HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
MONDAY, December 20, 1858.The Journal of Saturday was read.
THE BLIND INSTITUTION.
The SPEAKER laid before the House a communication from the Superintendent of the Institution for the Education of the Blind, responding to Mr. Smith, of Perry's resolution.
On motion of Mr. HARNEY, it was ordered to lie on the table, and 200 copies be printed for the use of the House of Representatives.
FUND COMMISSIONER'S BILL.
Mr. HUNTER, (the rules being suspended for the purpose,) moved to reconsider the vote of Saturday by which the Fund Commissioners bill (H. R. 98) was recommitted to the Committee on Ways and Means.
Mr. MELLETT took the floor in support of the bill (98.) It had been broadly declared that the proposition to appropriate a portion of the Sinking Fund for the purposes of the State extingences was a felony. It had been called stealing. He read a passage from the speech of Mr. Davis, in the Sentinel's reports, to the effect that this fund belonged not to the State, but to the children of the State. This he denied. Who gave it to the children? It was the money of the State, earned by the State, and now in the hands of the State; and, yet it had been called larceny to use it temporarily for State purposes. The State might hereafter use this fund for the support of common schools, but not now. He gave an illustration of the right by which this find was held by the State - the case of John Smith who had placed a fund in bank, in trust, for the use of his son John, when he becomes of age, &c,
He continued to reply to the speech of the gentleman from Floyd. He read the intimation, that the effect of the bill was to put all the State finances into the control of the Bank of the State of Indiana. This, he said, went to the extent of charging culpability upon the Committee on Ways and Means. He answered it not on their behalf, because the members of that committee were able to defend themselves. But he took the charge as personal to himself. If this committee were guilty of a high fraud, then he was guilty as accessory to their act, for he approved it with all his heart. If they were to be punished he ought to suffer the same penalty. It was a remarkable charge, because the gentleman from Floyd was remarkably sensitive about charges made against him - making no charges himself, and suffering none to be made against himand then it was an insinuation of the darkest kind. He made no insinuations. He had heard it stated, and it was probably true, that there was an object, a purpose in defeating this bill. It was plain to any man with his eyes open that the political buzzards of ill parties have scented the carcass in opposition to this bill. He admitted that it was nothing extraordinary that the Democrats should range themselves in opposition to it; but when he saw members of his own party in opposition, with features long, lank and hungry, hanging about this hall for the purpose of defeating the bill, it turned all the feelings of his soul into gall and bitterness. If there was a member upon this floor who deserved a monument for honesty and firmness, it was that man who could resist the appliances of his party and stand up to the honest convictions of his heart upon this question, and that man was the gentleman from Perry [Mr. Smith] a Democrat, who had introduced the bill.
It was proper to answer all fair argumentation; and suppose it to be true that this money is to go into bankwould it not be as well thus as for the State funds to be handed round to the favorites of the State Treasurer? But then it was said by the gentleman that this Bank of the State was a monster to grind the face of the people. Was not that an extraordinary intimation, coming from the man who induced the introduction of the bill to charter this bank, drawn up by Mr. Thomas L, Smith. He read testimony from the Bank Frauds Report, to show the origin of that bill. How should the gentleman now come into this hall and warn us against this bank! He imputed no motive. He also read from the testimony of Horatio C. Newland, going to show Mr, Davis' opinion that the Trust Funds would be safe in this bank. He had a right, in this way, to look at the source whence came these warnings against this bill. He would speak out, and his word might go to record. Was it not extraordinary for this man to impugn motives, who had spent more money for this bank charter than any and all the members of the Committee on Ways and Means were likely to spend for this or any other measure?
