BREVIER LEGISLATIVE REPORTS
BY ARIEL & W. H. DRAPIER
Vol. IV INDIANAPOLIS, FEB. 4, 1861 No. 9
CONCEALED WEAPONS.
Mr. SMITH of Bartholomew, from the Committee on Rights and Privileges, returned Mr. Prosser's bill (63) To repeal the act against carrying concealed or dangerous weapons, of February 23, 1859, recommending indefinite postponement.
Mr. PROSSER had introduced this bill not. because the law as it now exists conflicts with his interests-living in a rural district amongst peaceable folks,but it had been suggested to him by others. There was but one point in it, and that was to take away the inequality of the operation of the existing law. A law-abiding citizen did not desire to carry these weapons whilst the short haired fraternity-the ''rounders," or what you please to call them, that ask no odds of the law, they carry weapons in spite of the law: And it was very seldom that you could get hold of such a man to punish him. Thus honest men were left at the mercy of this clan. This was the only point in his bill; the only question was whether the law ought to be repealed and place the business men on a level with the ruffian.
Mr. DOBBINS. The present law might receive amendments in regard to officers, and then he thought it might be better than this bill.
Mr. ORR. The very reasoning of the gentleman from Brown induced the the committee to report against his bill. We would not lagalize the carrying of weapons by the short-haired gentry.
Mr. HEFFREN. There should not be a law on the statute-book which is violated with impunity, as this law was. This was the way to excite contempt for all law. It was a law against public sentiment and public justice.
Mr. ROBBINS concurred with Mr. Heffren.
The House refused to concur in the report, and the bill was ordered to be engrossed.
Mr. SMITH, of Bartholomew, from the Committee on Rights and Privileges, returned the petition from sundry citizens of Madison for legislation against sheep-killing clogs, with a recommendation that, it may be referred to the Committee on Agriculture.
The petition was so referred.
CONVENTIONAL INTEREST.
Mr. SHERMAN, from the Committee on Rights and Privileges, returned Mr. Orr's bill [74,] to regulate interest on money, and repeal the act of May 27, 1852, with a recommendation that the same do pass.
Mr. HEFFREN moved that the report with the bill be indifinitely postponed.
Mr. DOBBINS referred to the bad influence of a conventional interest in the States of Wisconsin and Ohio. After a fair trial in both these States the producing and consuming classes petitioned numereously for its repeal, till it was accomplished. The same thing had been tried in this State, and now there was a compromise. If the merchant pays 10 per cent, for money to buy his goods, the consumer at last lias to pay it, in the increased price of the goods he consumes.
Mr. LANE. We should legislate for the greatest good of the greatest number. The rule would not allow us to legislate for capitalists. Look at the condition of any new State that has adopted such a law, like Iowa. It was like the condition of our own State when we had such a law, which resulted in the compromise on six per cent., stated by Mr. Dobbins.
Mr. PACKARD replied that he had discussed it before the people, and although he had no selfish interest to consult in the passage of the bill, he confessed that he felt much interest in its success. His constituents were largely in favor of this increase in the rate of interest. If petitions were circulated amongst thorn, there would be found fifty to one in its favor. The experience of our own and other States, which has been referred to by members, was not the result of a high rate of interest, but it was occasioned by deep-seated difficulties, arising from heavy State debts and taxes. He had, until a recent period, resided in Michigan, and there the ten per cent interest law had acted beneficially. He concurred in the position assumed by Mr. Heffren in the discussion relative to the law against carrying concealed weapons, that laws which were generally disregarded ought not to be continued in existence; and the existing law, limiting the rate of interest to six per cent., is constantly violated. The people will have money when their business wants demand it, be the law what it may. The necessity of a change in the law is more felt in the border counties than in other parts of the State. The northern counties are drained of their surplus cap page: 132[View Page 132]ital, because it is sent to the adjoining States, where it can find a higher interest. He would be the last man to legislate against labor, but this bill promotes its welfare as much as that of the capitalist. As to loans made by merchants from banks, and'the argument from them, he would reply by asking whether such loans can now be made for less than 10 or 12 percent? Since this is the rate of interest generally given, a change in the law will not result in actually increasing it. As to the experience of Iowa, it was not a ten per cent, interest law that caused its financial difficulties, but other causes. He had been written to by men who are not capitalists, to use every exertion to change the present law.
Mr. BUNDY. In order that every gentleman desirous of debate may have an opportunity, he moved that the report be laid on the table, and its further consideration made the special order for Thursday of next week, at 10 o'clock.
Mr. NEBEKER suggested that the bills on the subject be made the order at the same time.
Mr. BUNDY could not say that, because they were not here.
Mr. McLEAN saw no propriety in any extended discussion of this question. There were good arguments on both sides. At least one week of time was consumed ineffectually on this subject at each of the two last sessions. The change of the law, he thought, could not be made. He was willing to make it the special order, but expected no result.
Mr. HEFFREN understood the motion to lay on the table and make the special order.
Mr. Bundy's motion was agreed to, and the subject was made the special order for Thursday of next week.
Mr. LEE, from the Committee on Rights and Privileges, returned Mr. Heffren's bill [65,] to repeal the act touching gaming contracts, with a recommendation that the same be indefinitely postponed.
Mr. HEFFREN. That was another of the laws that was violated every day.
Mr. STOTSENBERG. It was true the Supreme Court had decided that the money could not be recovered from the winning party after it has been put over by the stake-holders. It refers to betting on games. The argument that the law was not respected, would be just as good against any law.
The report was concurred in.
Mr. McCLURG, from the same committee, returned the resolution requiring railroad association in this State to employ no engineer who cannot produce a certificate of qualifications, with a recommendation of indefinite postponement.
The report was concurred in.
EXTRA SERVICES OF SHERIFFS AND CLERKS.
Mr. McLEAN, from the Committee on Organization of Courts of Justice, returned Mr. Neheker'e bill [8] providing for allowance of compensation to clerks of the Circuit and Common Pleas Courts, and sheriffs for extra services, recommending passage.
Mr. NEBEKER explained that this bill was to restore the act of 1852, in relation to fees for extra services of sheriffs and clerks. The act of 1855 left such compensation to the commissioners. This bill will give fees to the clerks and sheriffs in all State cases where the State loses. This was a remedy which this House would never agree to in specific cases. It was to restore the act of 1852, an act which limited the extra pay to those officers. But in 1855, it was so changed that a "reasonable fee," in the discretion of the County Commissioners, was allowed, instead of a fixed sum. The consequence of this change was that, in Vermillion county, the demand of the Clerk for extra services was for $5,600. But it was resisted, and he came down step by step to $250. A reasonable allowance was no doubt fair in itself, but then similar regular services are made a standard by which to determine what is reasonable, and this would operate prejudicially to the interests of the people. To remedy this defect in the law of 1855, he had introduced an act at the last session, limiting the pay to $200 and the bill had passed the House with but one voting against it, and through the Senate with but two voting against it. It was not vetoed, and yet it was not on the statute book of the last session. How it was lost, he could not tell. But to remedy the evil of the law of 1855, he had introduced the bill reported back by the Committee. He gave examples to illustrate the justice of the bill. The committee reporting were opposed to the bill, till he furnished the facts.
Mr. HEFFREN looked upon the bill as a proposition to allow the Sheriff to put his hands deep into the county treasury. It was resolved by a convention of Sheriffs in this city lately that each one of them would see his representative about this bill. The law now admitted of $100 a year extra compensation, when voted by the commissioners, where the annual compensation does not exceed $1000. He had been informed of cases of abuse under the law of 1852, now proposed to be revived. One man had drawn $1600, another $1800, &c., for extra compensation.
Mr. NEBEKER. The bill provides that they can not have over $100 a year for extra services.
Mr. JENKINSON. The gentleman from Warren was correct, and the gentleman from Washington was wrong. It was the act of 1855 that opened the door for abuse.
Mr. EDSON understood the bill to put the limitation of compensation to $100.
Mr. HEFFREN. The gentleman from Warren made a different explanation.
Mr. BUNDY read the provision of the act of 1855 The object of the bill was to limit the allowance for extra services to $100. That page: 133[View Page 133] was a reasonable amount, and he hoped the bill would pass.
Mr. EDSON. Were the extra services to be paid for at the same rate as other official services?
Mr. McLEAN. $100 was to be in full for all services.
Mr. NEBEKER. They have to itemize the account, but they can receive no more than $100 a year for extra services.
Mr. EDSON. It includes clerks. His county commissioners had been in the habit of allowing $10 a quarter to the sheriff for extra service. He thought the bill right, but should propose to amend so as to allow the same for extra-official as for ordinary services. The commissioners may allow less, and the bill should be guarded against cutting down a fair compensation, &c.
Mr. HEFFREN moved to refer the bill to the Committee on the Judiciary. The first section says they shall receive but the $100. That it shall be for services for which the law prescribes no fee. He was afraid of the second section, that it would be open to the abuses under the act of 1855.
Mr. NEBEKER explained further.
Mr. HEFFREN. The specific fees were now fixed in the act of 1855, and this bill gives them $100 in addition.
