] to amend Sections 5,472 and 5,480 of the code of 1881, concerning coal mines. The bill was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 88; nays 0.
Mr. Bowers' bill [H. R. 91] to regulate the practice of medicine, midwifery and surgery, was taken up as the special order.
Mr. ANTRIM thought there were some provisions of the bill that should not become a law in this State. He thought in some cases it would work a hardship.
Mr. STRAUGHAN was a physician and was in favor of the passage of this bill. It was legislation not to protect physicians of the State, but to protect the people from quacks and pretenders driven into this State by stringent medical laws enacted in other States.
Mr. PATTEN was opposed to the bill. The learned physicians from his County bad requested him to oppose the bill. They did not desire such legislation.
Mr LOWERS was in favor of the bill. He desired K see the standard of medicine raised in the Sta's. And this was the object of sued legislation. He moved that the bill be recommitted to a Special Committee with instructions.
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. Peters' bill [H. R. 429] to appropriate money for the erection of a family building and putting in gas mains at the House of Refuge, and apropriating $10,000, was read the third time an d passed the House by yeas, 86, nays, 0.
Mr. Genung's bill [H. R.
Mr. Greene's bill [H. R. 227] to legalize the acts of the Board of Trustees and other officers of the town of Jasper, Dubois County for the years 1879, 1880, 1881 and 1882, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 76; nays, 0.
Mr. Gordon's bill [H. R. 297] to legalize the incorporation of the town of Roachdale, Putnam County, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 74; nays, 0.
Mr. FRAZEE, from the Special Committee, reported back the resolution authorizing
the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House to return thanks to James
Gordon Bennett for the
Mr. Brooks' bill [H. R. 313] to amend Section 4 of an act providing a Treasury system for the State of Indiana was read the third time, and passed the House by yeas, 81: nays, 0.
Mr Wilson's, of Marion, bill [H. R. 176] to amend Section 6 376 of the code of 1881, concerning taxation, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 73; nays, 0.
Mr HEFFREN moved that when the House adjourned, it be until 7:30 p. m. The motion was agreed to.
Mr. Williams', of Knox, bill [H. R. 65] to amend Section 3 of an act concerning damages, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 65; nays, 3.
The bill [S. 45] supplemental to an act to Incorporate the Ohio Insurance Company, the title and name being changed to the Commercial Bank by decree of Court, November 12, 1881, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 73; nays, 3.
Mr. Robinson's bill [H. R. 259] to repeal all laws for the protection of English sparrows, was read the third time and rejected by yeas, 36; nays, 43.
The House took a recess until 7:30 p. m.
Mr. HOLLER introduced a resolution, which was adopted, authorizing the printing of 4,000 copies of the report of the Fishery Commissioner.
The House took up and concurred In the Senate amendments to [H. R. 223] concerning decedents' estates.
Mr. Bowers' bill [H. R. 191] to regulate the practice of medicine, midwifery and surgery, was taken up. The amendment providing that its provisions should not affect any person who is now practicing; medicine in the State was concurred in by the House. The vote recurring on the passage of the bill it was rejected by yeas, 41; nays,46.
The bill [S. 189] to authorize Railroad Companies to guarantee the bonds of any other Railroad Company organized under the laws of another State, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 75; nays, 11.
Mr. Schloss' bill [H. R. 372] concerning voluntary Gymnastic Associations, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 65; nays, 29.
Mr. Gordon's bill [H. R. 245], a bill concerning the incorporation of towns, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 59; nays, 19.
Mr. Mosier's bill [H. R. 332] to amend Sections 49 and 50 of an act concerning criminal cases, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 78; nay, 1
The House adjourned until 9 o'clock to-morrow morning.
The Senate met, the Lieutenant Governor in the Chair.
The reading of the minutes was dispensed with.
On motion by Mr. VAN VORHIS his bill [S. 295] to repeal an act concerning legal advertising in certain cases [requiring publication to be made for three consecutive weeks in a daily news paper], approved day before yesterday, was, under a setting aside of the restriction in the Constitution of the State by a two-thirds rule, read the second time by title only, the third time by sections and passed by yeas, 37: nays. 3. Mr. Van Vorhis explaining the act sought to be repealed required the publication for three weeks daily instead of three weekly publications as was the intention.
Mr. FLETCHER stating that the office of Township Trustee is virtually closed up while it was essential that it should be kept open which the bill [H. R. 176] proposes to allow, he moved for a suspension of the Constitutional rule that this may be done.
Mr. VAN VORHIS seconded the motion, declaring the measure necessary to allow that officer to properly perform his duties.
The motion was agreed to, and the bill [H. R. 176] to amend Section 6,376 of the Revised Statutes of i88I was read twice by title, the third time by sections, and passed by yeas, 34; nays, 0.
Mr. RAHM moved to take up the bill [H. R. 359] in relation to lighting of cities and towns with electric light and press it to the final vote under a suspension of the Constitutional rule.
The motion was opposed because of a contest in Evansville concerning this matter, and for other reasons-bills should not be hurried through under a suspension of the Constitutional rule with but one reading, especially in the last days of the session, etc-by Messrs. Voyles and Graham.
Mr, MAGEE favored the motion. A similar bill has been on the Senate files since the first day of February.
Mr. YANCEY believed all the opposition to this bill comes from the Evansville Gas Company.
Mr. RAHM said there was no one objecting in Evansville out from a single corner-even the Gas Company's attorney is satisfied with this bill, and every opponent gives him to understand that a 150 foot tower would be satisfactory. The bill is general in character and applies to other cities than Evansville.
Mr. ADKISON favored the motion.
Mr. HENRY knew opposition to the bill has not been withdrawn, and he opposed the motion.
Mr. VOYLES claimed this an effort to legalize what is claimed to be a nuisance in a case that is now a controverted question in litigation.
Mr. FOULKE was willing the bill should be considered, but hardly thought it in a shape to pass.
The motion to suspend the Constitutional rule was agreed to by yeas 34; nays, 9.
On motion the bill was referred to Messrs. Voyles. Rahm and Bundy.
On motion by Mr. WHITE, the bill [H. R. 332] to amend Sections 1,622 and 1,623 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, so that wherever property has been seized under a search warrant, it shall not be necessary before the final disposition of the property to wait for the conviction of the person charged with the crime, but the Judge may determine the ownership before that time, was passed by yeas, 33, nays, 2.
Mr. SPANN, Chairman of the
On motion by Mr. VOYLES the amendment allowing the Talbott claim was struck out a bill for the purpose having passed both Houses.
Mr. McINTOSH objected to allowing $1,300 to M. M. Campbell,regarding it as a gift.
Mr. JOHNSON, Chairman of the
Mr. SMITH was on the Committee two years
Mr. YANCEY expressed such fears now, and for that reason opposed the appropriation.
Mr. HENRY moved to amend by adding there to that the amount shall be paid to the said Campbell in person, or to his executor or administrator. It was agreed to by yeas, 27; nays, 12. The item as amended was agreed to by yeas, 17; nays, 15.
The Senate refused to concur in the Committee amendment proposing to allow the John Martin claim of $46,736 46, by yeas, 21; nays, 23.
Mr. BROWN moved to amend the report of the
Mr. McINTOSH remembered this claim as before the House when he was a member two years ago and he regarded it as unjust.
Mr. MAGEE spoke against it.
Mr. DUNCAN hoped the item would pass.
Mr. BELL said it was wrong unless Senators knew something against claims, to get up
and oppose them. The evil of lobbying to get just claims through would pass out, of
existence, When the
On motion by Mr. VOYLES the House amendment to the bill [S. 292] concerning work done by the Talbott Brothers, $4,439 79 was stricken out, it having been embodied in a bill which had passed both Houses.
Mr. SPANN offered the following:
Whereas, The Board of State House Commissioners have recommended additional legislation, the passage of which bill was in their opinion, necessary to secure the speedy completion of said building according to the plans and specifications adopted by said Board; and
Whereas, Such legislation has been defeated in the House of Representatives; and
Whereas, It is of the utmost importance to the taxpayers of the State of Indiana that said building should be completed as speedily as possible; therefore,
Resolved, by the Senate, the House of Representatives concurring therein, That in the event that the present State House contractors do not prosecute the work as last as the State House Commissioners are hereby authorized to cancel said contract and to relet said building to the lowest responsible bidder. Provided, That the same shall not be relet at a greater price or sum than $2,000,000.
Mr. S. moved for a suspension of the rules to allow of the immediate consideration of this resolution.
The motion gave rise to a long discussion, and was agreed to by yeas, 25; nays, 19.
The discussion [see appendix to these reports] was continued, and finally the resolution was rejected by yeas, 19; nays, 25,
On motion by Mr. BUNDY the bill [H. R. 359] in relation to the lighting of cities and towns with the electric system was considered. Committee amendments concurred in, saving pending suits, and the bill read the third time.
Mr. GRAHAM understood the bill as amended does not limit the height of tower that may be erected under its provision. He did not think the Legislature ought to license that to be done which may deprive citizens of the enjoyment of their property if not endanger their lives. He could net support the bill. '
Mr. CAMPBELL, understanding this bill contains nearly all the amendments reported by a minority of the Committee to a similar Senate bill, would now vote for it report.
Mr BELL also, with the Committee amendment just adopted, should vote in favor of the bill.
The bill passed by yeas, 34; nays, 6.
Mr. McINTOSH made an ineffectual motion to suspend the Constitutional rule-yeas, 25; nays, 15, two-thirds not voting in the affirmative-so as to pass the final vote the bill [H. R. 110] concerning proceedings in civil cases-to repeal Sections 1,397, 1,398, 1,399, 1,400, 1,401, 1,402, 1,403 and 1,404 of the Revised Statutes of 1881.
On motion by Mr. LOCKRIDGE the bill [H. R. 429] to appropriate $20,000 for the erection of a family building and putting in gas mains at the House of Refuge, under a dispensation of the Constitutional rule, was read twice by title, the third time by sections, and passed by yeas, 38; nays, 0.
Mr. LOCKRIDGE, explaining, and reminding Senators it was agreed to two years ago without a dissenting voice.
On motion by Mr. KEISER the bill [H. R. 55] to prevent the sale of impure butter, declaring such sale a misdemeanor, and declaring an emergency, was, under a dispensation of the Constitutional restriction, read twice by title only, the third time by sections and passed the Senate by yeas, 35; nays, 10.
On motion by Mr. BELL the bill [H. R. 418] to legalize the town of Cherubusco in the County of Whiteley, was pressed through the three readings and passed the Senate under a suspension of the Constitutional rule by yeas, 39; nays, 0.
On motion by Mr. WILLARD the bill [H. R. 227] to legalize the acts of the Trustees of Jasper, Dubois County, was advanced to the final reading and passed by yeas, 35; nays, 0.
On motion by Mr. SAYRE, the bill [H. R. 293] concerning Mutual Life Insurance Companies, under a suspension of the Constitutional rule by a two-thirds vote, was read second time by title.
Mr. SAYRE explained-under this bill such Companies shall not be organized until after having secured $200,000 policies on lives a prerequisite-their policy holders are to be secured by a bead deposited with the Auditor of State. It makes it unlawful to solicit insurance upon the lives of aged and infirm persons.
Mr. FOULKE referred to several bad provisions in the bill.
Mr. WILLARD objected to Section 6, and proposed several amendments to do away with a dodge or catch in the bill. He is informed that a clerical error noticed in the House on the third reading is still in the bill as reported to the Senate, and one amendment is to correct that.
Mr. BROWN demanded the previous question.
The Senate seconded the demand, and under the operation the amendments were rejected.
The bill was read the third time and passed by yeas, 36; nays, 10.
On motion by Mr. McCLURE the two amendments to his Clarksville charter bill [S. 120] were concurred in.
On motion by Mr. BROWN the bill [H. R. 91] to provide for the relocation of County seats was taken up, the question being on concurrence in a Minority Committee report recommending that the bill be indefinitely postponed.
The Senate concurred in the report by yeas, 26; nays, 14. So the bill was indefinitely postponed.
On motion by Mr. JOHNSON the House amendment to the title of the bill [S. 236] to fix commutation of terms of sentence of convicts was concurred in.
On motion by Mr. YOUCHE the House amendments to his bill [H. R. 289] were concurred in.
On motion by Mr. ADKISON his bill [S. 42] to require railroads to fence their lines, etc., was read the second time by title only under a suspension of the rules by a two-thirds vote, the question being on a minority report recommending the passage of the bill.
