BREVIER LEGISLATIVE REPORTS
BY ARIEL & W. H. DRAPIER
Vol. IV INDIANAPOLIS, FEB. 22, 1861 No. 15
the sinking fund commissioners from the provisions of the bill.
Mr. NEWCOMB submitted further instructions to so amend that the penalties of the bill relating to the disposal of the public funds shall not take effect till proper vaults shall be provided for the safe keeping of said funds; also, that deposits may be made in solvent banks in the name of the State, upon satisfactory assurances that the money shall be paid on demand, the interest to go to the State.
Mr. N. said: The great complaint has not been so much in depositing monies as in making loans, thus hazarding the funds in their hands. So far as losses have occurred from deposits, they have been by seeking out the wildcat banks that would give the highest rate of interest. I think there is a hardship in requiring these officers to keep the moneys on hand without having the proper means of securing it. I venture that any experienced burglar could go into the State Treasurer's office, and get out every cent of money in three hours. The security of public funds could be better obtained by allowing its deposit, than by putting it in insecure safes.
Mr. MARCH. I presume any bank wishing to borrow money can get tho proper security. We are setting guards around the public treasuries of the State, great and small: let us make no distinction. I am opposed to the amendment in every shape and form.
On motion by Mr. WAGNER, the bill and pending amendments were referred to the Finance Committee.
Mr. LINE submitted further instructions, which were also referred, to make all custodians of public moneys amenable to law.
[Mr. CONLEY offered a joint resolution, appropriating $10,000 to the aid of sufferers in Western Missouri and Kansas: but objection being made, he withdrew it.]
BANKS AND BANKING.
The Senate resumed the consideration of Senator Claypool's bill [86]-described on page 105 of these Reports-pending at the adjournment of yesterday. The question being on Mr. Tarkington's amendment to Mr. Anthony's amendment-both submitted yesterday-
Mr. CONLEY moved to lay the amendment on the table.
Mr. ANTHONY demanded a division of the question.
The amendment to the amendment was laid on the table.
The amendment was also laid on the table.
Mr. COBB moved to amend by adding a clause compelling banks to receive their issues in payment of debts due them.
The amendment was agreed to by consent.
The Committee report was then concurred in by consent.
WORK FOR COMMITTEES.
Senate bills were read the second time and referred to committees, as follows:
Messrs. O'Brien's 161, De Hart's 163; Dickinson's 168, Newcomb's 170, Ferguson's 174, Conley's 176 and Slack's 178. To the Judiciary.
Messrs. Carnahan's 164, Slack's 171 and 175 were ordered engrossed.
Mr. Berry's 165-Corporations.
Mr. Turner's 167-Roads.
Mr. Beeson's 169-Agriculture.
Mr. Wagner's 172-Printing.
Mr. Lomax's 173-Federal Relations.
[Mr. O'Brieri's [177] changing the time of holding the common pleas courts in Dearborn county-rules suspended-yeas 41, nays 0 read the third time and finally passed by yeas 41, nays 1.]
House bill 86-Organization of Courts.
House bill 119-ordered engrossed.
PERFECT TITLES TO RAILROADS.
Senator Hamilton's bill 31-see page 45 of these Reports-being read the third time-
Mr. CONNER. The purpose of this bill is to allow the purchasers of railroads under a foreclosure upon first mortgage bonds to buy in the road, and then reorganize and reinstate stock holders, reinstate subsequent creditors and junior mortgages. This bill does not make it obligatory upon purchasers upon first mortgage bond to reinstate every debt, but it is found to their interest to do so, and they do do so, and allow each creditor to take the chance in the new company just as in the old. There is also a provision legalizing sales made in accordance with this bill heretofore.
Mr. COBB. I have no doubt but what this bill, as far as applicable to the road for which it is gotten up for, would do its work well enough; but this bill is general in its provi page: 228[View Page 228]sions, and I must say I have heard the attorneys who got up this bill explain its provisions, and I was unable to comprehend it. I think I comprehend something in relation to this bill; if passed into a law, it makes the stockholder in all railroad companies liable to lose his stock at any time; it is an inducement to managers of railroad companies to let the debts of the company go unpaid; let it go to sale and get their friends to purchase it in order to cut out the stock holders. I am not disposed to legislate for the benefit of monied corporations. This bill has been presented to the Ohio and to the Illinois Legislatures; I presume that have not passed it, and we ought not to pass it.
Mr. HAMILTON said a few words in support, of his bill.
Mr. STEELE obtained the floor, but the hour for adjournment having arrived-
The Senate adjourned.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
FRIDAY, February 15, 1861.THE HEFFREN AND MOODY AFFAIR.