Mr. NEBEKER. It was the same bill he introduced at the last session, which was entitled "An act to repeal the act of 1855, and restore the latter clause of the 20th section of the act of 1852," and in the same shape of that bill, except that that bill was amended so that the sheriff might have $200 a year for extra service.
Mr. JENKINSON thought the terms of the bill might be ambiguous, and it had better go to the Committee.
Mr. EDSON proposed to amend by adding appropriately these words: "Said officers to be paid for such extra-official services at the same rates as prescribed by law."The bill and proposed amendment were referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. ORR, from the Committee on Rights and Privileges, returned Mr. Black's bill [76,] to amend section 1 of the act of March 5, 1855, to authorize county recorders and surveyors to issue fee bills; recommending its passage.
Mr. O. said the only change was in allowing fee bills to their predecessors.
Mr. FISHER said a bill was carefully prepared, and would shortly be submitted, to remodel the law regulating county surveyors, and he thought that these propositions should be considered together by the same Committee.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed.
Mr. MOORMAN, from the Committe on Agriculture, returned Mr. Black's bill [46,] supplemental to the act regarding estrays articles adrift, approved June 16, 1852, with the expression of opinion that further legislation on this subject is unnecessary. The report was concurred in.
Mr. THOMPSON, from the Committee on Agriculture, returned the bill [64] in relation to fencing railroads, and stock killed on railroad routes, recommending passage.
On motion by Mr. HEFFREN, it was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
On motion by Mr. BUNDY, (the order of business being suspended for the purpose,) the Senate joint resolution in relation to the pending Federal difficulties, was taken up and ordered to the Committee of Thirteen.
STATE REVENUE.
On motion by Mr. PROSSER, (the order of business being again suspended,) the Senate joint resolution, directing the Treasurer of State to issue his circular to the several county treasurers, directing them to send up the State revenue in their hands by the 10th February, was taken up.
Mr. P. said, in his judgment, this was the best proposition to raise money, and he thought it might yield $60,000 or $70,000 at once.
Mr. PARRETT moved that the House concur.
Mr. BRANHAM would say that there is already such a law on the statute book, but unfortunately there is no penalty attached to it. Before the Committee on Ways and Means reported the bill providing for borrowing money, they made inquiry of the Auditor and Treasurer, and satisfied themselves that no money could be go? here in time by a call on the county treasurers. Almost all the money in the hands of these treasurers was loaned out till the third Monday in March. Pass this, and in the first place you will not get any money, and in the second place, if you do, you will not get it in time. We shall be obliged to pass some law for the replenishment of the Treasury, or we shall be obliged to stop. The system under which we have been doing business had made a custom which was equal to a law; and under that custom, about all the revenue of the State in the hands of the Treasurers was now out on loans till the time the law requires, them to sottle with the State Treasurer. The existing law authorizes the State Treasurer to call on the county treasurers whenever he needs money. But the county officers will make as much as they can out of it while it is in their hands. Some of this money had been loaned out in this town till April. We have been, for a long series of years, taxing the people for money, for the benefit of the men who handle it. The Warden of the State Prison had told him that he had not money to buy provisions; and the Treasury here was empty. This joint resolution provides no penalty. Then how much stronger or more effectual would it be than the law already on the statute book ? None at all. If they disregard the one, they will disregard the other.
page: 134[View Page 134]Mr. DOBBINS. It might be amended so that if they neglect or refuse to respond, they shall not be entitled to their fees. That was, perhaps, the most and the least that the Legislature ought to do in the case.
Mr. WOODHULL. A penalty might work a hardship, for a county treasurer could not well tell how much was in his hands till he came to settle.
Mr. BRANHAM. It was only a joint resolution, and could not have a penalty.
Mr. PACKARD. It might work hardship in cases where the revenue had been put into speculations in hogs.
Mr. BUNDY. The passage of this resolution would avail nothing. The revenue in the hands of the county treasurers was loaned out to their friends for banking purposes, or deposited for interest, &c.
Mr. DOBBINS. His county treasurer was not in the habit of loaning out the revenue. He kept it in his office; and a thief came along lately and stole about $2,600 of it.
Mr. BUNDY. It was a general rule. There might be exceptions, of course.
Mr. PROSSER was in favor of doing something to compel the revenue to come in. It was not a good proposition to borrow from the Sinking Fund, which, under the Constitution, was sacred to the schools. He was glad it had failed. He knew we could get some money under this resolution, and it could not, do any harm.
Mr. EDSON concurred with Mr. Branham that the passage of this resolution would do little good. In his region the people had not paid their taxes; and he apprehended there would be but little revenue, till the very last day of payment in March. He had voted against borrowing from the school fund. He did not know a better place to apply for this loan than the Bank of the State.
Mr. PARRETT expressed his astonishment to hear gentlemen make such statements-that the revenue of the State was in hogs, used for banking purposes, and stolen. The treasurers, in his region, would not lend out the revenue. If such was the case that the money of the State was loaned out-to the Bank of the State, that never accommodated anybody but speculators and railroad men, it was time this resolution was passed. Should the revenue of the State go to Toledo, Chicago and elsewhere,, whilst we were here unable to pay our board?
Mr. PACKARD was in favor of the resolution, with a penalty.
Mr. ATKISSON said his county treasurer was at all times ready to come up to the time. He was in favor of the resolution.
Mr. BRANHAM. The Senate had not yet defeated the bill sent there. He indicated that a bill with the needed penalties would be introudced here soon; and that the loan proposed in the Ways and Means bill in the Senate could not affect the distribution of the school money.
Mr. BLACK and Mr. McCLURG stated that their county treasurers would respond to the proposed Circular, and they were in favor of the resolution.
Mr. SMITH, of Bartholomew, made a similar statement with regard to Jacob Snyder the long-trusted and reliable Treasurer of his county.
Mr. CAMERON demanded the previous question, and there was a second.
The resolution was adopted by-yeas 61 nays 33.
YEAS-Messrs. Anderson, Atkisson, Black, Boydston Brett, Brucker, Cason, Collins of Whitley, Combs,' Cooprider, Grain, Dashiel, Davis, Dobbins, Edson, Epperson, Feagler, Ferguson, Fleming, Ford, Gifford, Gore, Haworth, Hayes, Holcomb, Hopkins, Horton, Howard, Hudson, Jones of Tippecanoe, Jones of Wayne, Kendrick, Kitchen, Knowlton, Lods, Lane, Lee, Lightner, McClurg, McLean, Moss, Mutz, Orr, Packard, Parrett, Prosser, Prow Piagan, Bobbins, Roberts, Sloan, Smith of Bartholomew' Smith of Miami, Stevenson, Stotsenberg, Trier, Underwood, Warrum Wells, Williams, and Woodhull,-61.
NAYS-Messrs. Bingham, Branham, Bryan, Bundy, Burgess, Cameron, Campbell, Collins of Adams, Fisher, Fordyce, Gresham, Hall, Harvey, Heffren, Henricks, Jenkinson Jones of Vermillion, Moody, Moorman, Nebeker, Newman, Owens, Pitts, Polk, Randall, Sherman, Thomas Thompson, Turner, Wilson, Woodruff, Woods, and Mr' Speaker-33.
On motion by Mr. CAMERON, (the order of business being suspended for the purpose,) the House took up the consideration of his order to suspend the rule for adjournment till the 10th of February, so as to require but one session a day.
On motion by Mr. HEFFREN, it was laid on the table.
Mr. JONES, of Vermillion, from the Select Committee thereon, reported his bill [51] to fix the times of the Circuit Court in the Eighth Circuit, recommending its passage,
The bill was ordered to be engrossed.
STATE REVENUE AGAIN.
Mr. JONES, of Tippecanoe, moved to reconsider the vote just taken, concurring in tho Senate joint resolution to call on the county treasurers for the State revenue.
Mr. Speaker ALLEN (Mr. Edson in the chair,) thought that the joint resolution had been concurred in without a proper estimate of its bearings on the rights of the House of Representatives. By the provisions of the State Constitution, all revenue bills come properly under the jurisdiction of our Committee on Ways and Means. They tendered to the Senate a bill for the purpose of raising money; and the Senate, instead of rejecting it, had laid it on the table, and sent back this proposition to raise money in a different way. One reason why he desired this reconsideration was, that he did not want to see the House pass any proposition tending to reflect on the Committee on Ways and Means. And he thought that the House should not, under any circumstances, resign prerogatives conferred by the Constitution. The Senate, instead of page: 135[View Page 135] concurring in the House bill, presents its own propositionthus directly arrogating to itself the right to originate a money bill.
Mr. PROSSER denied that it was either a proposition to raise money or to reflect on the Committee on Ways and Means. It was to get money out of hands where it was diverted from its legitimate purpose. He moved to lay the motion to reconsider on the table.
The motion was rejected.
Mr. HEFFREN raised the "point, that this resolution to raise revenue, not originating here, was not properly before the House.
The SPEAKER. The question is still on the motion to reconsider.