Mr. YANCEY declared the bill proposes an impossibility. It is wrong and vicious and ought not to pass. Men living along the road could extort from the Railroad Companies, and then Railroad Companies can not fence their roads to the time set In the bill. He desired the people to deal fairly with the Railroad Companies as he would have the Railroad Companies deal with the people.
Mr. MARVIN thought this the worst bill ever introduced in this Senate. The greatest expense to farmers is building fences. It is wrong to put, anybody to the expense of building fences except to fence in stock.
Mr. ADKISON expected this bill would meet with opposition. For twenty-eight years the Wabash Valley Railroad has been running through some of the best corn fields in Wabash County, and the road promised to fence when they got the right of way. Twenty-eight years is surely time enough for them to fence this track. If there is a Railroad unable to fence its track they ought to sell out.
On motion by Mr. BROWN the bill and reports were laid on the table.
On motion by Mr. MACARTNEY the bill [S. 81] to authorize County Commissioners to grant bounties [$2 each] for the destruction of woodchucks, hawks or owls was read twice by title, the third time by sections, and passed under a suspension of the rules, by yeas, 28; nays, 7.
On motion by Mr. BISCHOWSKI the bill [H. R. 372] concerning voluntary Associations for the purpose of forming Gymnastic or Turnverin Associations-to authorize such to hold real estate or personal property-was read twice, under a suspension of the Constitutional rule, read the third time and passed by yeas, 80; nays, 1.
The Senate took a recess till
Mr. MAY, from the
Mr. BUNDY moved to take up the prohibition amendment to the Constitution joint resolution [H. R. 1] and press it to the final vote and on that motion he demanded the previous question.
On motion by Mr. BELL the motion was laid on the table by yeas, 22; nays, 18.
On motion by Mr. MAGEE the House concurrent resolution for a Joint Convention to elect a Chief of a Bureau of Statistics was taken up and amended by fixing the time at 8 o'clock p. m. this evening.
Mr. FLETCHER made an ineffectual motion yeas, 20; nays, 24-to press to a final vote the bill [S. 338] to abolish the office of City Treasurer in cities Having a population of 60,000 and over.
On motion by Mr. MAY his bill [S. 168] to legalise the acts of the Trustees of Cannelton, Perry County, was, under a suspension, passed to the final vote and paused by yeas, 85; nays, 0.
A Committee from the House of Representatives announced the House in waiting for Senators to meet in Joint Convention for the purpose of electing a Chief of the Bureau of Statistics.
Thereupon the Senate repaired to the Hall of the House.
When the Senators returned to their Chamber-
On motion by Mr. McCULLOUGH the bill [H. R. 270] to legalize toe town of Oakland, Gibson County, was pressed through three readings under a suspension of the Constitutional rule, and passed by yeas, 39; nays, 0.
On motion by Mr: SMITH, of Jay, the change of County lines bill [S. 280] to amend Section 4,204, R. S. of 1881, with a favorable majority and a minority report, recommending its indefinite postponement.
After discussion-see Appendix-
Mr. BROWN demanded the previous question.
The Senate seconded the demand.
Under the operations of the previous question the minority report was concurred in by yeas, 22; nays,21.
The Senate returned to the consideration of the specific appropriation bill-the question recurring on the motion to add $5,152.69 for a lightning rod placed on the Insane Asylum by David B. Munson.
Mr. CAMPBELL had investigated this matter and finds nothing in this claim.
Mr. BROWN demanded the previous question.
The demand w-s seconded by the Senate, and under the operation of the previous question-
The amendment [lightning rod] was agreed to by yeas. 24; nays, 10: and the Senate amendments were considered as engrossed by yeas, 28; nays, 15, the bill read the third time and passed by yeas, 25; nays, 17.
On motion by Mr. BELL, upon a two-thirds vote the Constitutional rule was suspended
and the bill [ H. R.
Mr. RISTINE submitted a report from the
On motion by Mr. WHITE, the Constitutional restriction was dispensed with by a two-thirds vote, and the bill [H. R. 160] to prohibit the selling, bartering or giving away the questions prepared by the State Board of Education, to be used y County Superintendents in the examination of teachers, was read twice by title only the third time by sections and passed by yeas 31; nays, 0.
On motion by Mr. WILLARD the Senate adopted the House concurrent resolution instructing the Secretary of State to have 10,000 copies of the road, dog and decedent estates' law printed and distributed.
Mr. BELL introduced a bill [S. 295] supplemental to an act to repeal an act concerning legal advertisements in certain cases, approved day before yesterday [so as to revive all laws that may be repealed by the law approved day before yesterday], which was read three times under a suspension of the Constitutional rule and passed by yeas, 35; nays,1.
Mr. BELL stating it to be questionable whether all laws on this subject have not been repealed by the Texas like stampede the Senate took in passing a bill to-day repealing the one approved day before yesterday.
On motion by Mr. VAN VORHIS the restriction in the Courts was dispensed with by a two-thirds vote, and the bill [H. R. 161] to amend Sections 6,488 and 6 491 of the Revised Statutes of 1881 [so that under sales of property for taxes in cities in a city may be made a party with the State and County in the sale, and that delinquent land sold under one sale] was read twice by title, the third time by sections and passed by yeas, 31: nays, 3.
Mr. HENRY withdrew the notice he gave the other day of the motion to reconsider the
vote by which the Senate agreed to the report of the
On motion of Mr. RAHM the Constitutional rule was suspended by a two-thirds vote
and Mr. May's bill [S.
On motion by Mr. LOCKRIDGE the Constitutional rule was suspended by a two-thirds vote and the bill [H. R. 397] to legalize the town of Roachdale, Putuam county, was read twice by title, the third time by sections and passed by yeas, 35; nays, 0.
On motion by Mr. KEISER the bill [H. R. 53] to legalize Burnettsville, White County, was read twice by title, again by sections, and passed by yeas, 31; nays, 0, under a suspension of the Constitutional rule.
On motion by Mr. VOYLES the Constitutional rule was suspended, and the bill [H. R. 105] concerning change of venue from Justice to Superior Court was read twice by title only, the third time by sections.
Mr. SPANN pointed out what he regarded as a vicious principle in this bill.
Mr. VOYLES thought the bill would not operate as stated by the Senator [Mr. Spann.]
On motion by Mr. BROWN the bill was laid on the table by yeas, 24; nays, 10.
On motion by Mr. SAYRE, the bill [H. R. 149] to amend ejection 516 of the R. S of 1881 [so as to put down cases upon the same footing as other cases may be commenced during the term], under a suspension of the Constitutional rule was read twice by title only, again by sections, and passed by yeas, 31; nays, 3.
A message from the Governor [a few minutes before midnight] announced his appointment, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, Mrs. Eliza C. Hendricks and Mrs. Clare Walker, as members of the Board of Managers of the Indiana Reformatory for Women and Girls, to serve for four years from the 4th of March next-to-morrow
On motion by Mr. BELL these nominations were confirmed.
On motion by Mr. MAY the Constitutional rule was dispensed with and the bill [H. R. 280] touching the duties of Township Trustees [to empower Township Trustees to levy a special tax to liquidate indebtedness] was read twice by title, again by sections, and passed by yeas, 33; nays 1.
Mr. VOYLES called up his notice, given just before adjournment day before yesterday, to add to the rules new one-No. 61. It was adopted by yeas, 21; nays, 14.
Mr. SPANN gave notice of a protest which he asked and obtained leave to file on Monday as of to-day.
On motion by Mr McCLURE the bill [H. R. 231] to fix Court Terms in the Fourth Judicial Circuit-the Counties of Floyd and Clark-was read twice, a Committee amendment concurred in, under A suspension of the Constitutional rule, read the third time by sections and passed by yeas, 34; nays, 0.
Mr. CAMPBELL offered a concurrent resolution authorizing toe State Librarian to distribute the Adjutant General's report now in the Library, among the Colleges and Public Libraries of the State as they may be called for, not more than one set to each; provided at least ten sets shall be retained in the Library.
On motion by Mr. SMITH, of Jay, the bill [H. R. 170] for the sale of escheated estates, was read twice by title only, the third time by sections and passed by yeas, 34; nays. 0, under a dispensation of the Constitutional restriction.
On motion by Mr. HILLIGA88 the bill [H. R. 313] to amend Section 4 of an act providing a treasury system for the State, under a suspension of the rules by a two-thirds vote, was read twice by title, third time by sections and passed by yeas 3; nays, 1.
[It requires the Treasurer of State to give bond for $100,000 with twelve good freehold sureties.]
A message from the Governor announced his appointment of John W. Compton, of Vanderburgh County; W. W. Vinnedge, of Tippecanoe County; Joel M. Partridge, of St Joseph County, and Wm. Lomax, of Grant County, members of the State Board of Health subject to the consent of the Senate-the first two to serve till the last day of February, 1885, and the last two till the last day of February, 1887.
On motion by Mr. BUNDY these nominations were confirmed.
On motion by Mr. BELL the bill [H. R. 332] to amend Sections 1,622 and 1 623 of the Revised Statutes of 188 was parsed to the final reading, and passed by yeas, 35; nays, 0.
And then at 12:07 the Senate adjourned.
The session was opened with prayer by Representative Smith, of Tippecanoe County.
Mr. HEFFREN called up the special order, being the bill [H. R. 466] supplemental to an act to authorize and provide for the erection of a new State House.
Mr HAM moved that the bill and amendments be indefinitely postponed.
Mr. SMITH, of Tippecanoe, was of the opinion that this is an effort to hand over unfinished to dilapidation and decay the new State House. This means to add not less than $200,000 and probably $1,000,000 extra expense to the State House before it is completed. It means a delay in the completion of the building of from two to five years. It means to take from the State of Indiana at least $1,000,000. It means to leave idle $1,000,000 in the State Treasury. It means legislation to the damage of the people, and not in the interest of the people or the State He desired to eater a protest, not on the Journal, but a protest in debate against this action, and he would leave it for the future to determine whether or not he had protested wisely as to the consequence of this legislation should it be passed. He had not been asleep, he was not blind, he was not deaf, and he would give this a the sequence of what will follow.
Mr GIBSON would not grant that the gentleman from Tippecanoe [Mr. Smith] was not asleep on this question. He desired to say to him that just such speeches were made in the House two years ago. The gentleman from Knox (Mr. Williams] championed these men two years ago when they said they would throw up this contract if the Legislature did not grant them an additional appropriation of $500,000, and the foundation would be left open to the ravages of the weather for the next two years When the members of the Investigating Committee asked Mr. Howard if he would put any more money in the building he avoided the question, and would not answer until chased in to a corner, and then he said he would not. These contractors do not need any more money, for under the present law they can draw 90 per cent. of the price of their work as soon as the estimate is made.
Mr. GIBSON moved the previous question, which was seconded by the House, and under its operations-
The motion to postpone indefinitely was agreed to by the House-yeas, 49; nays, 45-as follows:
Yeas-Messrs Bowers, Bowles, Bryant, Cabbage, Carr, Chandler, Davis, Deem, Eley, Ferriter, Fisher, Fleece, Gants, Gerber, Gibson, Gordon, Graham, Greene, Ham, Kennedy, Kester, McCormick, McMullen, Marsh, Mauck of Harrison, Miller, Mock of Wells, Montgomery, Mutz, Peters, Pruitt, Pulse, Robertson, Robinson, Schloss, Shaffter, Shaw, Smith of Blackford, Smith of Perry, Spain, Stevenson, Stucker, Tuley, Weaver, Whitsit, Williams of Knox, Williams of Posey, Woodling and the Speaker-49.
Nays-Messrs. Adams, Akin, Antrim, Barr,
So the bill was indefinitely postponed.
Mr. GORDON moved to reconsider the vote just taken and to lay that motion on the table.
The latter motion was agreed to.
The bill [S. 236] to fix commutations of terms of sentences on account of good behavior of persons confided in the State's Prisons, was read the third time.
Mr. SMITH, of Tippecanoe, considered this one of the most humane bills that has been before the Legislature, and was heartily in favor of its passage.
Mr. WILSON, of Marion, agreed with the gentleman from Tippecanoe [Mr. Smith], but he questioned the legality of such a measure.
Mr. BOSTON stated that the bill was prepared by the explain of the Northern Prison, together with the Warden. He talked with quite a number of the convicts, and there was not one of them who did not desire the passage of the bill. The officers of the Prison believe that the bill will do snore to further good discipline than anything else that could be done.
Mr. GILMAN believed that the provisions of the bill are good-that it is in the interest of reformation. The discipline of Prisons as now as administered has a tendency to degrade the inmates instead of making them better. He thought the men who drafted the bill entitled to honor.