Mr. FISHER moved to pass over informally the special order, to enable him to introduce his resolutian for the expulsion of Messrs. Moody and Heffren, and demanded the yeas and nays thereon, which being ordered and taken resulted-yeas, 41, nays 39. Upon explanation of a misunderstanding between Mr. Fisher and the Chair, as to the terms of this motion, the question was annoueced again, viz: Shall the order of business be suspended for the purpose indicated ? and the yeas and nays were ordered to be taken.
Mr. SMITH, of Bartholomew, thought it was notorious that there was a personal difficulty ty between Mr. Moody and Mr. Heffren, when their friends asked their leave of absence for the Thursday morning of last week. They were both gone then. He knew that Mr. Heffren left town a week ago last Wednesday night. On Thursday morning the leave was asked for Mr. Heffren. and granted-he did not say it was unanimous-and at the same time leave was asked and granted to Mr. Moody, with the fact of their having left to settle a personal difficulty generally known. If both these gentlemen were Republicans, upon a resolution to try them without their presence here, he would vote No all the time.
Mr. STOTSENBURG did not understand, that in voting to consider this resolution, he was voting in favor of the resolution. He agreed with the gentleman from Bartholomew, that these gentlemen should have a fair hearing. It was plain enough that this question would be brought before the House, sooner or later, and he could not see why it might not as well be considered now as at any other time. Action on this case was demanded by the feeling of our constituents, and he was for meeting it now-getting it properly before the House, so as to give time for a fair trial.
Mr. JENKINSON thought the least said the soonest memded. He wanted to go on with the business of the House. This was outside business-outside of the State. He vote against suspending the order of business.
Mr. WOODHULL was in favor of suspending the orders, because he did not believe the resolution would ever be readied in the regular order.
After debate, &c., in which several members defined their position-
The yeas and nays were taken and reported-yes 63, nays 29-as follows:
YEAS-Messrs. Anderson, Atkisson, Boydston, Branham, Bryan, Bundy, Cameron, Campbell, Cason, Collins of Whitley, Collins of Adams, Combs, Cooprider, Crain, Dashiel, Davis, Epperson, Erwin, Feagler, Ferguson, Fisher, Fordyce, Fraley, Frasier, Gifford, Gore, Hall, Harvey, Haworth, Hayes, Henricks, Holcomb, Hopkins, Jones of Vermillion, Jones of Wayne, Kendrick, Kitchen, Lods, Lane, Lee, Lightner, Moorman, Nebeker, Newman, Orr, Parret, Polk, Randall, Sloan, Smith of Miami, Stevenson, Stotsenberg, Trier, Thomas, Thompson, Turner, Underwood, Veatch, Wells, Williams, Wilson, Woodhull, and Woods-63.
NAYS- Messrs. Bingham, Black, Brett, Burgess, Fleming, Ford, Gresham, Grover, Horton, Howard, Hurd, Jenkinson, Jones of Tippecanoe, Knowlton, McClurg, McLean, Moss, Mutz, Owens, Packard, Pitts, Prosser, Prow, Robbins, Roberts, Sherman, Smith of Bartholomew, Warrum, and Mr. Speaker-29.
So the rules and orders were suspended.
The resolution was then read and considered. It is as follows:
WHEREAS, the Constitution of the State of Indiana provideth that every person who shall give or accept a challenge to fight a duel, or who shall knowingly convey to another person such challenge ; or who shall agree to go out of the State to fight a duel, shall be ineligible to any office of trust or profit: and whereas, it is notorious that a challenge has been given by G. C. Moody, Representative from the county of Jasper, to Horace Heffren, Representative from the counties of Washington and Harrison to fight a duel, and that said challenge was accepted by said Heffren, and that said parties went out of the State for the purpose of fighting a duel ; therefore,
Be it Resolved, That the said G. C. Moody, Representative from the county of Jasper, and the said Horace Heffren, Representative from the counties of Washington and Harrison, be and they are hereby expelled from this House.
Mr. VEATCH. Being satisfied that the House could not proceed with the consideration of this resolution without taking up time; and seeing that business more important was pressing for action, and the session being more than half spent, he would move to refer the resolution to a select committee of three, before whom the parties could appear for the purpose of defense.
Mr. HOLCOMB proposed to amend this motion by substituting a resolution, setting forth, that whereas, certain of the members and officers of this House have been engaged in giving, bearing, and accepting a challenge to fight a duel, and did go out of the State for that purpose, in violation of the Constitution; therefore resolved, that a committee of five be appointed to examine into, and report the facts in the case; and that they have power to send for persons and papers.