Mr. PARRETT was opposed to reconsideration. It was not a proposition to raise revenue but to notify officers that they had complied with the law. It was to wake up the State Treasurer to his duty under the law.
Mr. FISHER. The Governor had stated that the treasurer had made his call; but, there being no penalty, the call was disregarded.
Mr. PARRETT thought not. He cared nothing about the question of credit for originating the proposition.
Mr. NEBEKER. The county treasurers had not responded, because there was no penalty. The resolution would operate as a deception. It would postpone action. It would do no good. He hoped the motion would prevail.
Mr. FISHER felt assured that it would not only do no good, but harm, by preventing action that would be effectual.
On motion by Mr. BUNDY, the House took a recess till 2 o'clock.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
Mr. EDSON thought we were too much in the habit of re-consideration. True, it was right and proper to re-consider where there has been a mistake; but he saw none in this case, nor any reflection on the Committee on Ways and Means, or the House. It would not cut off the power of further legislation for needed revenue. It merely required the Treasurer of State to call for the revenue on the 10th of February. He believed the county treasurers would respond. There might not be very much revenue in their hands, but he thought there would be found enough for all purposes.
Mr. DOBBINS did not consider the Senate's action as reflecting at all on the House, or on the Committee of Ways and Means. Neither was it a measure to raise revenue, but its effect wonld he to wake up the treasurers to a sense of their duty. This was not the only means of raising money, and the Committee on Ways and Means should go on and submit another bill.
Mr. WOODHULL was opposed to re-consideration. This was a resolution to enforce a law which gentlemen tell us is disregarded. Then if we re-consider; would it not give greater impunity for disregarding the law?
Mr. MCCLURG did not understand that this was the only means of replenishing the treasury. If it did no good, it could do no harm. It seemed to him important to indicate to the county treasurers that they should be ready at the time to respond to a call for the revenue.
Mr. FISHER did not see any reflection here on the Committee on Ways and Means. But it would be improper for the Committee to introduce another bill to borrow money before the Senate have finally voted on the one al ready passed. He showed the urgency for money. The treasuries were almost empty all over the State. He hoped the resolution would be re-considered, if we could first devise means for replenishing the treasury. He thought, perhaps if we refuse to pass this resolution, it would urge the Senate's action on the bill of the House, to pass it, or refuse to pass.
Mr. JENKINSON had changed his mind. He should vole against re-considering. His treasurer, when he was asked for $1,000, had sent up $2,000.
Mr. PROSSER. The delinquent taxes had not been sent up.
Mr. FISHER. The Committee on Ways and Means were about ready to report a bill providing a penalty against delinquent treasurers.
Mr. PROSSER did not know how the finances were in his county; but if they had not the money, they had the staple of hoop-poles, and that would bring it. He desired the treasurers to live up to the law. He knew that the county treasurers never did send up the revenue till the State Treasurer's circular came. He had heard no valid argument against this resolution. He was utterly opposed to borrowing from the Sinking Fund, but he might be compelled tc vote for it as a last resort. We should not stultify ourselves by borrowing money, whilst the State revenue lies idle in the county treasurers' hands.
Mr. ORR. If the treasurer of Delaware county has any revenue in his hands, he will promptly respond. Was the Treasury now empty?
The SPEAKER. The drafts for the pay of members had not been honored. That was a pretty good indication of the condition of the Treasury.
Mr. ORR. If the county treasurers had been called on and failed what could be expected from a second call ? He would, however, vote to reconsider.
Mr. SMITH, of Bartholomew, had not changed his mind with respect to the treasurer of his county. Pie would be ready to respond at any time. He had a bill requiring the county treasurers to make report to the State Treasurer every month from December till April.
page: 136[View Page 136]Mr. NEBEKER demanded the previous question.
There was a second, and under its operation the vote adopting the resolution was reconsidered.
The SPEAKER stated his information that the resolution had been returned to the Senate.
On motion of Mr. FISHER, it was ordered that the Clerk ask for its return.
VISIT FROM THE PRESIDENT ELECT.
Mr. CAMERON, from the Select Committee on that subject, reported progess, correspondence and recomendation for arrangements for the reception of the President elect with suitable honors, on the 12 day of February.
The report was concurred in.
NEW BILLS.
Bills of the following captions were introduced and passed to the second reading:
By Mr. MCLEAN : (138) To repeal the Act of March 1, 1859, amendatory of the general city corporation law, and to restore the act of March 9, 1857.
By Mr. JENKINSON: (139) To enlarge the legal capacity of married women whose husbands are insane, and to enable them to make contracts as though they were not married.
By Mr. SHERMAN: (140) To authorize the President of the Sinking Fund Board to make deeds and certify mortgages in certain cages.
By Mr. ANDERSON: (141) To amend the 6th and 20th sections of the supervisor's act of March 5, 1859.
By Mr. EDSON : (142) To amend section 51 of the misdemeanor act of June 14, 1852.
By Mr. BUNDY. (143) To repeal the 9th section of the act of March 2, 1852, regulating fees and salaries.
By Mr. KNOWLTON: [144] To amend sec. 94 of the Assessment act.
By Mr. SMITH, of Bartholomew: [145] To amend the 33d section of the Assessment act of June 21, 1852.
By Mr. HEFFREN: [146] Supplemental to the Militia act, of June 14,1852, repealing secs. 3 to 20, and for a more perfect organization of the militia.
Mr. CAMERON made an ineffectual motion to read this bill by title, under a dispensation.
By Mr. McLEAN: [147] To amend section 68 of the general city corporation law.
By Mr. PARRETT: [148] Limiting the time within which prosecutions for crimes and misdemeanors may be commenced, and repealing all laws in conflict therewith.
By Mr. JONES, of Tippecanoe: [149] Providing for the election of a Surveyor General for the State of Indiana, and providing certain duties.
By Mr. JONES, of T.: [150] Providing for the election of County Surveyors, and prescribing their duties and fees, and providing for appeals.
By Mr. PROSSER: [151] To create the 14th Judicial Circuit.
By Mr. COLLINS, of Whitley: [152] amend section 19 of the act of March 5, 1859, fixing the times of holding the Common Courts, &c.
By Mr. SMITH, of Bartholomew: [153] To establish the second Judicial Circuit, and fix the times and terms of the Courts therein.
By Mr. BURGESS: [154] To amend the act of May 29, 1852, prescribing the powers and duties of Justices of the Peace in State prosecutions.
By Mr. UNDERWOOD: [155] Fixing the times fog holding the Circuit Court in the 12th Circuit, regulating the length of the terms thereof, and repealing all laws in conflict therewith.
By Mr. PARRETT: [156] Providing for the salaries and fees in the District and Common Pleas Courts, and repealing all former laws relating thereto.
By Mr. BLACK: [157] To amend so much of the act for equalizing appraisements for taxation as authorizes a State Board of Equalization.
By Mr. POLK: [158] To amend the 7th sec. of the act regulating the fees of officers, ap. proved March 2, 1855.
The House then adjourned.
IN SENATE.
THURSDAY, January 31,1861.Mr. NEWCOMB, from the Judiciary Committee, returned his bill [S. 5]-described on page 13 of the BREVIER REPORTS-recommending passage.
Mr. SHOEMAKER, from the Committee on County and Township Business, returned a resolution asking a change of the law making a transfer of deeds before their record: recommending legislation inexpedient.
Which reports were concurred in.
DISTRIBUTION OF THE SCHOOL FUND.
Mr. MURRAY offered a resolution, directing the Committee on Education to report an amendment to the school law requiring township trustees to make an annual equal distribution of the surplus school fund after the winter schools, for the purpose of carrying on a summer school.
Mr. M. said the object of the resolution was to make some provision by which the small children of the State could derive some benefit from the school fund.
Mr. MILLER, as chairman of the Committee, hoped an imperative resolution would not be directed to that Committee, as the common school system was now undergoing a complete revision in the hands of the Committee, and such a resolution would embarrass their action.
Mr. SHIELDS objected to the manner of distribution proposed in the resolution-he desired pro rata distribution.
page: 137[View Page 137]Mr. MURRAY insisted that the pro rata system of distribution is unconstitutional; and desired this to be a test question before the Senate.
Mr. JOHNSON thought the resolution was of no practical utility.
[A message from the Governor was received, transmitting resolutions passed by the Wisconsin Legislature, pledging co-operation in the defence and preservation of the Union.]
On motion of Mr. HAMILTON, the resolution was changed to one of inquiry.
The resolution, as amended was adopted.
FOURTH OF FEBRUARY CONVENTION.
Mr. LOMAX offered a resolution, instructing the Committee on Federal Relations to report at once a joint resolution providing for the appointment of Commissioners to the Border States Convention.
Mr. ANTHONY raised a point of order, that the resolution should go to the Committee on Federal Relations, under the rule, without debate.
After remarks by several Senators-
The PRESIDENT [Mr. Mellett in the Chair] so decided.
Mr. WOLFE appealed from the decision.
On motion by Mr. MURRAY, the appeal was laid on the table by yeas 26, nays 19.