Mr. GIBSON thought if there is any one thing to be regretted in regard to our Prisons it is the severe discipline that is sometimes necessary to administer. He had converged with the Wardens of both Prisons on this subject, and they desire the passage of the bill.
The bill passed the House by yeas, 93; nays, 0.
The bill [S. 278] supplemental to an act concerning drainage-see page 187-approved March 9, 1875, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 68; nays, 11.
The bill [S. 293] to authorize the payment of the claim of J. F. and H. S. Talbott, for paving done on North Meridian street fronting the Blind Asylum, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 80; nays, 2.
The bill [S. 98] to provide for the appraisement, purchase and conversion of toll roads into free gravel roads and their maintenance as free roads, was read the third time.
Mr. ANTRIM: This if called an act for the establishment of free gravel reads, but it strikes me that it if- establishing them at a great cost to a portion of the people living along the road. This propose-; that the Gravel Road Companies, when the holders of the stock find that it is not a paying investment, may unload that stock upon the people who live on that road. These people have helped to build the road; they have paid to keep up the road, and it is not fair to force this road upon them after it fails to pay expenses While the road does pay the majority of the stockholders will not agree to give up the road. This bill requires the citizens living within one mile of the road to buy the road for he benefit of the whole County. It is easily seen that poisons living two or more miles from this road will be benefited just as much by making this a free road as person living one-fourth of a mile from this road. There is usually a large number of small property owners living along these roads where tax is merely nominal, and such persons would willingly petition the stockholders to sell the road. Another thing, while this road is in the hands of the stockholders they are compelled to keep it in repair, but when it goes into the hands of the County it becomes everybody's business to keep it in repair and what is everybody's business is nobody's business.
Mr. WILSON, of Marion, declared this a fair bill. There is no compulsion about the matter. If a majority of persons living along the road desire it, it simply gives the right for such persons to purchase this road provided that the majority of the stockholders desire to sell. This is good Democratic doctrine. It gives these people the right to go into Court and have the Court decide whether the estimate placed upon the road is a fair estimate of the real value. Every free gravel road is built upon the principle that, the gentleman from Miami [Mr. Antrim] attacks, and is the principle on which all free gravel roads are built. The law is as fair and reasonable as can be devised for the transferring of gravel toll roads into free gravel roads.
Mr. KESTER could see no danger in buying roads as directed in this bill if the majority of the people living along the road desired to do so, and the majority of the stockholders desire to sell. This bill ought to pass.
Mr STRAUGHAN believed it was almost a demand that same law should be passed allowing these toll roads to be converted into free gravel roads. In his County they had some ninety miles of toll road. The business is being driven from the County seat, because it is completely hedged in by these toll roads, the business going to other points. He was in favor of the passage of the bill.
Mr. MELLETT stated that if he understood the bill right it requires persons living along and, within one mile of the road to pay a Tax in order to buy this road. Now suppose this is a good law will it be appropriated? Will these men who have paid a tax to build the road-will these men buy this road and turn in over to the County as a free gift? It occurred to him that these men would petition these stock holders to sell the road. In the first place these men are taxed to build this road, and no man will say that it is just to tax them again to buy the road.
Mr. THOMAS moved the previous question, which was seconded, by the House and under its operations.
The bill passed the House by yeas, 69; nays, 19
The bill [S. 107] to define the power of attorney and concerning the recording of the game was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 68; nays, 8.
The bill [S. 145] to amend Section 4,425 of the Revised Statutes of 1881 concerning the granting of licenses to teachers-see pages 72,184 and 199 of the Brevier Reports-was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 51; nays, 30.
The bill [S. 120] to amend the charter of Clarksville, in Clarke County, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 73; nays, 0.
The bill [S. 149] to authorize the sale and conveyance of certain lands in the State of Indiana, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 58; nays 8.
Mr. HUSTON called up the joint resolution [S. 2] to pay Mrs. Sarah May $10,000 for services rendered by the State architect of the new State House, and which failed to pass March 2 for want of the Constitutional majority, and another vote resulted in the passage of the resolution by yeas, 52; nays, 41.
The bill [S. 200] to revive an act approved May 14, 1860, for assessments of lands
for benefits of
The bill [S. 43] to increase Coroner's fees in Indianapolis, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 73; nays, 13.
The bill [S. 250] to establish provisions respecting private corporations existing under corporate laws prior to 1852, was read the third time and passed by the House by yeas, 73; nays, 1.
The bill [S. 174] concerning the Supreme Court Commission for two years was read the third time.
Mr. McMULLEN thought that this bill ought not to pass. Since the bill was up the other day he had taken the time to examine the facts concerning this Supreme Court Commission and its work for the past two years. He found that the Supreme Court decided during the two years beginning January 1, 1879, and ending January 1, 1881, 1,251 cases, and that during the two years beginning January 1, 1881, and ending January 1. 1883, it has disposed of only 1,138 cases, or 113 cases less than for the same period of time before the Commission was appointed. The Commission has disposed of only 714 cases since appointed. Take from this the difference between 1,251 cases which the Supreme Court decided in two years before the Commission was appointed, and 1,138 cases which the Supreme Court has disposed of in two years since the Commission was appointed, and we find that th Supreme Court Commission has only disposed of 601 cases more than were disposed of by the Supreme Court. This Commission has proved rather an expensive luxury. He thought it should not be continued any longer; he was opposed to it.
Mr. TULEY believed it was admitted on all hands that something ought to be done to relieve the Supreme Court. According to the admission of the gentleman from Dearborn [Mr. McMullen] the number of cases has been greatly reduced. He thought the Commission had done well to dispose of 714 cases. A few years ago if you sent a case to the Supreme Court you knew it would keep it for three or four years since the Commission was appointed, he had known cases to be decided in three mouths The House had already decided upon the Court of Appeals. It has spoken in unmistakable terms that we do not want that Court. It is just this: we must have that Commission or nothing. He believed the people demand it, and that the Supreme Court demands; it under all circumstances he believed the bill should pass and continue this Commission for two years more
Mr. MOCK did not think we should determine the amount of work the Commission had done by the number of cases it had disposed of. The test he applied, and which he considered a fair one, is this: He was creditably informed that the number of volumes of Supreme Court Reports would greatly exceed the number issued during the year previous to the creation of this Commission. He considered this a just and fair test of the amount of work accomplished by this Commission. The difference between twenty-five volumes of the same size and number of pages and seventeen volumes, show the amount of work accomplished by this Commission. He believed that the Commission should be continued for two years, and trusted that the members would vote for this bill.
Mr. SHIVELY said: It seems to me that we should sometime awaken to the fact that Indiana has become a great State. It ought to occur to any man that the Supreme Court can not discharge this business without some assistance. It is burdened, and has been for a number of years. It is said this Commission has not done satisfactory work, but, notwithstanding this assertion, they have done good work. Now, will we so to work and defeat the bill for the establishment of a Court of Appeals and also refuse to continue this Commission. It seems to me that it ought not to be done. It has been stated that they bay only disposed of 714 cases. This is no test. They can and will work better in the next two year than in the past. Then, you can not determine the efficiency of the work by the number of cases. We should not refuse to continue this for the next two years.
Mr. MONTGOMERY thought it was a fact recognized by all members on the floor, he presumed, that the Supreme Court can not keep up with the business While this Commission may not have accomplished as much as was expected of it, yet something must be done for the relief of the Supreme Court, in order that it may catch up with its business, Ha thought this Commission should be continued two years longer.
Mr WILSON, of Marion, was in real earnestness in his opposition to this Supreme Court Commission. It might not be good policy on his part, but he was opposed to this bill
Mr. MOODY spoke in favor of the bill. He thought it was a matter of justice to the people that this Commission should be continued for the next two years, and therefore the question of expense raised by the gentleman from Marion [Mr. Wilson] should not be taken into consideration
Mr. JEWETT thought the question has been fully considered, and demanded the previous question, which was seconded by the House, and under the operations thereof-
The bill passed the House by yeas, 57; nays, 35.
The bill [S. 293] to repeal an act concerning legal advertisements approved March 1,1883, was taken up and on motion by Mr. Tuley the Constitutional rules were suspended, the bill was read the first and second time by title, was considered engrossed, read a third time by sections and passed the House by yeas, 87; nays, 0
The bill [S. 229] to regulate the business of Express Companies was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 72; nays, 1.
The bill [S. 289] to amend the drainage law [when petition has been filed any person effected by the proposed ditch may come into Court and object to the petition or demur to it, the same as in ordinary complaint; extends the time of the filing of the exceptions to the assessments from three days to ten days; in the event the County Survey or is not a civil engineer the Court may designate some civil engineer to act in such case] was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 65; nays, 2.
On motion by Mr. JEWETT. Mr. Heffren's bill [H. R. 457] to allow a bounty for planting of yellow willow along the streams of Indiana, as a protection against floods, was taken up. The Constitutional rules were suspended, read the second time by title, considered engrossed, read the third time, and passed the House by yeas, 76; nays. 17.
Mr. MONTGOMERY'S bill [H. R. 415] concerning the distribution of properly, etc., was read the third time, and rejected by yeas, 34; nays, 65.
Mr. HUSTON introduced a resolution to authorize the appointment of a Joint Committee of the two Houses to investigate the matter of the bond of the Auditor of State; setting forth that such bond had not been properly filed with the Secretary of the State, and authorizing the appointment of a successor in case of any irregularity or non compliance with the law.
On motion by Mr. WILTON, of Marion, the resolution was laid on the table by yeas, 62; nays, 1.
The bill [S. 206] requiring County Auditors to advertise the amount of school funds loaned out quarterly, was read the third time and passed th House by yeas, 73; nays, 4.
The bill [S. 187] to amend Sections 5,104 and 5,106 of the Revised Statutes of
1881, to provide levy for the repair of turnpike roads, was read
The House took a recess until 7:30 p.m.
Mr. SCHLOSS introduced a concurrent resolution, which was adopted, authorizing the Secretary of State to print 10,000 copies of the road, doe law, drainage and decedents' estates acts, to be distributed to the several Counties of the State.
The bill [S. 85] to amend Section 2,
Senators WILLARD and BUNDY, as a Committee from the Senate, notified the House that the Senate would meet the House in Joint Convention at 8 o'clock p. m., for the purpose of electing a Chief of the Bureau of Statistics.
The bill [S. 139] to protect gravel macadamized and paved roads from heavy burdens, was read the third time and, on motion by Mr. SHIVELY, indefinitely postponed.
On motion by Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, a Committee of two was appointed to inform the Senate that the House is now ready to go into Joint Convention for the purpose of electing a Chief of the Bureau of Statistics.
The SPEAKER appointed Messrs. Williams and Beeson said Committee. The House took a recess to prepare seats for Senators, who immediately appeared on the floor of the House, and the Joint Convention was called to order by Lieutenant Governor Hanna, who announced the purpose of the Convention, and stated nominations to be in order.
Representative JEWETT placed in nomination for Chief of the Bureau of Statistics William A Peelle, Jr., of Johnson County.
Representative FRAZER placed in nominations John B. Conner, of Marion County.
There being no other nominations, the ballot resulted as follows:
For Mr. Peelie-Senators, 26; Representatives, 54-total 80.
For Mr. Conner-Senators, 13; Representatives, 35-total, 48.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR declared Mr. Peelle duly elected.
The purpose of the Convention being accomplished, it adjourned sine die.
The bill [S. 178] supplemental to an act to establish public libraries-see page 121-was read the third time, and passed the House by yeas, 64; nays, 21.
The bill [S. 179] to amend Section 8 of an act providing for the election of County Clerks, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 73; nays, 3.
The bill [S. 273] concerning foreign insurance Companies, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 69; nays, 10.
Mr. Tuley's bill [H. R. 160] to prohibit the selling, bartering or giving away of the questions provided by the State Board of Education, was read the third time and parsed by the House by yeas, 79; nays, 0.
The bill [S. 193] to provide for the election and Qualification cf Justices of the Peace-see page 147 of the Brevier Reports-was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 59; nays, 19.
Mr. Smith's, of Perry's, bill [H. R. 280] touching the duties of Township Trustees was read the third time and passed the House by yeas 64; nays, 22.
Mr. Gilman's bill [H. R. 150] providing for the sale of escheated estates was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 80; nays. 3.
Mr. Shively's bill [H. R. 149] to amend Section 516 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, concerning proceeding in civil cases, was read the third time, and passed the House by yeas 61; nays, 19.