Mr. COLGROVE noticed the doubtful compliment of the gentleman from Floyd, addressed to him for being right on this subject. If he was right now, he had been so all the time and therein he had the advantage of the honorable gentleman. He had been somewhat familiar page: 165[View Page 165] with legislation with regard to the Sinking Fund. Was there a proposition to read him out of the Republican party? Where then should he go? If he were fated to stand alone, he needed no party organization to sustain him in the right, and he wanted no support if he were in the wrong. He had ever characterized the chartering of the Bank of the State, as an effort to steal away the whole of these funds. It was with much effort that a direct proposition to this effect was put down. Again, a grave proposition came from the Committee on Ways and Means of that session, declaring that these funds were unsafe in the hands of the Sinking Fund Commissioners, proposing to sell the old bank stock at $1 28, when the report of the Commissioners showed that it was worth $1 80 to the dollar. If that had succeeded, there would have been stealage to the amount of $400,000 from the bank stock alone, which, with other things in the proposition, would have amounted to half a million. The speech of the gentleman from Henry had unmasked the whole subject, in the statement that the State was under no obligation, legal or moral, to repay this fund, and that it belongs to the State - not the children. Then all the State has to do is to use it. Why not do it, then, directly! This statement took away his confidence in some degree, in the fairness of the authors and defenders of this bill. He read the 114th section of the Old State Bank Charter, creating this fund, and gave its history showing that this money was the bondholders' till the bonds in their hands should be paid. Every dollar more than shall pay those bonds belongs to tho Common School Fund. This fund cost the State nothingit was not the proceeds of taxation - it had cost nothing but the use of the State's name. Any measure to divert this fund from its legitimate purpose, he must and would oppose with his vote and influence, party or no party.
He respectfully submitted that this was not a safe proposition, reading the llth 12th and 17th sections of the bill - giving the new commissioners control of these funds. He objected, as he had before stated, to the State becoming a creditor to this fund; because too many, with the gentleman from Henry, entertained the opinion that this fund belongs to the State. The State was heavily taxed, grinding the people into the dust; and the natural feeling of the representative was to put off any proposition that would increase the taxes. In 1866 those bonds would be all paid, and then these nearly three millions of dollars - the interest thereon - might be all applied to the support of Common Schools, if we do our whole duty toward that fund. The State, manifestly had no right to become a creditor to this fund, unless she put herself on an equal footing with other borrowers. He would strike out from the bill the 11th and 12th sections, because they are contained in the bill No. 99. Then the bill would be all propercreating and fixing the duty of the Board of commissioners. He would ask also that the State should, by this act of borrowing, pledge themselves to pay the old scoreand this he would apply to the bill No. 99. He read his proposed amendment to the following effect:
"The Treasurer of State shall, on the 24th day of December, 1858, appropriate all the money in his hands toward the payment of the interest on the State debt,coming due on the 1st day of January, 1859, and shall then, on behalf of the State, open a credit with the Board of Sinking Fund Commissioners for what sums may be required for the payment of the January and July instalments of interest on the foreign debt fcr the year 1859, and the current expenses of the State for the year 1859; and all advancements made by the Statte Board to the Sate shall claim interest at the rate of seven per cent, per annum: Provided that nothing in this Act shall be so construe as to authorize the Treasure of State to check upon the said Board of Sinking Fund Commissioners, nor shall said Board pay any such check, except for the payment of the interest above specified, and the current expenses of the State for the year 1859."
This would forever close up the door of abuse. As the bill now stood, the discretion of the Treasurer was not sufficiently restricted, &c.
He would also make the 6th section of the bill to read as follows :
"Whenever the revenues of the State shall have been returned to the said Board of Sinking Fund Comnissioners, all advances made under the acts of 1841 and 1842, and the interest on the same, shall be paid as follows: The first, on the loan made under the previous act of 1841, to be computed at six percent, per annum, and the interest on the loan made under the act of 1842 at seven per cent. per annum; and also the loan made by the said Board of Fund Commissioners to the State in July, 1858, with the interest on the same, to be computed at seven per cent, per annum, according to the terms of said loans, together with all sums advanced under the provisions of this act, with interest at the rate of seven per cent, per annum; and the Board of Sinking Fund Commissioners shall apply any surplus that may come into their hands, beyond the requisitions of the Treasury for the payment of the said interest and the current expenses of the State government, to the purchase of certificates of the foreign debts of the State, if the same can be obtained on reasonable terms, which certificates shall be cancelled at the date of the vurchase and held as vouchers by the Bsard of Sinking Fund Commisioners."
He wanted the bill should state precisely what it means; and he considered that this language could not be misconstrued. He explained his amendments at length, and said that if they were incorporated he could support the bill, but not otherwise.