Mr. COBB offered a resolution, excusing members of the Committee on Federal Relations from serving in the Senate until they make out their report in accordance with the resolution introduced by the Senator from Orange, [Mr. Lomax.]
The PRESIDENT. The Senate has taken no action upon the resolution of the Senator from Orange, and therefore I hold the resolution to be out of order.
Mr. COBB withdrew his resolution.
STATE DEBT AND STATE AGENT.
Mr. BEESON offered a resolution, which was adopted, requesting the State Treasurer to report the condition of the $104,052 37 suspended debt, also the $160,000 in the hands of the State Agent, and by what law it was put in his hands.
WABASH COMMON PLEAS.
Mr. CONNER introduced a bill [97] changing the time of holding Common Pleas Court in Wabash county, which was passed the first reading; rules suspended-yeas 44, nays 0- read the second time by title only; on his motion read the third time and finally passed by yeas 44, nays 0.
FEDERAL RELATIONS.
Mr. COBB offered a resolution excusing the Committee on Federal Relations from serving in the Senate until they can have time to consider the matters heretofore referred to them.
On motion by Mr. MURRAY the resolution was laid on the table-yeas 28, nays 16.
INTEREST ON SINKING FUND LOANS.
Mr. CRAVENS offered a resolution directing the Committee on Education to inquire into the expediency of providing by law for the annual distribution of interest received on loans by the Sinking Fund, &c.
SESSION HOURS AND ORDER OF BUSINESS.
Mr. TARKINGTON offered a resolution providing for but one session per dayfrom 9 till 1 o'clock.
Mr. BLAIR offered a resolution changing the daily order of business.
Which lie on the table for one day.
COURTS IN THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT.
Mr. CRAVEN, from the select committee thereon, returned bill [S. 74,] with an amendment recommending passage. On his motion the rules were suspended, the bill read the third time, and finally passed by yeaa 44, nays 0.
Mr. CULVER, from the Committee on County and Township Business, returned Mr. Miller's bill [S. 53,] recommending that it lie on the table.
The report was concurred in.
Mr. STEELE made an ineffectual motion to suspend the order of business far the purpose of taking up the loan bill.
On motion by Mr. STEELE the House message requesting a return of the joint resolution [S. 9] was taken up.
Mr. ANTHONY moved to accede to the request.
After remarks thereon by several Senators-
The motion was agreed to.
And then came the recess till 2.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
A message from the House announced the passage by that body of a joint resolution, [H. R. 29] authorizing the Governor to appoint five Commissioners to the Border States Convention of the 4th prox.
[The PRESIDENT laid before the Senate a communication from the President of the Board of Trustees of the Indiana University in answer to a Senate resolution of the 24th inst., relating to the condition of the University funds, which was read, laid on the table, and 100 copies ordered printed by consent.]
[A call of the Senate revealed the fact, that 42 members were present. Three absentees were sent for, and when they appeared, made humorous excuses, which were received by the Senate.]
The joint rssolution [H. R. 29] authorizing Commissioners to Washington, being read-
Mr. COBB moved to amend by striking out all that relates to the appointment by the Governor, and inserting the names of Thomas A. Hendricks, Cyrus L. Dunham, Henry S. Lane,, Caleb B. Smith and Wm. T. Otto.
On motion by Mr. ANTHONY, this amendment was laid on the table-yeas 27, nays 18.
Mr. ANTHONY made an ineffectual demand for the previous question.
Mr. WOLFE moved to amend by striking out all that part which trammels the action of page: 138[View Page 138] the Commissioners and by providing that their appointment shall be made by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.
On motion by Mr MURRAY, the amendments were laid on the table-yeas 27, nays 19.
Mr. COBB offered an amendment, submitting to the people on February 22d, the approval or rejection of the Crittenden proposition, as a direction for the action of these Commissioners.
The PRESIDENT. As a whole, the amendment is not in order.
Mr. MURRAY made an ineffectual demand for the previous question.
Mr. RAY offered an amendment, declaring the Crittenden proposition a fair basis for the action of these Commissioners.
On motion by Mr. BLAIR, the amendments were laid on the table-yeas 26, nays 19-a party vote.
Mr. President: In explaining the vote I am about to give, it is, perhaps, unncessary for me to say either to the Senate or the people I have the honor to represent, that I am utterly opposed to offering any compromise to the slave-holding States contemplating an amendment to the Constitution of the United States for the recognition of extension or slavery. While I hold a seat on this floor, I will never vote in favor of taking one step in that direction. By the restraints thrown around the action of this commission, they cannot commit the State of Indiana or the Republican party to any such proposition. The appointment of this commission, then, is a mere matter of policy. Though my judgment is opposed to it, as being of no practical utility, yet I acquiesce in it in obedience to the wishes of a majority of my political associates, and the earnest entreaties of Democratic Senators. I therefore vote in the affirmative.
Mr. WOLFE. I shall vote for the resolutions but I shall do it reluctantly for the reason that trammeled as those Commissioners will be they cannot effect much good. Indeed I am afraid they will not be permitted to act at all. My fears are that the number of States required by these resolutions will not be there. I do not do it because I myself want any change in the Constitution nor because I believe the State of Indiana needs any change, but simply because I believe such an act will be productive of good. I say further in voting for these resolutions that I do it because I believe it is determined that no other resolutions in any other shape will be permitted to be passed, therefore I take them as defective as I think they are rather than have no Commissioners appointed at all.
Mr. RAY gave notice that a minority here would enter their formal protest against these resolutions.
Mr. JONES. I shall vote for these resolutions because I know the public mind I represent is deeply agitated on this subject and any steps in the direction of compromise will be hailed with joy; and as nothing now accept, able can be obtained, I shall vote for the resolutions.
Mr. WILLIAMS moved to strike out in the resolutions all that relates to disfranchising the Commissioners unless nineteen States are represented in the Convention.
Mr. JOHNSON. These Commissioners will be subject to instructions from this Legislature, hence I shall vote for them. There has been a good deal of letting down on the part of my Republican friends in allowing these Commissioners to be appointed, and I think there will be more when we come to sending instructions.
On motion by Mr. MELLETT. The amendment was laid on the table-yeas 26, nays 19.
Mr. MARCH. Mr. President, relying upon my own judgment, and listening to the prophetic warnings of instinct, which I have found a safer guide than the deductions of logic whenever my pathway has grown dark I should vote against this resolution. I cannot, however, allow any one to go before me in devotion to the Constitution the Union and in readiness to do anything and everything calculated to hold up their falling pillars, and to sacrifice anything and everything for their preservation except the principles upon which they are founded. But the union of these States was not the work of politicians, nor was it built upon paper. It was the result of necessity, and of strong currents of patriotic and brotherly feeling running north and south, east and west, and which had been generated in the long, dreary struggle of the revolution. These were the necessities of commerce and finance, of international law and foreign intercourse. The necessities remain as strong as ever, but the currents of fraternal feeling have been broken, and jealousies and rivalries excited by the schemes of ambitious demagogues, and the blind servility of party, have taken their place. The meeting of these commissioners may increase the political imbroglio and multiply the points of difference. We also run the hazard in this kind of an outside and irresponsible convention, of having the fundamental principles of the government surrendered and sacrificed. I do not, however, despair of the Union, nor abandon the heretofore cherished hope of our great destiny.
I believe that there is yet sufficient centripetal force in the national government, when the laws of its creation,have fair room to work, uninterrupted by an imbecile executive and traitorous Cabinet and corrupt politicians, to draw every wandering star back to its orbit, and restore the system to its original harmony of action.In as much, however, as it is a mere question of policy and not of regard to the feelings of some of my political associates, and to ap page: 139[View Page 139]pease the apparent tenor of our Democratic friends. I shall vote for the resolution.
Mr SHIELDS. A few days since a gentleman has the confidence of the district which I have the honor to represent said to me, say to the Senate of Indiana that two thirds of the Republican party, and he is a Republican, thought the Crittenden proposition was the one that the Republicans of Southern Indiana demand.
Mr. CLAYPOOL. My better judgement is against this proposition, but out of a spirit of harmony to the end that I may act in perfect concert with my associates I have been willing to go with them for this measure. My reasons are divers: one is that it would strengthen the hands of our friends in the South; another is that it will stop a continuous noise on this floor, but the most masterly one of all is it will lick the wind out of Democratic sails.
Mr. LINE. I was well pleased to hear the venerable Senator from Parke [Mr. Steele (solo voce) don't call me "venerable,"-laughter] remark that this proposition has come from a republican caucus. I am not going to stand up here and say that proposition comes here covered all over with the slime of a republican caucus, but actuated by honorable and high minded considerations I shall vote for it, although I should vote for it more readily with some other provisions engrafted in it.
Mr. DICKINSON. In all my life with scarcely an exception have I ever found the promptings of nature to be a correct monitor. My convictions in this case are that I ought to vote "no." My republican associates, some out of general expediency, some out of privilege, think it their duty to vote "aye." I came here expecting to be governed by my republican associates on all questions of policy but never when they depart from principle. This I regard as a question of policy, but then it grasps directly hold of principle. Viewing, then, that as true, I feel compelled to vote "no" on the proposition and feel that I should fail to do myself or constituents justice if I do otherwise.