The bill [S. 244] to legalize certain records in the Recorders' Offices in all towns of 50,000 inhabitants and over was read, the third time and passed the House by yeas, 60; nays, 21.
The bill [S.
The bill [S. 34] to legalize the incorporation of Angola was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 60; nays, 9.
The bill [S. 260] to legalize the town of Darlington, Montgomery County, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 19; nays, 9.
On motion by Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, the following Senate bills were read the first, second and third time under a suspension of the rules and put upon their passage:
The bill [S. 294] to make general index of deeds and mortgages evidence, was passed by yeas, 68; nays,21.
The bill [S. 295] to repeal the act approved day before yesterday concerning legal advertisements, was passed by yeas, 75; nays, 3.
The bill [S. 247] to provide for the more profitable hiring of the convicts in the States' Prisons-see page 167, being read-
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox made an ineffectual motion-yeas, 24; nays, 33-to postpone
the bill
Mr. JEWETT demanded the previous question on the passage of the bill, which was seconded by the House.
Mr. KESTER moved to take up bill [H. R. 302] to make appropriations for the State
Government and its Institutions, and to concur in the report of the
The SPEAKER ruled the motion out of order.
Messrs. JEWETT and GORDON appealed from the decision of the Chair.
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, moved that the House adjourn.
The motion was agreed to by yeas, 47; nays, 37.
So the House adjourned at 12:10 o'clock. Sunday, March 4.
The Senate met at 9 a. m. under the
Mr. HENRY offered a resolution,
Mr. SPANN offered a resolution allowing
Mr. RISTINE offered a resolution that
Mr. WILLARD offered a resolution
Mr. SPANN submitted a protest, notice of which he gave on Saturday, to go into the journal of that day it is signed by seventeen Republican Senators, against the Voyles resolution adopted on Saturday night, which makes the veto take precedence of all other business. The resolution was protested against for the following reasons:
The protest was entered upon the journal.
Mr. MARVIN offered a resolution declaring Rufus Magee, the Senator from Cass County, President pro tem. of the Senate.
Mr. BENZ moved to substitute the name of James H. Willard, Senator from Lawrence.
Mr. MAGEE said this resolution was offered over his protest. Although sensible of the honor, he would not for a single moment allow his name to come in conflict with that of any other Democratic Senator for the honarable place, and therefore declined to accept.
The amendment [Mr. Benz's] was rejected by
The resolution was adopted and the Lieutenant Governor appointed Messrs. Marvin and Henry a Committee to conduct the President pro tem. to the Chair.
The Committee having performed that service-
Mr. MAGEE reiterated what he said a moment ago when his name was first mentioned for this honorable position: Though sensible of the honor he did not desire it because of the peculiar position he had occupied during the session. He did not care to have this prominence. He would only say that he was deeply grateful for this kind assurance of good opinion.
Mr. BUNDY moved to allow $1 per day extra pay to E. H. Wells, of the cloak room.
It was adopted.
Mr. SPANN offered the following:
Resolved, That the Auditor of State be and is hereby directed to issue his warrants on the State Treasury at the end of the present session in favor of W. H. Drapier, Stenographic Assembly Reporter, for what may be due him for Brevier Legislative Reports, at the same price paid per page per copy as uniformly paid since 1857, to be pad out of funds appropriated for Legislative expenses; the number of copies for the current session to be the same as heretofore published-ten copies of each to be forwarded, as soon as published, to each member of the General Assembly.
It was adopted by yeas, 25; nays, 15.
Mr. BELL offered a resolution for allowance of expenses in the Overstreet versus Johnson contested election case, being a total to Reuben M. Johnson of $1,310.
Mr. MAGEE moved to amend by reducing the amount to $500.
Mr BROWN entered a substitute for the amendment and resolution allowing $500 in addition to mileage and per diem.
It was rejected.
Mr. VOYLES said the Senate would not be justified in allowing as much as is proposed by the Committee resolution. It is true the center tor prosecuted the suit in good faith, but the items as set forth in the Committee report are too extensive.
Mr. MAGEE also thought the charges are outrageous and unjustifiable, and for one should vote against the resolution, and entered a protest against appropriating any such sum of money. When a man runs for office he takes his chances of being elected, and ought not to ask the State to pay the expenses of a contest, especially when the majority report says there was no good ground for a contest.
Mr. YOUCHE opposed the resolution, not believing it right to allow these expenses. If it was for the purpose of paying the expenses of one who had the right in the contest, it might be proper to pay the expenses, because under the rules that obtain in a Court of Justice the party gaining the case recovers from the other party. Yet this resolution asks that the State shall come in and for the purpose of encouraging the contest should put her hand in the pocket and pay the cost of the unsuccessful candidate. If this thing is to be encouraged the same rule ought to apply to every man who holds an elective office. The law expressly provides in case of County officers, where a man makes a contest and is unsuccessful is obligated not only to pay his own case, but also the man against whom the contest is made.
Mr. BROWN never was and never would be in favor of paying two persons for occupying one seat in a legislative body. The report of the Committee adopted the other day provides that this contestor shall be paid mileage and per diem, and he moved to amend the amendment by allowing him the sum of $500, and no more.
Mr. FOULKE favored this amendment. He protested against awarding compensation for three attorneys when one is ample for the purpose, and one should have attended to this case from the beginning to the end for the sum of $500.
Mr. ADKISON suggested $200 would be enough.
Mr. HENRY was willing to vote for that much, though the proposition of the Senator from Cass is nearer than any of them.
Mr. BUNDY also thought that the fairest amendment offered. He opposed allowing anything beyond mileage and per diem.
Mr. ADKISON moved to make the allowance $200.
Mr. Henry moved, as a substitute for the amendment and the resolution, $500 in full for per diem and expenses.
Mr. BELL thought it not right to talk about paying the reasonable expenses of this contest with the insignificant sum of $140. There is a principle upon which such action as is proposed is based; and that is to allow the expenses of a contest. It has been acted upon in Congress from time immemorial. Men ought to be encouraged to make a good contest. A contest for a County office holds out a much greater prize. Men run for that office for the money that is in it. Such circumstances don't attend this office. We are all interested in seeing any contest that seems to be fair carried.
Mr. JOHNSON considered this mileage and per diem is allowed for the very purpose of reimbursing the contestant for expenses incurred n the contest. Certainly the contestant has not rendered any service. If the sum is made $500, this Senate has done ample justice to the contestant.
Mr. BROWN considered $140 as nothing like a fair compensation for counsel fees in this case. The depositions were volumulens-about 2,300 pages. Before he would vote the poor, miserable, cringing sum of $140 to pay counsel fees, he would not vote a farthing.
Mr. BENZ didn't know anything about fixing the price of lawyer fees; only we oughtn't to pay Cropsey for loafing around here this winter, and that is what he wants to get pay for, not for contesting this case.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: Then you don't want to pay him very bad.
Mr. BENZ: No I don't.
Mr. BROWN'S heart was made sick when he moved to amend so that the compensation for legal service shall be $250.
Mr. SAYRE hoped the Senate would stand by the report of the Committee adopted the other day. The Committee find that the services are richly worth the prices charged. The report of the Committee as made to the Senate should be adopted without amendment.
Mr. FOULKE thought he would favor the $500, but failing in that, thought $250 should be allowed.
Mr. MAGEE withdrew his amendment.
On motion by Mr. BROWN the substitute resolution was amended by increasing the amount to $610.
The substitute resolution, as amended by Mr. Brown's motion, so as as to make the total sum $610, was adopted by yeas, 80; nays, 11.
Pending the roll-call, in explanation of votes-
Mr. BELL voted for it because it increases the sum slightly; it is wholly inadequate and unfair nevertheless.
Mr. BENZ remembered a contest six years ago that cost only $79. I can't see why in the dickens we are to pay lawyers for loafing around here abusing people. I vote "aye" all the time. [Laughter.]
Mr. BUNDY didn't think the contestant entitled to mileage and per diem. He voted "aye."
Mr. FAULKNER knew nothing about the fees charged-whether they were high or low-but he did know he would never vote to pay them one cent. He vote "no."
Mr. HENRY voted for the amendment in preference to the original resolution, reserving the right to vote against it as amended.
Mr. LOCKRIDGE stood by the majority report adopted by the Senate which allows the contestor mileage and reasonable expenses. The per diem is $369. This amendment leaves for expenses and attorneaeys' fees $250, which is a very reasonable fee. Therefore, he voted, "aye."
Mr. OVERSTREET asked to be excused from voting, but Mr. Bell objecting, he voted "aye," regarding $500 as reasonable.
Mr. SAYRE believing this sum not enough for reasonable expenses and attorneys' fees, voted "no."
Mr. VAN VORHIS voted for the amendment, reserving the right to vote afterward as he pleased.
Mr. VOYLES, believing this to be about as near as could be arrived at by mutual agreement, voted "aye."
Mr. YOUCHE thought nothing should be allowed the contestant, because he did not make the contest good.
The vote was then announced as above.
So the resolution, as amended, was adopted.
The resolution reported by the Committee as amended was concurred in by yeas, 28; nays, 14.
Pending the roll-call-in explanation,
Mr. ADKISON: Inasmuch as the Senator from Allen and Whitley [Mr. Bell] and the Senator from Marion [Mr. Van Vorhis] failed to stand up to the first proposition in the Committee report, he would not stand up to the second. Therefore he voted "no."
Mr. KEISER voted for the resolution on the ground that the Senate has heretofore decided that Mr. Johnson, the contestant, should have per diem and reasonable expenses. The expenses, as fixed in this resolution, are reasonable; therefore he voted "aye."
Mr. McCULLOUGH ordinarily could not under
The vote was announced as above.
So the resolution reported by the Committee, as amended by the substitute resolution, was adopted.
Mr BUNDY moved that J. A. West. C. A. Gal- breath, Joseph Friedman and Robert Newland be allowed twenty dollars each f^r finishing the (Copying of the journal this week.
Pending a vote on which-
The Senate took a recess till 2 o'clock p. m
The resolution pending at the noon recess was adopted.
Mr. VOYLES offered a resolution, which was adopted, allowing the Reading Clerk, Frank A. Smith, $80 extra.
Mr. DAVIDSON offered a resolution allowing Vincent P. Kirk, for the time he was suspended from the office of Doorkeeper.
On motion by Mr. RAHM it was laid on the table.
Mr. RICHARDSON offered a resolution, which was adopted, allowing a number of claims for labor and supplies, amounting to $36.
Mr. SPANN offered a concurrent resolution Authorizing the printing and distributing of all laws passed with an emergency clause.
Mr BELL from the
at 3:15 o'clock announced the passage of the metropolitan police bill by the House of Representatives, the Governor's veto to the contrary notwithstanding. The message also included the Governor's veto
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR directed the message and the veto to be read at once, which was done by the Principal Secretary.
The bill was then passed, the objections of the 'Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, by yeas, 26; nays, 21-as follows:
Yeas-Messrs. Bell, Brown, Compton, Davidson, Duncan, Ernest, Faulkner, Fletcher, Hill, Hilligass, Hoover, Howard, Hutchinson, Johnston of Dearborn, Johnson of Tippecanoe, Magee, Marvin, May, McClure, McCullough, McIntosh, Rahm, Richardson, Smith of Jay, Voyles, Wiliard-26.
Nays-Messrs. Adkinson, Benz, Bichowski, Bundy, Campbell, Fleming, Foulke, Graham, Henry, Keiser, Lockridge, Lindley, Macartney, Overstreet, Ristine, Sayre, Spann, Van Vorhis, White, Yancy, Youche-21.
So the metropolitan police bill was finally passed.
The reading of the resolution paying expenses In in the contested election case was finished.
It was adopted.
Mr. BUNDY offered a concurrent resolution to accept copyright of the Code Commissioners secured on the Revised Statute of 1881, and authorizing the Secretary of State to sell to any person for $2 per volume, for which the Secretary shall be entitled to fifteen cents. It was adopted.
Mr. JOHNSON offered the following:
Whereas, From all sections and from nearly every County, the State petitions have come to this General Assembly praying for the abolition of the present system of hiring out the labor of convicts of our Penitentiaries and the inmates of our Reform Schools and Benevolent Institutions, under contract to the highest bidder.