Mr. BUNDY was in favor a committee of five, and intended to have moved to so amend the motion of the gentleman from Spencer.
Mr. VEATCH. I accept that.
page: 229[View Page 229]Mr. BUNDY. But I am opposed to this amendment of the gentleman from Gibson, and move to lay it on the table.
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. HAWORTH proposed to make this subject the special order for Thursday, 10 o'clock.
The SPEAKER. The motion to eommit has preference.
Mr. McLEAN moved ineffectually to lay Mr. fetch's motion on the table.
Mr. STOTSENBERG. The people of the State, in their capacity of acting as jurors and judges, do not treat even the meanest criminal as this resolution proposes to treat two members of this House. Let us have a committee of investigation. He doubted whether it was competent for the House to act in the case without a record of conviction. When we act in such a case, we must know what has been done. Let us give the case into the bands of dispassionate, disinterested men, who shall all have all the evidence before them. Such has been the practice in Congress, and is the proper practice for all time; and it is proper and right, and in accordance with the law of the land. He was in favor of the resolution for the appointment of a committee. He did not want to see the resolution of the gentleman from Wabash postponed, without something effectual in its place.
Mr. FISHER did not feel disposed to offer any opposition to the motion of the gentleman from Spencer. But he could not understand the gentleman from Floyd, when he seemed to say that we have no power to expel a member without a verdict against him. When the Constitution provides that by a vote of two-thirds we may expel a member, it does not mean to say that we shall first go through a formal trial to conviction. All we want is to be satisfied in our minds that the individual is worthy of expulsion. He had no objection, however, to these parties being hoard. His only fear was that time would be delayed and frittered away, so there would be no opportunity for action. Whether the House would see proper to expel them or not, was a matter in which he felt no more interest than others. He thought he could see a disposition on the part of some to avoid a direct vote here, by putting the matter into the hands of a committee. He did not say this of the gentleman from Spencer.
Mr. VEATCH. His motion was to facilitate action. He supposed the committee would act promptly.
Mr. STOSENBERG read an authority: "In some of the States it is the commission of the crime, and in others conviction is necesoary."
Mr. FISHER. That was not satisfactory to him.
Mr. CAMERON demanded the previous question, and, under its force, the resolution as referred to a Select Committee of Five.
NEW COUNTIES AND COUNTY BOUNDARIES.
The SPEAKER now announced the special order, viz : the consideration of Mr. Nebeker's county boundary bill [39] and according to order the House resolved into Committee of the Whole thereon-Mr. McLean in the Chair.
On motion by Mr. CAMERON, the Committee rose and reported a recommendation that the bill do pass.
The question being on concurrence-
Mr. STOTSENBERG. He laid it down as a fact, that the innocent people of Indiana are not responsible for the blundering or the fraud of the last Legislature. When the acts come in their printed form to the people, they are to be noticed and recognized as the law of the land. We are all interested in the repeal of the acts of 1859 and 1857-all were agreed on that. But there was a point of difference as to a saving clause. After listening to the debate, he declared he had heard nothing that could have weight with him against such a clause. He rehearsed the provisions of those acts granting rights to go on and organize new counties. Those who in good faith, had taken proceedings under this law should be protected. He submitted examples, and spoke at some length.
Mr. JENKINSON demanded the previous question.
Mr. CAMERON desired merely to say, that the gentleman from Floyd had made two speeches against the saving clause, and no one had been permitted to answer him.
There was a second to the demand, the main question was ordered, and the report of the Committee of the Whole was concurred in.
Mr. FISHER proposed to amend the bill, by adding to the 10th section : " Provided that all proceedings commenced to change county boundaries, under the act of 1857, shall be continued and determined according to the provisions of said act." All the eloquence here that has been expended against a saving clause had been directed against the act of 1859, which is alleged to have been passed wrongfully. He wished now to save and protect the interests of those who have proceeded under the act of 1857, which was passed constitutionally. Rights that have accrued under that act should certainly be protected.
Mr. PROSSER moved to lay the amendment on the table; but withdrew it for-
Mr. CRAIN. If you save proceedings under the act of 1857, you save all proceedings; because the act of 1859 is but an amendment engrafted upon it. He renewed the motion to lay the amendment on the table.
The amendment was laid on the table-yeas 62, nays 27.
On motion of Mr. NEBEKER, it was ordered that the bill be considered as engrossed, and read the third time now.