I vote "no," because I believe: 1st That the appointment of Commissioners unauthorized, and will be futile for any good ; 2d That my constituency are emphatically opposed to the measure, and 3d That the act is the first step to the debauchment and ultimate destruction of our free, glorious and once happy Union and government.
Mr. TURNER. I have always held it to be my duty and privilege to co-operate heartily and fully with my republican, friends. I have acted with that party from principle and not from personal motives; and acting in accordance with the dictates of my own judgment and conscience I feel it to be my duty so to do. But in this case I feel as though I was compiled, under the circumstances to vote against this measure, and I confess it is with reluctance I take this course. The appointment of these Commissioners I regard as suicidal to the very principles of the government which we have attempted to foster and uphold. It will result in no good. They will not agree upon any plan that will settle this question. In justice to my own fealings and in justice to the constituency which I nave the honor here freely to represent I must vote "no" on this question.
Mr. RAY was sorry to hear from the lips of one Senator after another who gave explanations of votes that his judgment is against the proposition and that it is only to preserve party harmony and in obedience to party dictations that he gives his vote ; and was amazed that higher motives were not prompting them. Mr. R. continued about 25 minutes.
Mr. MELLETT. I must be permitted to say my judgment is not in favor of the resolutions ; and in my judgment I am actuated by as patriotic motives, with all due respect to the gentleman as he or any other man; and I must be permited to say that no gentlman upon this floor, in my hearing or in the State of Indiana, in all the relations of life is more willing to yield to a spirit of concilation and compromise than I.
[A message from the House announced the passage by that body of Mr. Conner's bill [S.97](introduced and finally passed in the Senate this forenoon,)with amendments.]
Mr. M. continued for nearly an hour speaking particularly in answer to Mr. Ray.
The resolutions were adopted by yeas 43, nay 3viz: Senators Campbell, Dickinson and Turner.
And then the Senate adjourned.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
THURSDAY, January 31, 1861.PETITIONS AND MEMORIALS.
Mr. STOTSENBERG said he had received, by telegraph, instructions to present the memorial of the people of the city of New Albany, requesting the Legislature to respond to the call of the General Assembly of Virginia, by the appointment of commissioners to the Washington convention on the 4th of February."
Mr. ROBERTS presented the proceedings of a Union meeting lately held in the town of Aurora, requesting the appointment of commissioners on the part of the State of Indiana, o the Border State convention, to convene at Washington city on the 4th of February.
Mr. FERGUSON presented the petition of Uriah Ballard, and others, citizens and taxpayers of Monroe township, Morgan county, asking for the release of John Ballentine, late ownship treasurer, from the repayment of $180, lost by his depositing it in the Savings Bank of Indianapolis.
It was referred to the Committee on Claims.
Mr. TURNER presented the petition of Wm. page: 140[View Page 140] B. Matthews and Thomas Johnson, citizens and residents cf the State of Illinois, asking remuneration for expenses incurred by them ($324 60) in the capture of one S. B. Calhoun, a fugitive from justice from Marion county.It was referred to the Committee on Claims.
Mr. HOWARD presented the proceedings of a Union meeting held last Saturday at Charlestown, the county seat of Clark county. He added his own personal gratification in being made the medium of communicating the judgment of the people of his county in favor of some amicable adjustment of our National difficulties, and of the appointment of commissioners to the Washington convention.
Mr. CAMERON submitted an amendment to the rules-for one session a day-which lies over one day.
Mr. SMITH, of Bartholomew, presented a resolution, which was adopted, that the Judiciary Committee inquire into the expediency of so amending the law, that where suits have been brought, judgment obtained, and execution issued, no other person than the proper officer shall be allowed to receive the amount of the debt, &c.
Mr. ROBERTS presented the petition of A. J. Cotton, which was laid on the table.
Mr. JENKINSON presented a letter from John L. Smithmyer, architect, employed by the Select Committee on the Northern State Prison to measure the work, &c., asking for authority to give him the right to examine all papers, contracts, estimates, drawings, &c., pertaining to said prison, now in the hands of liny of the officers thereof, or in the hands of the officers of State; accompanied with a joint resolution giving him that authority.
The joint resolution was adopted.
[A message from the Governor here transmitted the report of the commissioner appointed by the last General Assembly to investigate the office of the Agent of State in the city of New York.]
Mr. PROSSER submitted an order to limit speech in debate on the expected report of the Committee of Thirteen to ten minutes, which he subsequently withdrew.
On motion of Mr. VEATCH, the special order, viz : the consideration of the proposition for five additional bank districts, was postponed.
Mr. KENDRICK presented a memorial, embracing the account of George W. Griffith ($575 75) for repairs in the Library, which was referred to the Committee on Claims.
REPORTS FROM THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE.
By Mr. VEATCH: Returning Mr. Branham's bill [1]-embezzlement bill-with verbal amendments, and two additional sect-ions, to the following effect:
SEC. 8. That if the Auditor of State draw his warrant on. the treasury when there is no money in the treasury belonging to the particular fund to pay it, in conformity with appropriations made by law, he shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and, upon conviction if fined not less than $100 nor more than $1000, and imprisoned not less than one month nor more than six months.
SEC. 9. That if the Treasurer of State shall use the money of any particular fund for auy other purpose than that for which it has bee set apart and appropriated, he shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and, upon conviction shall be fined not less than $100 nor more than $5000, and imprisoned not less than one month nor more than six months.
The amendments were concurred in.
On motion by Mr. BRANHAM, the bill was laid on the table, 300 copies were ordered to be printed, and it was made the special order for Tuesday next at 2 o'clock.
By Mr. WOODHULL: Returning Mr. Cason's bill [35] to amend section 238 of the practice act, with the expression of opinion by the majority of the Committee, that it be laid on the table.
The report was concurred in.
By Mr. HEFFREN: Returning Mr. Speaker Allen's bill [13] for refunding license money illegally collected, with amendments, striking out the words, "with interest thereon from the time of payment," and adding a section 1 making it the duty of the commissioners to refund money collected from parties carrying on business in stocks and exchange.
The amendment was adopted and the bill ordered to be engrossed.
By Mr. EDSON: Returning the bill to amend section 466 of the practice act, and recommending its indefinite postponement. [The bill'was to provide that the sheriff may sell real estate on the premises instead of at the Court House.]
By Mr. WOODHULL:. Returning Mr. McClurg's bill [75] to amend section 412 of the practice act, and reporting such legislation inexpedient, and that the bill lie on the table.
By Mr. HEFFREN : Returning Mr. Moss's bill [21] to amend section 421 of the practice act, recommending indefinite postponement.
These reports were severally concurred in.
By Mr. EDSON , Returning Mr. Williams's bill [2,] declaring it to be a felony to let down fences and destroy cattle guards on the lines of railroads, reporting that the same lie on the table, and a substitute therefor, viz; a bill [159] declaring it to be a misdemeanor to leave open gates, let down fences, or destroy cattle-guards along the lines of railroads, and establishing a penalty therefor.
The report was concurred in, and the new bill passed to the second reading.
By Mr. CASON: Returning Mr. Black's resolution for defining an assault, and reporting a bill [160] to amend section one of the act with reference to misdemeanors punishable by a justice of the peace, approved June 17, 1852, which was passed to the second reading.
By Mr. WOODHULL: Returning Mr. At page: 141[View Page 141]kisson's bill [66] to amend section 476 of the practice act, with a recommendation of indefinite postponement.
The report was concurred in.
By Mr. VEATCH: Returning Mr. Jenkinson's bill [5] limiting the power of county commissioners in the assessment and collection of taxes, with a majority of the Commitee recommending indefinite postponement.
Mr. JENKINSON submitted a minority report insisting that the bill has merits, and if it becomes a law, it will induce economy in site county expendiures, prevent recklessaths, &c.
He said that the bill was one of the most important that the House would be called to legislate upon. The county of Allen had levied a county tax, last year, of ninety cents to the $100, and this year of sixty cents, whilst the average of the county taxes in the State was only thirty cents. He had a deep interest in the success of this bill, which limited the amount that could be levied by the county commissioners to fifty cents on the $100. For its passage he was in market, ready to reciprocate any aid that might be given him to pass the bill. Some members had court houses to see to, but these could be built under his law, with some delay. But if the county commissioners are to have no limit imposed on their power to levy taxes, they may take all a person has, and no such power should be granted them. It is said that the proper remedy is with the people, to elect a board of commissioners that reflects their opinions and wishes, but they are often deceived in the persons they may select. Hence these officers should not have the unlimited power conferred upon them. He called upon the friends of economy to give us this bill, and relieve the farmers of this State from paying rent instead of tax, and warned his Republican friends that if it was defeated, there would not be fifty Republicans left in Allen county. The bill had merits, and be wished its consideration to be laid over till Friday of next week.
Mr. FISHER suggested that the difficulties in Allen could be relieved by the people electing Republican officers; and he understood that they had taken it in hand and rendered this extraordinary legislation nearly unnecessary, by the election of a Republican county treasurer last October. [Laughter.]