Whereas, A bill passed by the Senate for the regulation of said convict labor aims only at modifying the present system, but falls short of abolishing it and applying the proper remedy for its evil and abuses; and,
Whereas, The short time of the legislative section prevented this General Assembly from finding the proper remedy for this system, which is admitted to be pernicious to the interests of Indiana manufacturers and Indiana mechanics and workingmen,
Resolved, That Committee of three Senators holding over for the General Assembly of 1885 be appointed by the President of the Senate to prepare a bill abolishing the present system of convict labor and substitute a system of employment for the convicts of our Penitentiaries, and the Inmates of our Reformatory School and Benevolent Institutions which will not come in competition with Indiana manufacturers.
Resolved, That the members of said Committee of three Senators shall not be entitled to any compensation for services on the Committee.
The resolution was adopted and the Lieutenant Governor makes the Committee to consist of Messrs. Johnson, Foulke and Campbell.
On motion by Mr. SPANN a Committee of Two-Messrs. Spann and Magee-were appointed to wait on the Governor and ascertain whether Hit Excellency has any further communication to make to the Senate.
The Committee soon returned and reported the Governor has no further communication to make to either Branch of the General Assembly.
On motion by Mr. YANCEY the concurrent resolution of the House authorizing a highway opened across the north end of the grounds of the Asylum for the Deaf and Dumb, was concurred in by the Senate.
Mr. FOULKE offered a resolution declaring it the opinion of the Senate that the action of the House of Representatives, in failing, without sufficient reason, to pass the general appropriation bill during the time allotted for the present regular session, is injurious to the best interests of the people.
Mr. VOYLES raised the point of order that this resolution is out of order, because it attempts to criticise a co-ordinate branch of the General Assembly.
The PRESIDENT pro tem. [Mr. Bundy in the Chair] overruled the point of order.
Messrs Bell and Voyles appealed from the decision of the Chair.
announced that the House of Representatives has concurred in the report of the Senate Conference Committee on the general appropriation bill [H. R 302] and a few minutes after another message announced that the Speaker had signed said bill.
Mr. SPANN-made an ineffectual motion-yeas, 18; nays, 26-that the Senate adjourn sine die.
Mr. FOULKE claiming the floor-
Mr. YANCEY offered a resolution, which was rejected-yeas, 18; nays, 26-that John L. Patterson, Deputy Clerk, be allowed $1 per day extra.
Mr CAMPBELL, explaining his negative vote, said: Upon every proposition which has
been made to-day for the payment of additional wages to the employes of this Senate
I have voted "no." and shall continue to vote "no." I grant that so far as I know
the officers of this Senate may have done their work well; certainly they have been
courteous and attentive, but in voting money as a public officer I know of no
principle by which to be governed except by the same equity and integrity A I would
be in my private business. These employes have sought these positions with the
knowledge of the wages paid, which I may add is in all cases nearly if not quite
double what they would get in other positions.
Mr. MAGEE offered a resolution that the thanks of this Senate are hereby tendered James Gordon Bennett for his magnificent contribution to the fund for the relief of the sufferers occasioned by the recent floods of the Ohio and Wabash Rivers, and that the secretary of this Senate be authorized to transmit to Mr. Bennett a copy of this resolution.
The resolution was adopted.
Mr. HENRY offered a resolution to pay $5 to a witness before the
On motion by Mr. VOYLES it was laid on the table.
Mr. FOULKE still claiming the floor
Mr. VOYLES offered a resolution allowing $45 extra pay to Frederick W, Daniels, Senate Postmaster.
On motion by Mr. HENRY it was laid on the table.
Mr. GRAHAM offered a resolution, which was adopted, allowing $1 a day extra pay to
Mrs. L E. Bundy, pa
Mr. McINTOSH making an ineffectual motion to lay it on the table
Mr. FOULKE still claiming the floor-
Mr. BROWN insisted that the Democratic party on the floor of the Senate should keep still and allow the Senator from Wayne [Mr. Foulke], who seems to be trying to out Herod the Senator from Rush, to crack his whip and lash it over our backs just as much as he pleases, because if there ever was a set of folks in the Senate lathed, in weapon and out of season, it has been the Republican members of this Senate.
Mr. FOULKE, still claiming the floor, gave way for-
Mr. SPANN, who moved that the Senate adjourn sine die.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR put the motion and declared it, carried and calls for the yeas and nays and boisterous applause.
So at 3:15 o'clock p.m., the Senate adjourned sine die.
The House was called to order by Mr. Speaker Bynum, who announced prayer by Representative Frazee, of Rush County.
A call of the House, which was ordered and taken, discovered ninety-two members present and answering to their names.
The SPEAKER stated the question before the House was the appeal taken from the decision
of the Chair, on Saturday, March 3, when he ruled out of order Mr. Kester's motion to
take up the general appropriation bill [H. R. 302], and concur in the report of the
Mr. JEWETT: He had examined the question since that time and did not desire to press the question, and with the consent of the gentleman from Putnam [Mr. Gordon], who joined in the appeal, be would withdraw it.
Mr. GORDON stated that a the opportunity had passed for accomplishing the object aimed at, he was also desirous to withdraw the appeal.
The SPEAKER stated that the appeal being withdrawn the question recurred on the passage of the bill [S. 247] to provide for the the profitable hiring of the convict in the State's Prisons.
Mr. SMITH, of Tippecanoe, raised the point of order that Senate bill 217 can not now be put upon its passage for the reason that Section 14, Article 5, of the Constitution provides that no bill "hall be presented to the Governor within two days next preceding the final adjournment of the General Assembly.
The SPEAKER ruled the point of order not well taken and that the House could pass the bill at the present time, but could not under the Constitution present it to the Governor.
Mr. McMULLEN thought the point of order made by the gentleman fr* m Tippecanoe [Mr. Smith] WAS not well taken. He took the position that the House could pass the till, and in case of an extra session, arguing from the standpoint that we do not know that there will not be a session to-morrow, the bill could then be presented for his signature or veto. He took the ground that under the Constitution no bill could be presented to the Governor for two days next preceding the final adjournment, but that bills could be passed up to the final adjournment.
Mr. JEWETT thought in the consideration of his question the House should proceed with great deliberation. The Constitution provides that no bill shall be presented to the Governor for two days next preceding the final adjournment of the General Assembly. He did not like to see a plain provision of the Constitution overridden in this way. He did not desire to put the Governor in this dilemma of having a bill presented to him at this late day-he would take that back, he would wish to put him in any dilemma, seeing the dilemma in which he had placed the other House of this General Assembly. It would be establishing a most dangerous precedent, as if the Governor should accept the bill, it would establish the rule that the Governor and a majority of the Legislature when they agreed might substantially decide what bills should or should not become law. He objected to asking the Governor to establish any such precedent
Mr. SHIVELY desired to inquire into the statue of this bill. It occurred to him that any action now would be totally at fault. He thought it had been regarded by all Central Assemblies since the Constitution was adopted that the legislative day expired on Saturday night at 12 o'clock. He believed it was the first time In the history of the State since the Constitution was adopted that any attempt has been made to pass bi'ls and do legislation on the last day of the session. The Constitution says that no bill shall be presented to the Governor within two days of the final adjournment, and when we send a bill there we would be trampling upon the Constitution and be in contempt of our oaths.
Mr. SMITH, of Tippecanoe, desired to say that the Constitution is above all other authority-that any provision of the statutes concerning the business of the General Assembly could not take precedent of the Constitution. He agreed with the remark made by the gentleman from Washington [Mr. Heffren] when he said last Saturday that it was the last day in which bills could be presented to the Governor.
Mr. Speaker BYNUM [Mr. McMullen in the Chair] thought the provisions of the Constitution harmonize in all particulars. The question of passing a bill and the question of presenting a bill to the Governor are two different matters entirely. He thought it would be wrong to present a bill at this time, still he did not think that the legislative power of this body ceased Saturday night at 12 o'clock. The only question now is whether or not we have power to pass this bill.
Mr. GORDON was a member of the
Messrs. FRAZER and ADAMS now sent up an appeal from the decision of the Chair, in which they set forth the point of order made by Mr. Smith, of Tippecanoe, and made the rule of the Chair on that point.
Mr. SPEAKER BYNUM [Mr. Gordon in the Chair] did not desire to be misunderstood. His opposition was simply this: He did not see anything in the Constitution limiting the power of this Legislature in the passage of bills up to the last hour. He did not know whether or not there was any precedent upon this question. The provision of the Constitution which says that no bill shall be presented to the Governor within two days next preceding the final adjournment does not prevent this House from passing bills during that time.
Mr. ADAMS (interrupting) asked the question does a certain section of the Constitution provide that no bill shall be presented to the Governor within two days of the final adjournment; and does it not further provide that all bills passed shall be presented to the Governor?
Mr. BYNUM (resuming): Certainly; all bills passed up to the time of limitation must be presented. He argued that the bill might be passed, and could be presented to the Governor, in the event of his calling a special session.
Mr. FRAZER thought this question would be referred to by coming Legislatures as a
precedent. He hoped that the members would turn to the Constitution and examine it that
they might vote knowingly upon this question. The Constitution provides that every bill
passed by the General Assembly shall be presented to the Governor. It further says that
no bill shall be presented to him for the two days next preceding the final adjournment.
The only order given by this House that a bill shall be presented to the Governor is the
passage of that bill. If we pass this bill to-day we thereby give order and power to
this
Mr. WILSON, Kosciusko, argued the question from the same standpoint as the gentleman who had just finished.
Mr. McMULLEN contented that whether this General Assembly met again or not the passage of this bill would be binding, and the next General Assembly might and should present it to the Governor two years from now, if it did not reach him before.
Mr. ADAMS was of the opinion that if we should construe the Constitution as the gentleman from Dearborn [Mr. McMullen] had suggested we would have to admit that the Convention which assembled thirty years ago authorized the General Assembly to do something that could never mature into a law. The Constitution provides that no bill be presented to the Governor for the two days next preceding the final adjournment, and that all bills shall be presented to him. It simply means, if it means anything in the world, that the General Assembly shall not pass bills on the last two days of the session. If it means anything else it would be giving the General Assembly to do something that could never mature into a law. It would be a mere farce. The Constitution was clear that the General Assembly could not pass bills after the time had expired for the bills passed becoming law. He was certain that the next General Assembly would have nothing to do with bills passed by the present General Assembly that had failed to become law.
Mr. HEFFREN thought the question had been fully discussed and demanded the previous question, which he withdrew with the understanding that the vote would be immediately taken upon the appeal from the decision of the Chair.
The question being shall the decision of the Chair stand as the judgment of the House? the vote resulted, yeas, 47; nays, 43 so the decision of the Chair was sustained.
A message was received from the Governor announcing that he had returned the bill [H. R. 133], the metropolitan police bill, with his veto.
The question recurring on the passage of the bill [H. R. 247] the bill was rejected by the House by yeas, 24; nays, 59.
Mr. HEFFREN moved to take up the message from the Governor on the bill [H. R. 133] the metropolitan police bill. The motion was agreed to.
The message was read as follows:
I return to you, with my objections thereto, House bill No. 133, commonly known as the metropolitan police bill.
The bill declares that, in cities of this State containing 29,000 or more inhabitants, according to the United States Census of 1880, there shall be established a Board of Metropolitan Police, to consist of three Commissioners, to be appointed by the Governor, and the Secretary, Auditor and Treasurer of State. One of the Commissioners shall be of "opposite politics" to the other two. It provides that these Commissioners shall have power to appoint a Superintendent of Police, Captains, Sergeants, Detectives and such other officers and patrolmen as they may deem advisable, to be appointed equally between the two political parties. The number of patrolmen is limited to one for each thousand inhabitants. No limit whatever is placed upon the number of Captains, Sergeants and Detectives. Though they might be made so numerous to gratify party or personal favorites, as to impose a most unjust burden upon the City Treasury, the voters of the city can do nothing to regulate this number.
There are but two cities in the State the population of which is shown by the census of 1880 exceeds 29,000 inhabitants. They are Indianapolis and Evansville, the City Governments of which have been, except during great intervals, in the control of officers holding different political opinions from a majority of the members of the General Assembly.
Fort Wayne, by the census of 1880, contained a population of nearly 29,000 inhabitants. The City Government of Fort Wayne is steadily under the control of officers who agree with the majority of the members of the two Houses of the Legislature in political opinions. Fort Wayne is not included within the provisions of the bill. Nor are any of those provisions of the bill which its advocates claim are necessary for good municipal government and fair elections made applicable to that city either by the bill itself or by any other bill which has been before the present Legislature. It is evident, therefore, that the design is for merely party reasons, to deprive the citizens of Indianapolis and of Evansville of the power, through officers chosen by themselves, to appoint their police.