Mr. FRALEY had said nothing on this question, owing to his position in the election campaign, in which he felt himself instructed to keep quiet in this matter. He had been requested simply to state the facts. The upper page: 230[View Page 230] part of his county (Fountain) was within two miles of the county seat of Warren county, and there the people desired to divide. But in the lower part of the county they they were about two-thirds opposed to division. They had been unfortunate in his county-had burnt down two court houses; and they were burdened with the tax for rebuilding. The upper part of the county were a large tax-paying people, and therefore the lower part were unwilling to let them go.
Mr. LIGHTNER. There were other counties interested in this bill besides Fountain and Warren. Howard was interested as well; and there was a portion of their territory in controversy at this time; and their people would feel very much aggrieved to be estopped in this summary way. That portion of territory was originally a part of the Miami Reserve; and as soon as the Indian title was extinguished, the people there, then a portion of Clinton county, desired to be included in Howard. They were 20 miles from the county seat of Clinton, (Frankfort,) with a swamp intervening; and they were but 7 3/4 from Kokomo, which had become a railroad town, and there they did all their business. They could have no business at Frankfort, except that connected with the county seat. He himself had $380 in costs due to him there, which were not worth the trip to collect to-day. Well, they had availed themselves of the act of 1759, and attached themselves to Howard county. But a portion of this territory (six sections) so attached was still in litigation. In that case the people were deeply interested. They wanted this saving clause.
Mr. COLLINS, of Whitley, said his constituents were interested in the law remaining as it was enacted in 1857. He thought the law of 1857 sufficiently guarded; he earned not for retaining the act of 1859. He referred to the case of advantage which it had worked in attaching a portion of Noble to Whitley.
Mr. McCLURG said his county had suffered from this law. He was interested in this question of a saving clause-he referred to the contest about the six sections mentioned toy the gentleman from Howard, by which it shad been attempted to reduce Clinton county below the area of 400 square miles. He was unwilling to lose those sections, and therefore opposed to the saving clause.
The bill was then passed the final reading in the House-yeas 73, nays 14.
Messrs. Mutz, Epperson, Cameron, Orr, Prow, Owens, Robbins, Jenkinson, Ragan, Henricks, and Randall had leave of absence till Monday and Tuesday.
On motion by Mr. FRASIER, the order of business was suspended for-
REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES.
Mr. BUNDY, from the Judiciary Committee, returned Mr. Kendrick's bill [172] to amend sections 1 and 2 of the Constables' act of May 27,1852, and reported further legislation inexpedient ; and that the bil lie on the table, which was concurred in.
Mr. BRANHAM, from the Committee on Ways and Means, returned Mr. Bryant's bill [132] to amend the 37th section of the Valuation and Assessment act (to admit deduction of intebtedness from personal property), recommending that it be indefinitely postponed, which was concurred in.
Mr. JONES of Wayne, returned Mr. Davis's bill [164], to allow the Auditor of State to loan funds derived from estates without heirs, and reported a bill in lieu, entitled, a bill [237] to authorize the Auditor of State to pay all funds from estates without heirs to the Commissioners of the Sinking Fund : which was passed to the second reading.
Mr. FISHER returned Mr. Smith of Bartholomew's bill [145] to amend the Assessment, act (it adds a provision for township and special school tax), recommending passage.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed.
Mr. GROVER, from the Committee on Education, returned the joint resolutions [S. 5] proposing to amend article 8 of the Constitution so that cities, townships, and towns may have power by taxation to raise additional funds for the support of common schools, with amendments (verbal), recommending its passage.
Mr. FISHER was opposed to the resolution. If the proposition embraced the rural districts, I would vote for it most cheerfully.
Mr. GROVER. It does.
Mr. FISHER. Then I withdraw my opposition.
The amendments were concurred in, and the resolution was then passed-yeas 77, nays 13.
Mr. GROVER also returned the joint resolution [12] proposing to amend the 23d subdivision of article 4 of the Constitution, so as to enable cities, townships, and towns to raise additional revenue for the support of common schools, recommending passage (the provision occurring twice in the Constitution, it requires a separate resolution to amend in each case).
The resolution was passed-yeas 70, nays 16
Mr. HOLCOMB returned Mr. Kendrick's bill [10], authorizing the township libraries to loan certain funds, with a motion that it bo referred to the Committee on the Judiciary; which was agreed to.
Mr. STOTSENBERG, from the Committee on Organization of Courts, returned his bill [118] to authorize the judges to make certain orders in vacation, recommending passage. [The judges may make orders for the benefit of parties residing in another county, allow depositions to be taken, &c.]
The bill was ordered to be engrossed.