Mr. HARNEY thought gentlemen did not understand the nature of the opposition to this bill. He deprecated all disposition to make it a party question. Some of us, and the committee also, were in a false position. The two propositions ought to be separated. The organization of the Sinking Fund Board should be a distinct proposition. There were ample security for the payment of any debt against this Fund. He would have the proceeds of this fund begin at once - as soon as may be - to be applied to the common schools. But this should not be complicated with the organization of the Board. Nor should the Treasury question be complicated with this bill. All the present objections to the Treasurer's system of using these funds, he thought, by this bill, might be carried to the Sinking Fund Commissioners. A large amount of discussion was expended for want of distinctness in propositions. He defended the speech of Mr. Davis from the personal application sought to be made of it by the gentleman from Henry, (Mr. Mellett.) He thought the proposition, that this fund's proceeds could not be applied to the schools till the last Bond should be paid, was not good in law. This fund was the guardian of the common schools. This bill was a proposition striking at its very heart, and the opposition of the gentleman from Elkhart was pertinent. page: 166[View Page 166] Where was the good faith in the former loans from this fund? No provision was made to pay the interest. It was a Mexican system of finance. It was to a forced loan upon the fund that he objected. The State should approach the fund as any other borrower. He considered the existing objections to the Treasury management, and rested the blame as much with the Legislature as the Treasurer. He charged it as against a system that ought to be changed. " When I look at the opportunities before me," said Lord Cline before the Parliament, "I am astonished at my moderation." He had as much interest in taking care of the Treasury as though the Treasurer belonged to the opposite party, &c.
Mr. BLYTHE. It was a matter of gratulation that we could approach this question without party feeling. He regretted that there had been made to raise the party lash. He eulogized the gentleman from Perry for his position to this bill. The gentleman from Floyd, if he were present, would pardon him for saying that his opposition, submitted last Friday, was only an admirable stump speech. The objection of the opposition was to the State's use of part of a trust fund; and, secondly, that the system proposed to be wiped out was an old one. These were all; and he looked at these objections and at the bill. We were taking part of a trust fund, therefore the bill ought to fail. What was the foundation of this argument, but that the State of Indiana is a scoundrel, and can not pay its obligations? It was a baseless argument. With the exception of the gentleman from Randolph, gentlemen in the opposition had dealt only in generalities. He alleged that the provisions in the 17th section of the bill were ample to secure the repayment of the loan.
[A Senate message now announced the passage of bills (S.107) authorizing the Governor, Auditor and Secretary of State to borrow from the Board of Sinking Fund Commissioners to pay the January interest; (S. 5) to amend the 32d section of the assessment act of June 21,1852; also (S. 102) to contioue the Board of Sinking Fnnd Commissioners till the first Monday in April, &c.]
Mr. COLGROVE said that section provided nothing for the payment of interest.
Mr. BLYTHE called attention to the language of the 16th section for answer. But the objection was not an argument against the principle of the bill. It might, indeed, suggest amendment. The bill, he affirmed, provided a sufficient guarantee for repayment - interest and all. The main argument of the gentleman from Floyd was that the system proposed to be set aside was an old one. But when age had brought decrepitude or vice, his veneration failed him. He was willing to advance, with a due regard to the past. And, in view of the history of this system, he said to the gentleman from Randolph, in the words of Shylock: "Now infidel, I have thee upon the hip." The propriety of change in the system, was demonstrated beyond all civil. Let the part of the opposition to the bill show a better plan than that submitted by the Committee on Ways and Means. He yielded to no man in his affection for the common schools, and would not lay his hand on this fund, unless there were honesty and ability in the State enough to return it, There was another subordinate objection urged by the gentleman from Floyd, that there was no present exigency for this measure He took issue on the allegation that the Governor, Auditor and Treasurer, had power to provide by loan for the ordinary expenses of the Government, read this assumed authority from the act in the Statutes, prescribing the duty of the Governor, and pronounced it unconstitutional and void. For this was a function not expressed in the title of the act. Then there was an exigency for the passage of this act, or something like it, to pay the January interest, and the current ordinary expenses of the State Government. When he had concluded -
The House (at 4:45) adjourned.