That these are the controlling reasons is placed beyond doubt by the mode provided for selecting the Commissioners of Police. Instead of appointing two or four officers equally divided in political opinion to make the selection, three State officers differing in political opinion from the Governor are appointed along with him to make the choice. These are officers, too who unlike the Governor, are eligible, under the Constitution, to re-election at the end of their present terms and who, naturally desirous of being re-elected, may well be supposed, without meaning to judge them with any disrespect, to be peculiarly susceptible of party bias.
The Commissioners to be selected are not required to be equally divided in
political opinion,
The Commissioners are required, in appointing the officers and men who shall compose the police, to appoint "equally between the political parties."
This fair-sounding phrase will deceive nobody acquainted with the courses of parties. If men are to be chosen as policemen Impartially, the men who choose them must be impartial. When no careful provision is made that it shall not be impartial, it is easy to foresee what will be the real party composition of the police. Those who agree In political opinion with a majority of the Commissioners will be bold, aggressive partisans; those who do not will, for the most part, be likely to be persona of weak political convictions, and will be afraid to utter their sentiments lest by doing so they may lose their places.
The citizens of Evansville and Indianapolis are by this bill to be deprived of the political rights which belong to the citizens of Fort Wayne because a majority of their inhabitants chance to differ in political opinion from a majority of the members of the General Assembly. This majority, claiming to be members of a party favoring popular rights, propose to set the first example in this State of depriving the people of a right to regulate their own law affairs. They have found out, as they suppose, a better way of educating the people for the duty of self-government than by confiding to them the management v of their own local concerns. They are better pleased it would seem, with the aristocratic forms which give to others than the people the right to determine what is best for the people I refuse to subscribe to such views. The best Governments have faults, but the best Government, in the long run, in that which confides to the people the greatest power in regulating their local affairs.
The best way to cure the evils of bad local administration, where such evils exist, is to make the people affected by them fell that they will suffer from them until they exert themselves locally to remedy them. But especially I object to the bill for several reasons. It is the beginning, if it shall pass into a law, of party contests at each recurring Legislature to take cities out of the control of the majority of the inhabitants when a majority in the Legislature differ from them on party questions. Like the scheme to renew the old abuse of giving to the Legislature the appointment of the Trustees of our Benevolent and Reformatory Institutions, its inevitable effect will be to increase party wrangling and frenzy up the two Houses, to make the real interests of the people subordinate to party triumphs, and prolong the sessions of the Legislature beyond the limit prescribed by the Constitution for regular sessions of that body
The present session of the Legislature is an illustration of the effect of this
merely partisan legislation. The Constitution of the State gives to the Governor
three days exclusive of Sunday for the consideration of every bill after the day
it shall have been presented to him. It is a very brief time under ordinary
circumstances, but especially is it so when, as during the present session,
party strife has postponed the passage of nearly all legislation until the
closing hours of session. Bills enough are on my table properly to occupy at
least a fortnight in order to be considered with even reasonable care; yet,
because I have not been willing to waive my Constitutional right to deliver it
for the brief term of
It is believed that, if this bill should become a law, the city of Indianapolis will not be able, under the levy and assessment it is now allowed by law to make, to meet its necessary expenses. The city is now operating under an assessment as high as the law allows. The expense of the present police force is stated to me by the Mayor to be $50,210 a year. The annual expense of the police force provided for by the present bill will be, at a moderate estimate, as I am assured by persons competent to judge, more than $80,000.
The fourteenth section of the bill now returned is in my opinion repugnant to the Constitution. It requires that the fees fixed and allowed to City Marshals "shall be taxed and allowed in all cases where the arrests are made or protests served by any of the police force of said cities in favor of said city, and shall be collected in the same manner as other costs are collected, and shall be paid into the City Treasury of said city by the officer or party or person collecting the same every three months" Section 12 of Article 1 of the Constitution ordains that justice shall be administered "freely and without purchase." In a case which arose under a statute giving a salary to Clerks and Sheriffs and requiring them to pay all their fees and costs into the County Treasury, Judge Worden said that "while it may be that litigants can be required to pay docket fees or otherwise contribute to the support of the Judiciary in such manner as might be provided by law, it is clear to my mind that they can not be required through the medium of Clerks and Sheriffs nominally as for their fees, to put money into the County Treasury which may be used for general purposes, and as the condition upon which justice can be administered to the litigating parties by the Courts of the State." The opinion of Judge Worden was adopted as a true statement of the law in Fulk vs. Board of Commissioners of Monroe County (46 Ind., 150.) Under that decision it appears that the requirement that the fees allowed to Marshals shall be paid into the City Treasury is unconstitutional.
For the several reasons above stated, I am constrained to return this bill without my approval.
The question being on the passage of the bill notwithstanding the Governor's veto, the vote resulted yeas, 54; nays, 42; as follows:
Yeas-Messrs. Akin. Barr, Bowers, Brooks, Bryant, Cabbage, Carr, Chandler, Chittenden, Davis, Elev, Ferriter, Fisher, Gerber, Genung, Ham, Heffren, Howland, Jewett, Kennedy, McHenry, McMullen, Mauck of Harrison, Miller, Mock of Wells, Montgomery, Moody, Nave, Patten, Peters, Price, Pruitt, Pulse, Robertson, Schloss, Shaffer, Shaw, Smith of Blackford, Smith of Perry, Spain, Stevenson, Stucker, Sutton, Thomas, Tuley, Weaver, Whitsit, Williams of Knox, Williams of Posey, Wilson of Marion, Woodling and Mr. Speaker-54.
Nays-Messrs. Adams, Antrim, Beeson, Best Brazelton, Campbell, Copeland, Deem, Fleece, Frazee, Frazer, Furnas, Cants, Gibson, Hanson, Helms, Henderson, Holler, Huston, Kester, Kirkpatrick, Knowles, McClelland of Lawrence, McClelland of Porter, Marsh, Mellett, Mering, Mosier, Pettibone, Robinson, Shively, Shockney Smith of Lagrange, Smith of Tippecanoe, Sterret, Straughan, Thompson, Westfall, Wiley, Wilson of Kosciusko and Wrightr-42.
So the Metropolitan Police bill passed House.
Mr. HOWLAND Introduced a concurrent resolution, which was adopted, authorizing the location and construction of a highway across the grounds of the Asylum for the Deaf and Dumb.
Mr. HELMS offered a concurrent resolution, which was adopted, granting each member of the General Assembly the privilege of keeping file copy of the Revised Statutes furnished him, provided he would pay the Secretary of State $1 for the same.
Mr. MOZIER offered a resolution, which was adopted, authorizing the Secretary of State to send to each member copies of the journals of the two Houses, and copies of the acts of this Genera Assembly, together with five copies of the Brevier Legislative Reports.
Mr. HEFFREN moved to take from the table the report of the
Mr SHOCKNEY offered a protest against the passage of the bill at this time. He did not believe that any action of the General Assembly or the Governor could make it a law. Such an attempt is in direct opposition to the provisions of the Constitution,
The motion to take the report from the table was agreed to by yeas, 42; nays, 31.
Mr. HEFFREN now moved to concurr in the report of the
The motion was agreed to by yeas, 52; nays, 32.
A resolution allowing Mr. Ribold, proprietor of the Bates House, $600 for the use of
Committee Booms was, on motion by Mr. ANTRIM, reduced to
The Senate concurrent resolution to accept the copyright secured by the Revision Commission of the Code of 1881, was adopted.
Mr. Speaker BYNUM delivered the following valedictory:
Gentlemen of the House of Representatives:
Our labors are at an end. The present session has been one of special importance to the people. I congratulate you upon the faithful discharge of your duties. You have labored earnestly and diligently, and, although at times there has been excitement and division in your ranks upon some questions, upon all those which affected the people directly and universally, there has been but one desire and sentiment, and that was to formulate and enact the best laws in the briefest period. No member of this House should feel the slightest hesitation in saying we have assisted to accomplish a good work. We began our labors with many disadvantages. The Constitutional amendments were thrust upon us in the most complicated form. We were confronted with the proposition that unless an in increased price of more than a quarter of a million dollars was given to the State House contractors the building would be abandoned at a great loss to the State. Upon these we had to gather information and make up our minds, whether correctly or not remains a question. Deducting the time required for the consideration of these questions, we have assisted to enact more good and beneficent laws than any preceding House in the same length of time. We have assisted in the enactment of a law in relation to the settlement of decedents' estates which will prevent their being squandered in costs and fees; we have assisted to enact a road law universally demanded by the people in all parts of the State. We have assisted in the enactment of many other laws which are elss in importance only because of their local application. When your labors are laid before your constituents, and fully tested, I have no fears but what your labors will meet with their hearty approbation. As for myself, I can only say I have labored hard to advance your work. No person who has not occupied the position assigned me can realize the cares and labors it imposes. When chosen to preside over your deliberations, I felt that my elevation was to some extent a personal sacrifice. I accepted it with the firm intention of strictly enforcing the rules of the government and pressing legislative business as fast as possible. At times I may have seemed harsh and arbitrary, but nothing was farther from my thought or purpose. If I have done any member a wrong it was unintentional and caused by the excitement incident to legislative work. I have used my utmost endeavors to favor each and every member, and to assist them in securing the passage of laws in which they felt a special interest, and only regret that I have not been able to accomplish more in this particular.
I have nothing but the kindest of feelings for each and every member of this House, and return to you my thanks for assistance you have given me in the discharge of my duties and for the uniform kindness shown me. My relations with the officers of the House and their assistants have been pleasant throughout, and to them I also extend my thanks for the courteous manner in which they have at all times assisted me in my labors.
Mr. JEWETT moved that the House adjourn sine die.
The motion was agreed to and the House of Representatives of the Fifty-third General Assembly stood adjourned at thirty-five minutes after 3 o'clock Monday, March 5, 1883.
No. 25. An act to amend Sections 1 and 2 of an act entitled an act appropriating moneys to pay amounts due members of the Indiana Legion and of Independent Companies of Militia and Minutemen for services rendered under orders of the Governor during the Rebellion.
No. 49, An act to fix the time of holding Courts In the Counties of Posey and Vanderburgh.
No 155. An act authorizing Charitable Associations to change their names.
No. 32. An act to punish persons who disclose the contents of messages or conversations sent over telephone lines.
No 29. An act to legalize the acts and proceedings of the Board of Trustees and other officers of the town of Westfield, Hamilton County, in the State of Indiana, and also the records made by them, mode of their proceedings and acts acts since the incorporation of said town.
No. 219, An act authorizing and empowering Gas-Light and Water Works Companies to extend their pipes and mains beyond the corporate limits of cities and towns.
No. 5 An act supplemental to an act concerning the publication of the Revised Statutes of 1881.
No. 50. An act concerning the official terms of Directors of the Northern State Prison.
No. 207. An act to define the Thirty-first and Forty-fourth Judicial Circuit of the State of Indiana.
No. 102 An act to amend Sections 1 and 4 of an act entitled an act to provide for the organization and support of an Asylum for Feeble-Minded Children; to provide for the appointment by the Governor of a Board of Trustees of the Soldiers' Orphans' Home and for, said Asylum, and to abolish the office of Trustee of the Soldiers', Orphans' Home and to repeal the act on the same subject. This bill became a law without the Governor's signature.
No. 207. An act to define the Thirty-first and forty-forth Judicial Circuits of the State of Indiana.
No. 22. An act to amend Section 1 of an act approved March 3, 1881, the same
being Section 5,897 of the Revised Statues of 1881, entitled "an
No. 287. An act to declare exempt from taxation certain moneys and causes in action held by executors, bequeathed or devised to literary, scientific, benevolent or charitable institutions.
No. 197. An act to amend an act entitled an act to amend an act to divide the State into Circuits for judicial purposes, abolishing the Courts of Common Pleas and transferring the business thereof to the Circuit Court, and creating the Thirty-ninth Judicial Circuit: providing for the Appointment of a Judge, etc.
No. 192. An act to legalize the incorporation of the town of Cadiz, in Henry County, and legalizing the acts of the Board of Trustees, etc,
No. 134. An act authorizing cities in this State to permit municipal taxes when paid in installments.
No. 89. An act to amend Section 28 of an act entitled "an act to provide for a general system of common schools, the officers thereof and their respective powers and duties and duties and matters properly connected therewith, and prescribing the fees for certain officers therein named and tor the establishment and regulation of Township Libraries.
No. 20. An act relating to the qualification of petit Jurors in the several Courts of this State.