Mr. PARRETT retunred Mr. Gifford's bill [127] to give the custody of old probate papers to the clerk of common pleas, recommending passage.
It was ordered to be engrossed.
Mr. NEWMAN returned Mr. Jones of Tip page: 231[View Page 231]pecanoe's bill [101] to repeal two sections of the circuit court adjournment act, with a motion to refer it to the Judiciary Committee, which was concurred in.
Mr. McCLURG returned the resolution for non-resident parties litigant to pay $5 docket fee, reporting legislation inexpedient: which concurred in.
Mr. BINGHAM returned Mr. Underwood's bill [155] fixing the circuit court in the Thirteenth Circuit, recommending passage:
Also, Mr. Henrick's bill [185] numbering the pleas districts, recommending passage.
They were severally ordered to be engrossed :
Mr. GROVER (by consent) submitted a resolution, which was adopted, directing the Auditor of State to report to this House the Respective amounts of the following funds, showing when they accrued to the State, and were paid into the Treasury, viz.: funds arising from Estates without Heirs; Military fund; Surplus Revenue Fund; Bank Tax fund; and the fund arising from the proceeds of animals running at large.
Mr. PROSSER, from the Committee on Rights and Privileges, reeturned Mr. Woods's bill [179] relative to estrays. &c., with a motion to lay it on the table.
Mr. WOODS said the bill was merely to simplify the estray laws, so that estrays could be taken up and recorded in the Clerk's office, where the owner could be sure to find, in five days after taking up, a description of his property. He desired to avoid all that expensive programme of appraisement and advertisement. He moved to recommit the bill.
Mr. Prosser and Mr. Parrett opposed ; but the motion was agreed to, and the bill recommitted.
On motion by Mr. PACKARD, Mr. Heffren's Public Printing bill [17]-the special order for this day was postponed till Thursday 10 o'clock.
Mr. ORR, from the Committee on Rights and Privileges, returned Mr. Black's bill [157] to repeal district and State boards of equalization, reporting legislation inexpedient.
Also the petition of H. McDice for amendment of the road laws, so as to admit land owners to change highways on their own land at their own expense, &c., with a motion to lay it on the table.
Also Mr. Williams's promissory note bill [171], reporting legislation inexpedient, &c.
Mr. HURD returned Mr. Parrett' s criminal limitation bill [148], with a motion to lay it on the table:
These several reports were concurred in.
Mr. SMITH of Bartholomew, from the Committee on Rights, returned Mr. Bundy's Married Woman's bill, [32] with a motion that it belaid on the table.
On the motion of Mr. BUNDY, by amendment of the report, it was referred to the Judiciary.
SURVEYORS' BILLS.
Mr. FRASIER from the Committee on County and Township Business, returned Mr. Jones of Tippecanoe's Surveyors' bills, [145, 150] with the opinion of a majority that they will systematize the surveying of the State. The Committee learn that they are the result of the deliberations of a Convention of Surveyors. They propose a Surveyor General of the State, (without salary) for appeals, and to secure uniformity of action. They propose to legalize acts in subdividing lands, determining boundaries, making records, &c., rsquiring standard measures, true meridians, &c.; and providing penalties for negligence, &c. The Committee recommend the pasaage of both bills.
Mr. F. said those who had investigated, knew that there was almost a total want of regulations governing the subject of surveying in this State. The statutes simply prescribed regulations for county surveyors-for filing their bonds, and a few items in regard to their fees. There was nothing in the way of rules to govern them, and very little in the legislation of Congress on the subject.
Mr. PARRETT suggested a question whether it was competent for the State to legislate at all on the subject.