Mr VEATCH said that the evil complained of was a local one, and it was not right to tie the hands of all the counties in consequence A majority of the committee were perfectly willing to yield to the gentleman from Allen all they could. But they considered it improper to enact a law that should govern and restrain the whole State merely to suit the views of the people of Allen. If the principle of the bill was right, we ought to take the power of taxation entirely out of the hands of the Board of Commissioners. We ought to have no bounty Commissioners, and repose this power somewhere else. Did he understand the gentleman to say that if we do not pass this bill, there will not be 50 Republicans left in Allen? Then suppose we do not pass it. The Democracy will have the control in Allen county, and certainly they can fix it to suit themselves. Who shall restrain the people? Besides they might have useful purposes to accomplish, as the building of Court Houses; and for such purposes the commissioners should have power to levy sufficient taxes, even as high as $1 on the $100 valuation. The hands of all should not be tied to accommodate the peculiar circumstances in Allen. From this view the committee made their report against the passage of the bill.
Mr. JENKINSON. If the bill don't pass, the pledge of Republicans on the stump will not be regarded. He exhorted them to be careful of their pledges.
Mr. BUNDY moved to suspend the order of business for the report of the Committee of Thirteen.
The motion was agreed to: and thereupon-
STATE OF THE UNION.
Mr. BUNDY from a majority of the Select Committee of Thirteen, reported back the Senate joint resolution No. 7 on the present condition of National Affairs, without amendment, and a recommendation that the same do pass.
The joint resolution was read by the Clerk. [See pages 57 and 58 of these Reports.]
Mr. BUNDY, in behalf of a majority of the same Committee, also returned the Virginia resolutions, stating that numerous other matters referred to them, with reference to the preservation of the Union, now before them, would be acted on at an early day, and reporting a new joint resolution [29] rehearsing the call of the State of Virginia, and other States, to unite in an earnest effort to adjust the present unhappy Federal controversy in the same spirit in which the Constitution of the United States was formed, in. a Convention of Commissioners from all the States to be held in the City of Washington on the 4th day of February, if it be possible to agree upon some plan of adjustment: and whereas, some States have responded to this call; therefore resolved, &c., That we accept the invitation of the State of Virginia in a spirit of fraternal feeling; and the Governor of this State is empowered to appoint five Commissioners to meet the Commissioners appointed by other States, &c. But restraining said Commissioners from acting so as to bind the State of Indiana, till nineteen other of the States shall have accredited their Commissioners to said Convention. That while we are not prepared to assent to the terms proposed by the State of Virginia, and have entire confidence that the Constitution of the United States contains ample provisions within itself for the correction of the evils complained of; still we are disposed to respect the pacific desire of the State of Virginia, and other States, evinced hy send page: 142[View Page 142]ing their Commissioners to the proposed Convention. But, as the time fixed is so near at hand that it must be impossible for all the States to be represented, it is expected that the Commissioners on behalf of this State will request the Convention to adjourn and give time for the delegations. That the Governor transmit copies, &c.
Mr. HEFFREN, in behalf of the minority of said Committee, submitted the following :
Mr. SPEAKER
: The undersigned, the minority of the Select Committee of Thirteen, to whom was referred the resolution proposing that this House adopt as their sentiments the proposition offered in the United States Senate by the Hon. John J. Crittenden, and to whom was referred the various resolutions of the House upon Federal Affairs, would report the following as their views upon the same:
They would say, without intending to cast any reflection upon the presiding officer of this House in the formation of said committee, that, in their opinion, justice, as well as all parliamentary usage and law, would say that the friends of the original proposition should have a majority upon the committee, and more especially when the original proposition or resolution was the Crittenden amendments. Afterward, a multitude of propositions and resolves were referred to said committee, upon which the committee once made a unanimous report, which was afterward recommitted. Upon all of the various propositions we will not speak in detail; but, being moved by an imperative sense of duty to our common country, we ask prompt action upon some scheme of adjustment that will preserve the Federal Union and restore tranquility to the country. Entertaining the most profound convictions of the blessings, as well as the threatened dangers of the Union, they are willing to make great sacrifices to perpetuate the one and avert the other.
At a time like this, when the foundations of the National Government are shaken, and its pillars are crumbling away, it is the solemn duty of every patriot of the land to discard all specious fallacies in regard to slavery-all blind resentments for supposed aggressions-all prided sectional animosities, and all partisan criminalities, and forgetting the mutual provocations of the past, bring all offensive doctrines and platforms all abstract theories and barren creeds-as sacrifices upon the altar of a common country.
The undersigned, entertaining these views, have been and now are willing to sacrifice their former political ideas, notions and opinions upon the altar of their country, for the sake of preserving the heritage our fathers left us. They are pained to witness the present excited and alarming state of the public mind, yet common justice seems to require that we should revert to the history of the past and see what it is that has brought our nation to the verge of dissolution. In doing so we must say that the continued agitation in Congress, the State Legislatures, and before the people by fanatical vagabonds, about the present alarming condition of affairs, anti-slavery lecturers, orators and stump speakers have, it seems to us, done all in their power to aid and assist in the great drama, and even professed ministers of God, men who hypocritically pretend to be ambassadors of the Most High, have descended, from their lofty position and prostituted their talents and the pulpit, soild the robes of religion, disgraced decency and outraged morality, by their infamous and hellish harangues to aid in the unholy and unchristian cause of bringing about contention and strife. Their whole theme has been of the wrongs another race upon whose very form the God creation has stamped the impress of inferiority that of the whites, and by their lectures, speech and sermons have pertinaciously continued the crusade until we now stand, as it were, upon the slumbering volcano with its hot, boiling lava rolling and thundering beneath our feet, and wanting but a breath to overwhelm all in a common ruin. Such is the terrible condition of our country to-day, and to this has she been brought by demagogues and fanatics until a portion of the people of the Union seek to preserve the rights by secession. Star after star has fallen in quick succession from the national firmanent and soon more will follow unless the gaping bleeding wounds of our country are staunched. Can we even hope for a return to justice by the North? We fear not. Madness seems to rule the day, the hour; reason and discretion seem to have fled their seats and left the impulses and passions of man to run riot. Love of country seems to be forgotten and patriotism banished from the hearts of men. Confusion and discord appear on every hand.
In this condition of our country, in the present disordered exigencies of the hour, the undersigned believe that every effort for conciliation should be exhausted, every offer of compromise duly and fairly considered and well examined; that we should meet our brethren of the South as patriot? and lovers of a common country, who, while sternly and properly protecting their own rights and liberties, would not infringe upon ours; that each and all should sacrifice partisan prejudices and opinions, however much we may dislike so to do so, for the good of our country, and accept any offer which is honorable and calculated to save the country and the liberties of the people, seems to us a plain duty as well as a patriotic one. In holding these views the undersigned would accept and respond to the invitation of Virginia for the appointment of Commissioners to confer with others at Washington City on the 4th of next February, and would accept the propositions known as the Crittenden, border State, or any other just and honorable scheme of conciliation and adjustment which will save the Union and forever settle the slavery question.
They would further say that they believe this Government "derives its just powers from the consent of the governed," and that it would become subversive of the very spirit of liberty and of natural right to attempt, by the strong arm of Federal power, backed up as it would be by the army and navy to coerce or compel the people of any State or States to remain an integral part of a Government they desire to separate from, and that we can not view but with serious alarm any attempt upon the part of the General Government to make vassels and serfs of the freemen of the country, to do homage to a great power at the
page: 143[View Page 143]point of the sabre or bayonet. If such a course should be pursued, and be successful, the free citizen of Indiana would have of his liberties worth the name, and when a dominant party, placed in upon the very question which is now disrupting the Government, attempts to enforce its political creeds and dogmas at the point of the bayonet and at the cannon's mouth, it becomes every freeman to say whether he will assist in the hellish scheme or whether he will stand idly by and see despotism flourish, or whether he shall take the part and espouse the cause of those who shoulder their arms to protect and preserve their rights and liberties. We believe we will be safe in saying that we speak the sentiments of more than one hundred thousand of the freemen of Indiana, that we will not assist in the scheme, that we will not stand idly by, but remembering the illustrious examples of their fathers, fight to keep the fires of equal rights, justice and liberty burning Yet, desirous as we are of preventing any collision between the people of any State or States and the Federal Government, or between the people of the several States, to avoid the horrors of & civil war with all its conconimitant train of evils, to avoid the shedding of blood, the ravaging of villages, the sacking of cities, and preserve and if possible transmit unimpaired to our posterrity, the best Government ever established, maintain our station among the nations of the earth and still preserve our land and nation as an asylum for the oppressed of all nations, would report for adoption the following joint resolution:
Be it resolved, by the General Assembly of the State of Indiana, That in the opinion of this General Assembly, commissioners should be appointed to meet commissioners of other States, on the 4th of February next, in accordance with the request of the General Assembly of Virginia, and that Henry S. Lane, Caleb B. Smith, William T. Otto, Cyrus L. Dunham and Thomas A. Hendricks be and they are hereby appointed such commissioners to proceed to Washington City without delay, to meet the commissioners of other States, to consult upon the present alarming condition of the country, and that they report their action to this General Assembly.