No. 2. An act to enable Turnpike Companies in this State to connect the turnpike roads operated by them with turnpike roads in an adjoining State.
No. 17. An act for making a contract with the city of Michigan City for constructing a sewer from the Northern Indiana State Prison and emptying into the harbor on the coast side ot said city.
No 283. An act to abolish the Criminal Court of Allen County and transferring the business thereof to the Circuit Court, and repealing all laws in conflict therewith,
No. 113. An act to amend Section 27 of an act entitled "An act providing for elections of Justices of the Peace and defining their jurisdiction, powers and duties in civil cases," pissed and approved June 9,1852, said Section 1,467 of the Revised Statutes of 1881 which specially applies to change of venue before Justices.
No. 203. An act authorizing the Trustees of the Institution for the Education of the Deaf and Dumb to sell a Strip of land off the premises occupied by paid Institution.
No. 173. An act supplemental to an act"entitled "An act fixing certain fees to be taxed in the officers and the salaries of officers therein named," etc.
No. 6. An act concerning highways and Superintendents thereof.
No. 167. An act defining the Twentieth Judicial Circuit; creating the Forty-fifth Judicial Circuit; fixing the time of holding Courts in aid Circuits, and providing for the appointment of a Judge and Prosecuting Attorney for the Forty-fifth Judicial Circuit.
No. 170. An act fixing the times of holding Circuit Court in the Twenty-second Judicial Circuit.
No. 138. An act on the subject of railroad crossings at grades.
No. 121. An act to legalize the acts of an incorporation of a certain voluntary Association organized In Vanderburg County under an act approved June 17,1852, enabling Trustees to receive lands and donations for the use of schools, Churches and Societies whose articles of incorporation were filed m the office of the Recorder of Vanderburg County on the 21 day of September. 1857.
No. 244. An act to legalize certain records tn the office of County Recorder.
No. 151. An act relating to County, State and other officers and the payment by them to their successors in office of all money in their hands at the expiration of their terms of office, and providing penalties for the failure to do so.
No. 229. An act regulating the transactions of business by Express Companies of this State
No. '293. An act to repeal an act entitled an act concerning legal advertising in certain cases, repealing all laws in conflict therewith.
No. 114. An act to amend Section 189 of an act entitled an act concerning taxation, approved March 29, 1881 being Section 6,458 of the Revised Statues.
No. 57 An act to amend Section 280 of an act entitled an act concerning proceedings in civil cases, approved April 7,1881.
No. 292. An act to pay to J. F. and H. L. Talbott for work done by them for the State of Indiana.
No. 273. An act concerning Foreign Insurance Companies.
No 34. An act to legalize the incorporation of the town of Angola, Steuben County.
No. 47. An act to amend an act to establish public libraries in connection with the common schools in all cities of 10,000 or more inhabitants, and to define the duties and powers of Boards of School Trustees, etc.
No. 67. An act authorizing municipal corporations to invest their sinking funds in Government, State and County bonds, temporarily.
No. 162. An act concerning deed executed by administrators, executors, guardians, sheriffs, and commissioners of Court, and certified transcripts of judgments, of partition, and the number thereof and their use in evidence.
No. 107. An act relating to power of attorney and providing for the recording of the same.
No. 52. An act to amend Sections 218 and 227 and 228 of an act entitled an act concerning taxation. Approved March 29, 1881, This became a law without signature of the Governor.
No. 78. An act to amend Section 2 of an act en' titled an aet providing for the establishment of the State Bureau of Statistics and Geology, defining the Chief's duties, providing for the collection of statistics on agriculture, manufactures, commerce, education, labor, social and sanitary subjects, making said Chief curator of the Geological Cabinet and appropriating money to carry out the provisions of the act. This became a law without Governor's signature.
No. 196. An act to amend Sections 9, 38. 47 and 76 of an act entitled an act to divide the State into circuits for judicial purposes, fixing the time of holding Courts therein, abolishing the Courts of Common Pleas, and transfering the business thereof to the Circuit Courts and providing for the election of Judges and Prosecuting Attorneys.
No. 130. An act to amend Section 16 of an act entitled "an act regulating the working of coal mines and declaring a lien upon the works and machinery for work and labor in mining coal and for the royalty on coal, and providing penalty for the violation thereof and providing for toe appointment and qualification of Mine Inspector and prescribing his duties, declaring an emergency." approved March 8,1879, and to amend Section 4 of an act supplemental to said act. approved March 5,1881 being Sections 5,472 and 6 488 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, and adding a supplemental section thereto.
No. 105. An act to legalize the incorporation of the town of Waynetown, Montgomery County.
No. 174. An act concerning the Supreme Court.
No. 206. An act requiring County Auditors to advertise the amount of school funds not loaned out in their county at stated periods.
No. 120. An act to repeal Sections 5, 6, 7 and 8 of an act entitled an act
amendatory to the char
No. 217. An act to authorize the Willard Library of Evansville to soil and convey certain real estate belonging to said Library, situated in the city of Evansville.
No. 260. An act to legating the incorporation of the town of Darlington, Montgomery County.
No. 294. An act to make the general index of a deed or mortgage, which has been made pursuant to law, prima facie evidence on the records to which it refers when the destruction of the record by fire and the loss of the original instrument is made to appear.
No. 295. An act supplemental to an act entitled an act to repeal an ace entitled an act concerning legal advertising in certain cases, and repealing all laws ?n conflict therewith, and declaring an emergency, approved March 1,1883, amened March 3,1888, construing the same and reviving all laws repealed by the said repealed act of March 1.1883.
No. 45. An act supplemental to an act to incorporate the Ohio Insurance Company, approved January 16,1849, the title and name of such corporation having been changed to the Commercial Back by a decree of the Floyd Circuit Court, November 21,1882.
No. 77. An act providing for the location and erection of additional Hospitals for the Insane, and providing for the management thereof.
No. 43. An act fixing the fees, salaries, duties and compensation of the officers and persons earned therein, prohibiting the violation of its provisions and repealing certain laws.
No. 189. An act to amend Sections 1 and 2 of an act entitled an act, to provide for the repair of free turnpike roads in the various Counties of Indiana.
No. 285. An act to legalize a term of the Circuit Court held in the County of Pulaski in the month of June, 1881.
No. 12. An act to amend Section 288 of an act entitled An act concerning public offenses and their punishment, approved April 14, 1881. the same being Section 2,204 of the Revised Statutes of 1881.
No. 288. An act to amend Section 57 of an act entitled aa act for the incorporation of towns, defining their powers, providing for the election of the officers thereof and declaring their duties ap proved June 11,1882, as amended by an act en- titled an act to amend Section 57 of an act en titled for the incorporation of towns, defining their power, providing for the election of officers thereof and declaring their duties, approved June 11,1852. which amended act was approved March 12, 1877, and is designated as Section 8,847 of the Revised Statutes of 1881.
No. 250. An act establishing provisions respecting private corporations, created and existing at and before November 1, 1851.
No. 145. An act to amend Section 34, being 4,425 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, for an act entitled an act for a general system of Common Schools. the offices thereof and their respective flowers and duties and matters properly concected therewith, and prescribing fees of certain officers therein named and for the establishment, regulation of Township Libraries and to repeal U laws inconsistent therewith, providing penal- ties therein prescribed, approved March 6, 1865.
No. 48. An act providing for the appraisement, purchase and conversion of toll roads into free roads, and for their maintenance as free roads,
No. 74. An act to authorise any manufacturing or hydraulic company to erect a dam across the St. Joseph River, in Elkhart County.
No. 1. An act appropriating $125,000 to defray the expenses of the regular session of the Fifty-third General Assembly of the State of Indiana and other matters connected therewith.
No. 118. An act to amend Section 9 (the same being Section 4,968 of the Revised Statutes of 1881) of an act entitled "An act concerning the General Assembly, business therein and Committees and Clerks thereof, and declaring an emergency, approved April 21,1881.
No. 150. An act relative so the appointment of Judge pro tem. for Criminal Courts, and empowering them to hold and discharge the duties of Criminal Courts and fixing and providing for compensation of such Judges pro tem.
No. 148. An act ceding the jurisdiction of this State over certain lands owned and to be owned and held by the United States;
No. 34. An act to legalize the election of the Board of Trustees and all other officers of the town of Sullivan, Sullivan County, Indiana, for the years of 1882 and 1883, and to legalize all of their official acts by laws, ordinances, regulations and proceedings passed, adopted and executed by them under and ia pursuance of an act entitled "An act for the incorporation of towns, defining their powers, providing for the election of officers thereof, and declaring their duties;" approved June 11,1852.
No. 414, An act appropriating $40,000 for the relief of the sufferers on the Ohio, Wabash and White Rivers in the State of Indiana from the recent flood, providing for the expenditure of the same.
No. 32. An act to create the Forty-third Judicial Circuit, to amend Sections 15, 16 and 18 of an act entitled "An act to divide the State into Circuits for Judicial purposes; fixing the time for holding Courts thereto, abolishing the Courts of Common Pleas and transferring the business thereof to the Circuit Courts, and providing for the election of Judges and Prosecuting Attorneys in certain cases," approved March 6,1873; and also to amend Section 54 of said act, as amended by an act entitled "An act to amend said Section 51," approved March 13,1877; and also to provide for holding terms of Court in the Fourteenth, Fifteenth and Forty-third Circuits; providing for the appointment of a Judge for the Forty-third Judicial Circuit; and other matters connected therewith and repealing all laws in conflict therewith.
House concurrent resolution, No. 11. In relation to the flood suffering and requesting our Representatives and Senators in Congress to ask for an appropriation from the general Government for their benefit
No. 67. An act to legalize the incorporation of the town of Silver Lake, Kosciusko County, Indiana, and to legalize each and every official act of the several Boards of Trustees of said incorporation, and all other acts of each and every officer of the same.
No. 66, An act to legalize the incorporation of the town of Syracuse, in Kosciusko County, in the State of Indiana, and to legalize each and every official act of the several Boards of Trustees of said town, under an act entitled "'An act for the incorporation of towns, defining their power, Providing and declaring their duties," approved June 11, 1852, and all by-laws, ordinance and proceedings adopted in pursuance thereof,
No. 22. An set to legalize the assessment of taxes made by the Board of Trustees of the incorporated town of Winchester, in the County of Randolph, in Indiana, as levied by said Board of trustees for the year 1881, and the proceeding of the proper officers in relation thereto, and to empower the proper officers to collect said taxes.
No. 27. An act appropriating for the completion of the construction and furnishing of the department for women of the Indiana Hospital for the Insane, and for the construction of a warehouse and two coal houses for said Institution.
No. 413. An act for the relief of W Heaggy, former Treasurer of Madison County,
Indiana, and Simon M. Cos, Joel Epperly, Louis Loeb, William Kirk, Samuel Fesler,
J. A, Pence, Isaac D. Honest, George Heaggy, A. C. Vermillion, Au
No. 461. An act to amend Section 4 of an act entitled "An act to create the Forty-third Judicial Circuit;" to amend Sections 16,16 and 43 of an act entitled "An act to divide the State Into Circuits for Judicial purposes, fixing the time for holding Courts therein, abolishing the Courts of Common Pleas and transferring the business thereof to the Circuit Courts, and providing for the election of Judges and Prosecuting Attorneys in certain cases," approved March 6, 1873; and also to amend Section 54 of said act as amended by an act entitled "An act to amend said Section 51," approved March 13, 1877; and also to provide for holding terms of Court in the Fourteenth, Fifteenth and Forty-third Circuits; providing for the appointment of a Judge for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit and other matters COB- nested therewith, and repealing all laws in conflict therewith and declaring an emergency for me Immediate taking effect' of this act.
No. 5, An act concerning town elections, repealing all laws and parts of laws in conflict therewith.
No. 419. An act appropriating the sum of $60,000 for the relief of persons who are suffering and destitute by reason of the prevailing high waters of the Ohio, Wabash and While Rivers; creating a Provisional Board of Relief to disburse said appropriation, providing for a record and report of he manner of such disbursements. ^
No. 200. An act providing for the payment of certain claims to the persons therein named for labor performed by them, in ditching swamp lands in Tipton County, under employment by the Swamp Land Commissioners of that County.
No. 52. An act to provide for the construction of a sewer from the grounds owned by the State at or near the Indiana Reformatory Institution for Women and Girls so as to connect such sewer with one of the principal sewers of the city of Indianapolis.
No. 285. An act to fix the times of holding Courts in the Second Judicial Circuit of the State of Indiana, fixing the length of terms thereof, providing for the return of process therein, repealing all laws in conflict therewith.