Mr. FRASIER was not aware of any constitutional obstacle-did not know why the State should not regulate the surveys of her own lands; of course she would not regulate the surveys of the lands of the General Government. He had had occasion frequently to observe this fact; but more especially since he has been in this city, he had been made acquainted with the confusion of surveys as amongst the different counties. There was a perfect Babel with regard to the rules observed amongst the county surveyors; they followed rules for which no reason could be given, only that it had been the practice. One surveyor will use a chain of 66 feet, and another will use a chain of two poles length. And in the deeds the line is described as running so many chains, &c., when really they are but half chains, and when the real truth of the case gives the holder double the amount of land described. Hence the necessity for a system, and especially in the subdivisions of sections; in the length of chains; in the variations of the needle, requiring the establishment of a true meridian in every county, by which the surveyor shall be governed in his bearings. There was no reason that there should be variations of a degree or more in the direction of the lines in two adjoining counties, which must be the case, more or less, so long as these things are suffered to remain as they are-lying round looseevery surveyor operating on his own hook. Herein consisted the necessity for a surveyor-general. In this system, ho would be required to render his public services as director of the county surveyors, without any compensation-the bill providing him page: 232[View Page 232]simply fees, which he will not get if he does not work. It allows him $6 a day and mileage, for running county and township lines. He gave an example of a disagreement of five rods in the lines along the boundary of Tippecanoe county, which had to be compromised. All such difficulties would be avoided, or more readily and satisfactorily settled, by reference to the head of the department of surveying. Another reason why there should be such an officer was found in the unsatisfactory condition of the original field-note in the office of the Auditor of State. It was not to be expected that we could always have a State Auditor who shall be also a surveyor. Some of these field-notes were not full. In some townships they were defective, and in some there were none. The proposed system provides that these field-notes shall be placed in the hands of an experienced lawyer, who shall be able to see what, additions are necessary, and be required to keep them in such condition that whenever the people of the State desire to refer to them they can do so; and certain fees are provided for this service. He was satisfied that we needed a Surveyor General more than we needed an Agent of State; and this bill provides for one, with no other expense beyond simply furnishing him an office for his papers.
Mr. WOODHULL showed that the latter bill required that the county surveyor was to be provided with an office.
Mr. FISHER called for a division of the question-one bill at a time.
Mr. FRASIER. The system depends upon both-one would not be complete without the other. He moved to lay both on the table, and that they be printed.
Mr. FISHER was willing to vote for the bill [150] to regulate county surveyors, but not for an additional State officer.
The SPEAKER, The question will be first on printing the bill No. 149.
Mr. WOODHULL. It would be like the creation of the office of Attorney General to save expense. The State now paid more attorney's fees than before.
Mr. SMITH, of Bartholomew, would rather reduce than increase the number of State officers.
Mr. LANE was satisfied this system would saddle another State officer upon the people. Six dollars a day and mileage, and $10 for platting a township were pretty good fees, these bills were gotten up by a convention of surveyors; and he gave a surveyor's opinion when he said that in the aggregate the fees were increased 30 per cent.
Mr. HOLCOMB moved to lay the motion to print on the table.
Mr. FRASIER desired to explain, but Mr. H refused to withdraw the motion.
The motion to print was laid on the table, and then-
On motion of Mr. FRASIER, his motion to print the bill, No. 150, was also laid on the table.
On motion of Mr. CRAIN, the two bills were laid on the table.
Mr. PROSSER moved to reconsider this vote and to lay the same motion on the table. The latter motion was agreed to.
EXPENSES OF THE LEGISLATURE.
On motion by Mr. BRANHAM, (by unanimous consent) his engrossed bill [190] to provide ($30,000) for the expenses of the present Legislature, was taken up and passed the final reading-yeas 82, nays 2.
The House then adjourned.
IN SENATE.
SATURDAY, February 16,1861On motion by Mr. LINE, the reading of yesterday's journal was dispensed with.
Leave of absence was obtained for Sir Williams till Monday, and Mr. Newcomb till Tuesday.
Mr. HAMILTON presented two petitions, praying the Legislature to instruct our Congressmen and State Commissioners to adjust the National troubles on a basis similar to the Crittenden proposition; which was referred to the Committee on Federal Relations.
Mr. TEEGARDEN presented a petition from citizens of the city of Laporte, praying for some law greatly reducing the municipal expenses of small cities.
REPORTS FROM THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Were made, returning the following bills, with the recommendations severally named:
By Mr. MILLER: His bill 88-described on page 105 of the BREVIER LEGISLATIVE REPORTS-passage with amendments. Also: a memorial from the Commissioners of St, Joseph county, and a remonstrance from the brothers of the University of Notre Dame du Lac, in said county, recommending that they lie on the table; and reporting a bill [S. 186] To amend sec. 6 of the assessment act of June 21, 1852, so as to reduce the amount of land exempt from taxation belonging to manual labor schools from 320 to 160 acres; which was passed the first reading, without objection.
By Mr. MARCH: Senator O'Brien's 113-see page 163 of these Reports-passage with amendments.
FROM THE COMMITTEE ON ORGANIZATION OF
COURTS.
- By Mr. CLAYPOOL: Senator O'Brien's 91-see page 122 of these Reports-passage with amendments.
- By Mr. COBB: His bill 93-time of holding common pleas courts in Jackson county-passage.
- By Mr. DICKINSON: His bill 151-see page 194-lie on the table. Also: His bill 152common pleas jury passage with amendment.
- >By Mr. CONNER: Senator Newcomb's 136-see page 184 of these Reports-passage with amendment.