Be it further resolved, That we accept, as a basis of settlement, the propositions of Hon. John J. Crittenden, made in the Senate of the United States.
Be it further resolved, That our Senators in Congress be instructed, and our Representatives be requested to use all their influence to have said propositions accepted by Congress, and that they do all in their power to have a convention of delegates to amend the Constitution.
Be it further resolved, That the people of Indiana should have occasion to express their opinions upon said propositions at the ballot-box; therefore, we do recommend the passage of a law, as soon as possible, to allow the people to vote for or against such proposition, on the 22d day of February next.
Resolved further, That we are willing to accept any honorable measures of pacification of tne present difficulties to save our country, the Union and the Constitution.
H. HEFFREN, C. B. KNOWLTON, LEWIS PROSSER, WM. E. McLEAN, M. JENKINSON.
The SPEAKER. The Chair is satisfied that no personal reflections could have been intended in the minority report, just read. The Chair recognizes fully the doctrine laid down in the report. The Chair may have misapprehended the object for which the Commiteee was raised. He is of opinion the object was to devise some means by which the present unhappy federal difficulties may be settled within the Constitution; and, with that understanding of the object, he is not conscious of having violated any parliamentary rule in the appointment of the Committee.
Mr. STOTSENBERG suggested that it was important that immediate action should be had on the second series of resolutions reported by the majority-the joint resolution [29] with respect to the appointment of Commissioners.
Mr. VEATCH submitted an order, which was adopted, limiting speech in debate on said resolutions to thirty minutes, and closing the debate next Friday.
[Mr. Boydston, Mr. Smith, of Bartholomew, and Mr. Holcomb obtained leave of absence for two days.]
On the motion of Mr. STOTSENBERG, the joint resolution [29] was taken up. lie then proposed to concur, with an amendment, inserting after the word "represented," to the following effect:
Whereas, the southernmost States of the Confederacy have dissolved their connection with the Government of the United States; and whereas, it is to be feared that other of the Southern States will shortly take the same steps, unless some gnaranteee of their rights can be agreed upon that will meet the approbation of the conservative masses, and bring back the seceding States into the Union; and whereas, the plan of adjustment, proposed by the Hon. John J. Crittenden is known to bs acceptable to them, and they have been recommended by numerous Union meetings held in the State of Indiana and other Northern States; and whereas, the people are the source of all political power, and it is proper and right that an expression of the views of the people of the State of Indiana should he made on the Crittenden propositions, to serve as a guide for the action of her commissioners in said convention ; therefore,
Resolved, That, said propositions be submitted to the people of the State of Indiana at, a special election to be held on the 22d day of February next, and that at such election the electors of the State at large shall proceed to vote either For the Crittenden Propositions and the substance thereof, or Against the Crittenden Propositions and the substance thereof.
Mr. STOTSENBERG said that so far as the appointment of the Commissioners is concerned, there was no difference as to the propriety of sending them, but there was a great difference as to the instructions to bo given to them. The report of the majority contained page: 144[View Page 144] no definite basis of settlement, upon which the compromise was to be made by the Convention of Delegates. The report intimates that the minds of the Committee have not yet been made up on this matter. It leaves untouched that difficult question upon which rested the pacification of the country. In this perilous condition, what better can be done than to refer the whole question to the people of the State ? So far as we have heard from them, and many meetings have been held, they have spoken out in favor of the Crittenden amendments. These contain the only proposition of compromise considered by the people. If their voice is heard from Indiana, it will have a powerful influence in composing the strife between the States.
The yeas and nays were demanded and taken thereon, resulting-yeas 38, nays 60-as follows:
AYES-Messrs. Atkisson, Black, Boydston, Brett, Clark, Collins, of Huntington, Combs, Dashiel, Davis, Edson, Fleming, Ford, Gifford, Hayes, Heffren, Holcomb, Horton, Howard, Jenkinson, Kitchen, Knowlton, Lods, McClurg, McLean, Moss, Mutz, Owens, Packard, Pitts, Polk, Prosser, Prow, Robbins, Roberts, Smith, of Bartholomew, Stevenson, Stotsenberg, Trier, and Warrum-38.
NAYS-Messrs. Anderson, Bingham, Branham, Brucker, Bryan, Bundy, Burgess, Cameron, Campbell, Cason, Collins, of Adams, Cooprider, Grain, Epperson, Erwin, Feagler, Ferguson, Fisher, Fordyce, Fraley, Frasier, Gore, Gresham, Grover, Hall, Harvey, Haworth, Henricks, Hopkins, Hudson, Kurd, Jones, of Tippecanoe, Jones, of Vermillion, Jones, of Wayne, Kendrick, Lane, Lee, Lightner, Moody, Moorman. Nebeker, Newman, Orr, Ragan, Randall, Sherman, Sloari, Smith, of Miami, Thomas, Thompson, Turner, Underwood, Veatch, Wells, Williams, Wilson, Woodhull, Woodruff, Woods, and Mr. Speaker-60.
So Mr. Stotsenberg's amendment was rejected.
Mr. STOTSENBERG proposed again to amend, by striking out the words, "while we are not prepared to accept the terms of settlement proposed by the State of Virginia," and inserting these words, " while we at present express no opinion on the terms," &c.
Mr. PROSSER proposed to amend the amendment, by striking out "nineteen States," and inserting "ten States."
The SPEAKER decided the latter out of order.
Mr. Stotseriberg's amendment was rejected by-yeas 38, nays 60.
Mr. HEFFREN proposed to amend, by taking the appointment of the commissioners from the Governor, and naming them in the resolution, viz.: Henry S. Lane, Caleb B. Smith, Wm. T. Otto, Cyrus L. Dunham and Thomas A. Hendricks, be and they are hereby appointed said Commissioners, and that they report their acts and doings to this General Assembly, and that all that part of the joint resolutions which prevents the Commissioners from acting until nineteen States are represented, be stricken out.
Mr. HEFFREN. Mr. Speaker, I have but a very few words to say, and shall reserve what further I have to offer, till we come to the discussion of the entire report. While the General Assembly is in session, I see no reason or justice in putting into this joint resoultion a transfer of the power of this into the hand of one man. I for one have been always and will be always opposed the one-man power. When Andrew Jackson was President, we heard a great deal said by the enemies of the Democratic the one-man power. But a change here seems to have come over the spirit of their dreams. While I believe Governor Morton actuated by a desire to do his and especially his party some service in these appointments, I am still unwilling to put this power into his hands. I prefer to appoint by the Legislature a man who has just been elected by about 10,000 majority, Governor of the State-a man of whom it has been the pride of the Republican party to follow wherever he dared to lead, and who has been but the other day elected here by Republican votes to the highest position, which by his acknowledged talents he is fitted to adorn. Why is it that Republicans here should be afraid to trust such a man ? Why should gentlemen be afraid to trust William T. Otto, a man of the first order of talents, and who was never suspected of being contaminated with Democracy ? And why should they be afraid to trust that other man whose locks are white with years, and whose brow they are now endeavoring to encircle with the honors of the Secretaryship of the Interior? When men like these are proposd, why is it that you are afraid to send them to Washington in these times of peril, to see if there may not yet be devised some scheme of adjustment and compromise to save the Union. I offer also two Democrats. But rather than there should be a waiver of this principle of appointment, I would beg to add two other Republicans in their places. I would be willing to say, send five Republicans; but, in God's name, give the representatives of the people the right to say who they want to represent them in this most important and responsible mission. Why tarn these appointments over to the hands of one man ? I cast no reflections on the Governor. I have heard imputation! cast upon former Governors because of too much power lodged in their hands. But we have no assurance who he will appoint. Here we recognize the right of the majority which the Republican party have gained at the polls. This amendment offers men of your own choice, distinguished for talent and public service; and I for one am willing to lay aside my Democracy for the time, so far as to be willing to vote for these men. And it will be the first time in my life that I ever voted for a man opposed to my party. And I am willing to add two more. Why then, I repeat, will you not trust yourselves and your own and your country's cause in the hands of your own trusted leaders? Are you afraid of your own shadow? afraid that your own hearts will swerve from the path of duty and recti page: 145[View Page 145]tude? Have you more confidence in the Executive than you have in yourselves? It seems to that these questions come home to you. Besides this, the State Constitution prescribes that the officers shall be elective; and also, all Governor cannot appoint when the Legsilature is in session. Why not let a spirit of harmony once prevail in these halls, and it us strike hands like brothers in this hour of our country's peril? Why not recognize our constitutional rights as represenatives of the people of Indiana, and act, upon those rights in the selection of these commissioners to act in the name of the people ? The other amendment which I propose strikes out the provision that these commissioners shall not act until nineteen States shall be represented. I think that kills be whole thing. I have no idea that so many as nineteen States will be represented in the Washington convention. Have we no desire to take part in the consultations of that body ? Then, in the name of justice, let us not tie up the hands of our commissioners, and say that they shall not act until nineteen States shall be represented. Sir, I am opposed to the resolutions on these grounds; and I can not allow them to pass without making an effort to resist this restriction, and proposing that the Legislature shall make the selection of these commissioners. I think that is the true doctrine. And I say, take your five commissioners, gentlemen; you have got the power, and we accord it cheerfully. Take and send your own men, and our hearts shall go with them into the chamber of their consultations at Washington. And if they can all be convinced that the Southern States have no right to be heard-no rights that ought to be respected-then I shall be ready to vote with you and say that the people have no right to be heard, and their representatives ought to be mere automatons in the hands of the Governor! I say again, in a spirit of friendship to the majority here, give us these commissioners-three Republicans and two Democrats, or give us five Republicans; but give us a voice in saying who they shall be, and then untie their hands. When you shall have done that, I am willing to go with you for the report. I do hope, sir, that our mouths will not be closed as to the choice of the commissioners-that the mouths of the representatives of freemen will not be closed, and themselves transferred, like cattle in the shambles, by a Governor who holds his office now by an accident.