No. 346. An act concerning legal advertising in certain cases, repealing all laws in conflict therewith.
No. 369. An act concerning certain duties of certain State, County and Township officers, making them liable on their official bond for failure to perform the same, providing for the collection of the same and the payment to the proper officer.
No. 407. An act to amend Section 4 of an act approved March 5, 1873, and of the Revised Statutes (4,556), and to repeal all laws in conflict therewith.
No. 117. An act to amend Sections 255. 256 and 157 of an act entitled "An act Concerning Taxation," approved March 29, 1881.
No. 30, Ah act to amend Section 8 of an act entitled an act regulating the adoption of heirs, approved March 2,1855.
No. 333 An act to legalize the incorporation of the Shelbyville and Marietta Turnpike Company of Shelby County, Indiana, and to legalize all the acts thereof and all contracts made by and with aid Association, and all the official acts of the several Boards ot Directors thereof under "An act authorizing the construction of plank and gravel roads," approved May 12,1852.
No. 61. An act for the relief of the Township Trusteee, legalizing certain acts performed by them.
No. 224. An act legalizing the corporation of the town of Carbon, in the County of Clay, and State of Indiana, the election and qualification of its Board of Trustees and other officers and their official acts.
No. 270. An act to legalize the incorporation of the town of Oakland, Gibson County, Indiana, and to legalize the election and official aces of the Board of Trustees and other officers of said town.
No. 372. An act concerning voluntary association for the purpose of forming Gymnastic or Turnverein Associations, and authorizing: such Associations to hold real and personal property, by purchase, gift or devises, to sell and convey the same, legalizing all such Associations heretofore formed to or made by such. Associations.
No, 170, An act providing for the sale of escheated estates, the disposal of the proceeds thereof, authorizing the execution of deed thereof.
No. 280. An act touching the duties of Township Trustees with reference to liquidating and contracting indebtedness of Townships in certain oases.
No. 230. An act to legalize the sale ot certain real estate in Counersville, Ind., belonging to the estate of Joseph Emmisburger, deceased, by Delona E. Williamson, attorney in fact, for the adult heirs and guardian of the minor heirs of said Emmisburger, to Edward F. Claypool.
No. 308. An act to amend sections 1 and 2 of an act entitled "An act to amend an act entitled an act to incorporate the Trustees of Hartsville Academy, approved January 12, 1850.
No. 13. An act concerning the use of firearms.
No. 256. An act to provide a fund for the permanent endowment of the Indiana University, and for the Investment of the same.
No. 31. An act authorizing the Board of County Commissioners to grant bounties for the destruction of woodchucks, hawks and owls.
No. 420. An act providing means for the erection of the new State House, providing for the assessment and collection of certain taxes thereafter, and making certain appropriation therefor.
No. 103. An act concerning liens of mechanics, laborers and material men.
No. 286. An act empowering manufacturing companies to take and hold stock in corporations furnishing water power, and legalizing purchase of such stock by such company.
No. 161. An act to amend Sections 222 and 227 of an act entitled "An act concerning taxation," approved March 29,1881. the same being Sections 6,491 and 6,496 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, and to provide for the sale of lots and lauds to the highest bidder for cash in certain cases.
No. 53. An act to legalize the acts of the corporation of, the town of Bennettsville, in White County, in the State of Indiana, and to legalize all subsequent and each and every official act of the several Boards of Trustees, and of all other officers of said corporation, under an act for the in- corporation of towns, defining their powers, providing for the election of officers thereof, and declaring their duties, approved June 11, 1852, and by-laws, rules and regulations and proceedings adopted in pursuance thereof.
No. 397. An act to legalize the incorporation of the town of Roachdale, Putnam County, Indiana, and to legalize ail the acts, by-laws and ordinances of said corporation, and all contracts made with and by said corporation.
No. 380 An act to legalize the incorporation of the Daleville and Bull Creek Turnpike Company of Delaware County, Indiana, and to legalize all the acts thereof and all contracts made by and with said Turnpike Company and all the official acts of the several Boards of Directors thereof, to legalize and restore the charter of said Turnpike Company.
No. 366. A n act relative to Maple Grove Cemetery In Richmond, Wayne County, Indiana.
No. 329. An act to authorize the Auditor of State to issue patents in certain cases in the name of the State of Indiana to purchasers of Wabash and Erie Canal bonds in said Scale, and to deliver the same to the purchasers or their grantees.
No. 408. An act to amend Sections 1, 21 and 42
No. 198. An act for the relief of Alien Lupton, John Peters, Henry Edris, Ell Holiday and Sarah A. Bonier.
No. 55. An act to prevent the sale of impure butter, and the keeping on any table at any hotel or boarding house, impure butter; providing penalties.
No. 227. An act to legalize the election of the Board of Trustees and all other officers of the town of Jasper, Dubois County, Ind., for the years of 1879. 1880. 1851 and 1882; and to legalize all their official acts, by-laws, ordinances, regulations and proceedings parsed and executed by them under and in pursuance of an act entitled "An act for the incorporation of towns; defending their powers; providing for the election of officers thereof; declaring their duties," approved June 11,1862.
No. 429. An act appropriating money for erecting family buildings, putting in gas and for drainage at the House of Refuge, providing how said money shall be drawn from the State.
No. 29. An act to enable the several Counties of this State to sell and dispose of lands forfeited to the State for the use and benefit of the school fund, and providing for the deficiency in said school fund occasioned by such sale, and repealing all laws in conflict.
No. 359. An act in relation to the lighting of cities and towns and furnishing the inhabitants thereof with the electric light and other forms of light, and providing for the right of way and the assessment of damages.
No. 160. An act to prohibit the gelling, bartering or giving away the questions prepared by the State Board of Education to be used by County Superintendents in the examination of teachers, and providing penalties therefor.
No. 381. An act to fix the time of holding Circuit Courts in the Forty-second Judicial Circuit, and to repeal all laws in conflict with the act.
No. 176. An act to amend Section 108 of an act entitled an act concerning taxation.
No. 176. An act to amend Section 108 of an act entitled an act concerning taxation.
No. 418. An act to legalize the incorporation of the town of Cherubsco, in the County of Whitie, and State of Indiana, and to legalize the election, qualification and the official acts of the said town of Cherubusco.
No. 223. An act to amend sections 5, 23, 47,
No. 57. This bill became a law without the approval of the Governor. An act to provide for the taxation of dogs, to regulate matters connected therewith, and providing penalties for the violation of the provisions of this act, entitled "An act to protect sheep husbandry, to regulate matters connected therewith, to provide for regulations taxing and killing dogs " approved April 13, 1881.
No. 149. An act to amend Section 367 of an act entitled "An act concerning proceedings in civil cases," approved April 7,1881.
No. 193. An act to amend Section 1 of an act entitled "An act providing for the election and I qualification of Justices of the Peace and defining their jurisdiction, powers and duties in civil cases," approved June 9, 1853, being Section 1,418 of the Revised Statutes,
No. 31. An act authorizing the Board of County Commissioners to grant bounties for the destruction of woodchucks, hawks and owls.
[This bill became a law without the Governor's signature.]
No. 293. An act to provide for organizing and regulating the business of Life Insurance Corporations, Associations and Societies transacting business on what is known a the assessment plan, and fixing penalties for the violation of its provisions.
The undersigned proprietor of the BREVIER LEGISLATIVE REPORTS
respectfully represents That twenty-five years ago we organized and executed a plan
of independent unpartizan Legislative Reporting (the first ever attempted west of
the Alleghanies having regard to fullness and completeness as to the matter and the
parliamentary forms) upon which we have printed our Reports at a cost to the State
less by one-half than any similar job of the State's printing: That our work proved
acceptable to the General Assembly and received acts for authorization and pay; That
it has been maintained and has received similar acts of endorsement by every
assembly except three; and we respectfully submit that under this usage of the
General Assembly we have a fair constructive permission and invitation to continue
our independent work of elaborating and offering the BREVIER
REPORTS.
The twenty-first volume of the BREVIER LEGISLATIVE REPORTS of
the Proceedings and Debates of the Indiana Legislature will embrace reliable
short-hand sketches of the Journals, Proceedings and Debates of both Houses of the
Fifty-3rd General Assembly of the State of Indiana, convened at Indianapolis city,
in regular session, the 4th day of January, A. D. 1883. It will contain important
motions, messages, resolutions and committee reports, that shall be made and
submitted; it will describe or copy at length bills and weighty propositions that
shall be presented and considered ; and it will afford liberal and verbatim sketches
of the Debates,-presenting without partizan bias the position of every member on the
floor, with the yeas and nays in every question of moment on which they shall be
ordered and taken.
The coming session will without doubt, be usually interesting, and the BREVIER REPORTS will be, as it has been for 25 years the only
source from which reliable reports of the Debates of the Legislature can be
obtained. This has been found to be the best and most economical means of presenting
to the people an intelligible journal not only of what is done, but of
The undersigned submit that these Reports are indispensable to the history of legislation in the State, of great value to the people at large, especially to politicians, and every public man; and that their value is increased by time.
We propose to pursue the publication of our BREVIER LEGISLATIVE
REPORTS. But there is now this difficulty about our work: we are unable to
contract with either of the morning papers in this city for the daily printing of
our Reports of the Session in their newspaper. Therefore, since our Reports of the
present Session cannot appear in the papers as heretofore, and to provide against
the restrictions of space in the daily papers by which the reports are marred and
excluded, we pro- pose to contract for printing outside of the daily press, so as to
insure a complete and satisfactory record. These contracts involve an inevitable
expense of money on our part, which is barely justified by the State's authorization
of the purchase of the number of copies of the Reports which has been accord- ed for
nineteen years in the Specific Bill or resolution nearly every Assembly since 1857-.
The price is less than one-third which is paid by the States for the work of the
Reporter of the Supreme Court.
The past, we think, teaches plainly enough, that unless the General Assembly were to establish a special Bureau for Reporting and Printing, involving new offices and additional public expensivenesss, which should be avoided by all means consistent with reasonable carefulness for the information and welfare of the supervising people, our proposition, which has been accepted by the General Assembly for twenty-five years is the best, and certainly it is by very much the cheapest way to escape the evils of partial Reporting in the interest of rings and factions. We think, also, that the general acceptance of our Reports twenty-five years justifies the expectation that the Legislature will not now forego the advantages of these contributions to the history of its work.
So, pledging diligence and fidelity for completeness and impartiality, larger space and improved facilities for printing, we hope you will regard it as respectful, and but the part of common prudence for us to ask of the present General Assembly for some expression, in advance, in favor of the continuance: of these Reports, upon which we may proceed with the printing of another-the 21st-volume of our Reports.
In this submission of the Brevier Reports we have not been mistaken as
to the common and growing public demand for just and intelligent public records. We have
tried to meet that demand, and to provoke parties abler than we are to supply it as it
ought to be supplied. And we still suppose that the representatives of the people know
what they want in this matter know whether it is better to do everything here at the
Capitol by memory and word of mouth than to stand upon a fair and open record for history.
We have proceeded strictly upon the presumption that the peopled representatives know
what is due to the country and to themselves in this matter of a record of their
legislative action. And if there is any consideration against the continuance of the Brevier except that of its cost, the same conceit is as much against the
lobbies and open doors for the sessions of the General Assembly; and it is at least one
hundred years too late for secret sessions.
The work can not be done by jobbers for the money that has been paid for it; and as to
the standing contract price of the work, it carries that on every page: for " two thirds
of a cent a page per copy" it is furnished to the proper accounting officers of the State
in printed sheets, procured in every item of its cost at our own
expense.
The Brevier Legislative Reports have been acceptable to the Legislature and the people for twenty-five years. The work has stood sternly on its merits with each particular session since '57 and it is offered again with the ability and desire on the part of these reporters to make such an abridgment of the State Legislative Record in the best form and at the cheapest rate.
Considering the difficulties and opposition incident to such a work; the contingencies of failing health and failing purse, and failing at length to make an acceptable offering of the work, there is nothing in the offering of it on our part but hard work, and the good name of unswerving workers, much very delicate personal responsibility, and some pecuniary hazard-(large for our means-) and, last and at the best, but small pay.
As seventeen consecutive sessions of the General Assembly have authorized the publication
of the Brevier Reports, it is regarded respectful and a duty to continue
a proffer of the service that has been acceptable to every Legislature for so many
years.
None in the State are so competent to make a Legislative Record as the projectors of the
Brevier Reports because the lives of no other Indianians have been
passed in such like Service.