Mr. BEESON, from the Committee on Agriculture, returned a resolution relating to the purchase of Dr. Owen's Cabinet, reporting that, owing to the very embarrassed condition of the finances of the State, they deem it unnecessary to legislate upon the subject.
Which reports were severally concurred in.
NEW PROPOSITIONS.
The following bills were introduced, and severally passed the first reading :
page: 233[View Page 233]By Mr. CONNER: [187] To repeal an act providing for extending the terms of Circuit Courts, &c., approved February 12, 1855; and the act amending section 1 of said act, approved December 24, 1858.
By Mr. DEHART: [188] To amend sec. 9 of an act providing for the appointment of notaries public, approved June 9, 1852; by giving them the same powers conferred upon justices of the peace in certain cases. (To try and determine such suits as are founded on contract or tort, when the debt or damages does not, exceed $300. May confess judgment before them in any sum not exceeding $400. Suits may be instituted before them.)
By Mr. MURRAY : [189] To repeal all laws making appropriations in aid of the colonization of negroes and mulattoes of this or other States.
Mr. CARNAHAN declared this bill unconstitutional, and made an ineffectual motion to reject it.
By Mr. MARCH: [190] To amend section 1 Of an act concerning the interest on money, approved May 27, 1852; so as to declare usurious all greater profits than would be realised from discounting notes or bills of exchange made payable in this State.
By Mr. MELLETT: [191] To create the seventh judicial circuit of the State of Indiana.
By Mr. HULL: [192] To provide for a change in width of State roads.
DELINQUENT TAX LISTS.
Mr. BEARSS offered the following:
Resolved, That the Judiciary Committee be instructed to inquire into the expediency of fixing by law a uniform price for publishing the delinquent tax lists of the several counties of this State: also, to require greater accuracy in the description of lands advertised, and that they report by bill or otherwise.
Which was adopted by consent.
AID FOR THE SUFFERING IN KANSAS.
Mr. CONLEY offered the following :
WHEREAS, it is represented that a large portion of northwestern Missouri and parts of the State of Kansas have been affected by drought; and whereas it is represented that vegetation is almost totally cut off; and whereas, we deem it due to the generosity of the great State of Indiana to give aid to suffering humanity; therefore-
Be it Resolved, That the sum of $10,000 be appropriated out of the State Treasury for the relief of our fellow-countrymen in the States of Missouri and Kansas, which sum shall be placed in the hands of trustees for distribution, as they may think the wants of citizens may need such relief.
Which was referred to the Finance Committee.
A MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE
Announced the passage by that body of the bill [H. R. 190] to provide ($30,000) for the expanses of the present Legislature; also, the concurrence of that body in the joint resolution [S. 12] proposing to amend article 8 of the Constitution, so that cities, townships and towns may have power by taxation to raise additional funds for the support of common schools.
WORK FOR COMMITTEES.
Senate bills were read the second time, and referred to Committees as follows:
The Judiciary Committee's 166, and Mr. Cobb's 183-rules suspended, and read by title only-were ordered engrossed.
Messrs. O'Brien's 179, 181, Cobb's' 184, Ray's 185-were referred to the Judiciary Committee.
Mr. Slack's 180-Corporations:-182-Finance.
EXPENSES OF THE LEGISLATURE.
The bill [H. R. 190] To provide ($30,000.) for the expenses of the present Legislature, was taken up and read the first time.
OLD LOCAL LAWS.
Mr. TEEGARDEN offered a joint resolution [S. 14] directing that the Sec. of State shall employ some competent person to index the local laws of this State from 1830, to the formation of the new Constitution in 1838, and have the same printed for the use of the General Assembly of the State; which was referred to the Committee on Finance.
DUELLING BY ASSEMBLYMEN.
Mr. CONLEY offered the following:
Resolved, That the Committee on the Judiciary be instructed to inquire into the expediency of so amending the law for the prevention of duelling in this State as to expel any member of the State Legislature who shall give or accept a challenge to fight a duel, and after giving or accepting of such challenge, shall suffer himeslf or themselves to be arrested; or shall in any manner countenance any obstruction to such fight; or in any case either of the parties back down from such fight for any cause whatever, he shall be sentenced to the Northern State Prison for a term of years, to be fixed by this Legislature, Provided, however, that if such parties shall fight, they shall in no wise be amenable to law; and said Committee is requested to report by bill or otherwise as soon as it is convenient for them to do so, as the law in relation to duelling is deemed inefficient to prevent that desperate mode of adjusting difficulties between members of the Legislature.