Mr. DOBBINS was satisfied that Henry S. Lane and other Republicans named in the amendments would not fairly represent the people in the Washington convention; but still, for the sake of reciprocating the invitation to an amicable adjustment of National difficulties, he would vote for them. He would even vote for five Republican commissioners, father than refuse to make an expression in favor of the perpetuation of our National Union.
The amendment was rejected by the same votes-yeas 38, nays 60.
Mr. PROSSER proposed to amend, by striking out all that relates to the appointment of Commissioners, and inserting Henry S. Lane, Caleb B. Smith, Wm. S. Otto, John P. Usher, and Thomas S. Stanfield.
This was rejected by-yeas 36, nays 60.
Mr. EDSON proposed to amend, by inserting a clause requiring the Governor to make the appointments at his earliest convenience; and requiring the Commissioner so appointed to proceed immediately to Washington, &c.
Mr. DAVIS proposed to amend further by striking out "19," and inserting "ten," but withdrew upon recollecting that this had been voted down.
Mr. EDSON said it did seem to him his resolution should have favor. He was in earnest. Much depended on our action to-day. There was nothing of a partizan character in his amendment. The only question was as to time. He exhorted all to join in this effort. There was but one way, in the opinion of many, in which the Cotton States could be brought, and that was coercion, He was for conciliation, and had hope in the Border States Convention. The Legislature would be in session at the same time with that Convention, and our Commissioners could communicate and advise with this body hereafter. Everything depended on immediate action.
Mr. GRESHAM saw no necssity for the amendment. There was no doubt the Commissioners would be speedily appointed.
Mr. EDSON had understood differently.
The SPEAKER reminded Mr. Edson of that part of the resolution which requires the Commissioners to be there and ask for an adjournment till other States might come in.
Mr. HEFFREN proposed to amend the amendment, by adding, "and we accept as a basis of settlement the Crittenden propositions offered in the Senate of the United States."This last was rejected by yeas 38, nays 60.
Mr. EDSON then had leave to withdraw his amendment.
Mr. HEFFREN now again proposed other Commissioners, viz.: Henry S. Lane, William T. Otto, Caleb B. Smith, William K. Edwards, James E. Blythe.
Mr. SMITH, of Bartholomew, would strike out "Caleb B. Smith."
Mr. FRASIER gave notice that if this course was further persisted in, he would demand the previous question.
The SPEAKER, Tbe previous question would not be in order, because a resolution has been passed limiting the time when debate should close.
Mr. BUNDY moved to lay Mr. Fisher's amendment on the table.
It was agreed to, and the question recurred on Mr. Heffren's amendment. The yeas and page: 146[View Page 146] nays being demanded and taken thereon, resulted-yeas 36, nays 60; so the amendment was rejected.
[A message from the Senate returned their joint resolution directing the Treasurer of State to call in the revenue.]
The question was now taken by yeas and nays on the adoption of the joint resolution [29] reported by the majority of the Committee, resulting-yeas 90, nays 5-as follows
AYES-Messrs. Anderson, Atkinson, Bingham, Black, Branham, Brett, Brucker, Bryan, Bundy, Burgess, Cameron, Campbell, Cason, Clark, Collins, of Adams, Collins, of Huntington, Combs, Cooprider, Grain, Dashiel, Davis, Edson, Epperson, Erwin, Feagler, Ferguson, Fisher, Fleming, Ford, Fordyce. Fraley, Gifford, Gore, Gresham, Grover, Hall, Harvey, Haworth, Hayes, Henricks. Holcomb, Hopkins, Horton, Hudson, Kurd, Jenkinson, Jones, of Tippecanoe, Jones, of Vermillion, Jones, of Wayne, Kendrick, Lane, Lee, Lightner, McClurg. McLean, Moody, Moorman, Moss, Mutz, Nebeker, Newman, Orr, Owens, Packard, Pitts, Polk, Prosser, Prow, Ragan. Randall, Bobbins, Roberts, Sherman, Sloan, Smith, of Miami, Stevenson, Stotsenberg, Trier, Thomas, Thompson, Turner, Underwood, Veatch, Warrum, Wells, Williams, Wilson, Woodhull, Woodruff, and Mr. Speaker-90.
NAYS-Messrs. Heffren, Howard, Kitchen, Lods, and Woods.
Messrs. Dobbins, Edson, McLean, Owens, Packard, Polk, Robbins, Roberts, Stotsenberg, and others voted affirmatively under protest. They did not like the report, but desired the commissioners.
Messrs. Heffren, Kitchen and Smith, of Bartholomew, made brief explanations for their negative vote.
Mr. COLLINS, of Adams, voted for the resolution authorizing the Governor to appoint five commissioners, &c., &c., for the reason 1st. That the Union is above all price. 2nd. The invitation of Virginia is friendly and patriotic, and should be responded to. 3rd. I vote for the resolution- because 1 think it is the best thing we can get in this General Assembly; and 4th. I entertain some hope that the commissioners whom the Governor may appoint will become more patriotic, when they get beyond the influence of this Legislature and its surroundings.
Mr. POLK. In voting in favor of the resolutions reported by the majority of the Committee of Thirteen, favoring the sending of Commissioners to meet the Commissioners oi Virginia at Washington, on the 4th day of February next, I did not consent that those Commissioners go in any way trammeled in their action, which the resolutions do, by plain implication : Nor did I consent to the unfair requirement that nineteen States shall be represented before said Commissioners shall act. for the reason that no more than nine slaveholding States, which still acknowledge their allegiance to the Federal Constitution, will be represented ; hence the non-slaveholding States must necessarily control the Convention at the start. To say the least of it, it shows an unwillingness on the part of the State of Indiana to meet her sister States of the South on an equality. I, therefore, make this my protest.
Mr. STOTSENBERG said: While I have individual confidence, which cannot be shaken by partizan feelings, that the Governor will appoint good men, I would have preferred that the General Assembly could have appointed them. I am not desirous to vote that we prepared to assent to the terms proposed bv Virginia, because I believe we ought not to bind the Commissioners in such a manner, in the face of the innumerable petitions and requests of our people, which have been poured in upon us, and because I think that, as the resolutions themselves contemplate delay, we ought to give the people of our State an opportunity to be heard on the question of adopting or rejecting the Crittenden propositions, as there is ample time therefor.
But rather than not respond to the patriotic call of our old mother, Virginia, I will vote for the resolutions, for I am anxious that & commission should be appointed somehow and in some manner.
Mr. ROBERTS (explaining.) Mr. Speaker; I believe that the people of my county, irrespective of party, are in favor of the appointment of commissioners to the Border States' convention, to be held at the city of Washington on the 4th of next February. In view of this fact, sir, and also of the fact that the majority report of the Committee of Thirteen contemplates the appointment of commissioners, though in a manner somewhat objectionable, I shall vote aye, reserving to myself the right of entering on record my objections to he report in the main.
So the report of the majority was concurred in.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
Mr. GROVER (under a suspension of the order of business moved by Mr. Moody,) returned Mr. Moody's bill [119,] concerning the state, county, township, and road tax of Newton and Jasper counties, recommending its passage; and the same was ordered to be engrossed.
On motion by Mr. MOODY, it was (under a dispensation of the constitutional provision) considered as engrossed and passed the first reading in the House-ayes 79, nays 2.
On motion by Mr. FISHER (by unanimous consent,) the bill [S. 79] fixing the times of Common Pleas in the counties of Wabash, Miami, Coss, Fulton and Kosciusko, with his amendment, "making all writs, papers, &c., issued by the Wabash Common Pleas, returnable," &c., was passed through the several stages in the House of Representatives-yeas 90, nays 0.
Mr. SMITH, of Bartholomew, from his committee, reported a bill [161] to amend the 11th section of the treasury system act of March 1, 1859, and it was passed to the second reading.
On motion by Mr. McLEAN, it was ordered that 200 copies of Mr. Veatch's bill for five additional bank districts be printed for the use of the House.
