BANK OF THE STATE OF INDIANA.
Mr. CONLEY, by leave, offered the following:
Resolved,Mr. CONLEY, by leave, offered the following: Resolved, That the special committee to whom was referred Senate bill (No. 42) are hereby directed to inquire into the management of the Bank of the State of Indiana, and the conduct and transactions of its officers during and since its organization, and that said committee is hearby empowered to send for persons and papers if deemed necessary by a majority of said committee.
Mr. CONLEY said there were indications that this concern has not been properly conducted, and in the event of the discovery of misconduct, this resolution is offered in order that we may have the proper sources of development. If there has boon no mismanagement it world increase the credit of the institution with the people; and these ultra bank men should be the last to oppose the adoption of the resolution.
On a motion to lay the resolution on the table, the yeas and nays were demanded, and bring ordered and taken, resulted - yeas, 18, nays 17 - as follows:
YEAS - Messrs. Anthony, Bennett, Blair, Bobbs, Cobbt Conner, Cooper, Cravens, Craven, Green, Hamilton, Heffren, Hill, Johnston, Odell, Stevens, Turner and Wagner-18.
NAYS. - Messrs. Conley, Fisk, Qoodinjr, Hargrove, Hendry, Jennings, Kinley, Line, Lomax, McClure, March, Miller, Rice, Shoemaker, Slack, Thompson and Wallace-17.
Mr. CRAVENS, when his name was called, said he thought the proposition was intended to injure the currency of the country.
Mr. GOODING, when his name was called, said the repeal of this bank charter might effect the currency somewhat, but currency or no currency, he should vote for the repeal, and let consequences take care of themselves. It were better to have war, pestilence and famine, than to sustain such an institution. The honor of Indi an a requires the repeal of that charter.
Mr. LINE, when his name was called, said he was not here to cast his vote with a view to make war upon any institution of our State, but when the question comes up here to investigate this matter, it seemed out of place to refuse.
Mr. WAGNER, when his name was called, said that, by his vote, he did not express an opinion in favor of covering up any mismanagement on the part of any bank. He took the ground that the Senate had no right to presume matters were going wrong, unless there were charges made.
Mr. WALLACE, when his name was called, said it was contended, as a reason why we can not repeal this charter, that it is a contract; if it is, who are the parties to it? The State of Indiana and certain citizens? If it is a contract, and the State is a party to it, we unquestionably have the right to make this examination. He was in favor of an examination, whenever we can do it lawfully.
So the resolution lies upon the table.