Which was laid en the table.
[Mr. LINE offered a resolution, which was adopted by consent, authorizing a Committee [Senators Line, Conner and Turner] to inquire whether there may not be a more convenient arrangement of the desks of Senators.]
INTEREST ON MONEY.
Mr. LANDERS offered the following:
Resolved, That the Committee on Banks be required to examine the law on the subject of interest, and report to the Senate by what law banks are allowed to take the enormous rate of interest they now take; and if they find the law gives to incorporations privileges denied to private individuals, they are required to introduce a bill to repeal the same, so that all persons may have the same right.
Which was adopted by consent.
BREVIER LEGISLATIVE REPORTS.
Mr. MILLER offered the following:
Resolved, That the Doorkeeper be directed to contract with ARIEL & W. H. DRAPIER for 600 copies of their Brevier Reports of the Proceedings and Debates of the present session of the General Assembly-one copy to be laid on the desk of each member of the Senate as printed, and the remainder to be bound and distributed as the Laws and Journals-Provided the said reports, except the binding, shall not cost more than one dollar per copy.
page: 234[View Page 234]Which was referred to the Committee on Finance.
GUARDIANS AND ADMINISTRATORS.
Mr. MURRAY offered the following:
Resolved, That the Committee on the Judiciary inquire into the expediency of so amending the law on that subject as that petitions for the removal of guardians and administrators shall be entitled to an appeal from the court of common pleas the same as in all other appeal cases.
Which was adopted by consent.
LIQUIDATION OF THE STATE DEBT.
Mr. LOMAX offered the following:
Resolved, by the Senate (the House concurring,) That a joint committee of three on the part of the Senate and five on the part of the House be raised to consider as to the propriety of reporting a bill to provide for the gradual and certain liquidation of the State debt within a reasonable time.
Which was adopted by consent, and the Senate committee is made to consist of Messrs. Lomax, Wagner and Mellett.
OYSTERS ALL AROUND.
Mr. Claypool offered the following:
Resolved, That if any Senator does not hereafter offer a resolution when the same is in order, he shall be declared to be in contempt of the Senate, and be required to furnish oysters for members and officers of the Senate.
Which was laid on the table.
THE COLONIZATION FUND.
Mr. NEWCOMB offered the following:
Resolved, That the Auditor of State be requested to report to the Senate the amount of warrants issued on the Colonization Fund since the passage of the act providing for the colonization of negroes and mulattoes, approved April 28, 1852, and for what purposes the expenditures have been made; distinguishing between the expenditures for transporting negroes and mulattoes out of the State and other expenditures.
Which was adopted by consent.
THE UNIVERSITY AND THE SINKING FUND.
Mr. JOHNSON offered the following:
WHEREAS, It is understood that the State University Fund is indebted to the Sinking Fund; and WHEREAS the State University Fund has large amounts of moneys loaned on mortgage, therefore-
Be it Resolved, That the Committee on Education be instructed to inquire into the expediency of the passage of some law by which said mortgages may be transferred to the Sinking Fund Commissioners in payment of said debt; and report by bill or otherwise.
Which was adopted by consent.
LIMIT TO SPEECHES.
Mr. BEESON offered the following:
Resolved, That no member of the Senate be allowed to speak upon any subject longer than twenty minutes.
Which was adopted.
PUBLISH THE LAWS IN EACH COUNTY.
Mr. TURNER offered the following:
Resolved, That the Committee on Public Printing be instructed to inquire into the propriety of having the laws published in one weekly newspaper in each county where one is printed.
Which was adopted by consent.
JURISDICTION OVER HIGHWAYS.
Mr. MURRAY offered the following:
Resolved, That the Committee on County and Township Business inquire into the expediency of reporting a bill transferring the location, vacation or change of highways within the respective townships from the Board of County Commissioners to the township trustees.
Which was adopted by consent.
COUNTY ASSESSOR.
Mr. MILLER offered the following:
Resolved, That the Committee on County and Township Business inquire into the expediency of abolishing the office of township assessor, and creating the office of county assessor as it existed prior to the passage present laws, and report by bill or otherwise.
Which was adopted by consent.
And then the Senate adjourned.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
SATURDAY, February 16, 1861.Mr. KITCHEN desired, but failed to obtain leave to submit a resolution directing the Committee on the Affairs of the town of Indianapolis to inquire of the Board of Health as to the extent to which the small pox is prevailing at this time in the city. [Laughter]
Mr. KENDRICK. The small pox really is in the city.
Mr. COLLINS, of Whitley, presented a resolution of the 10th District Agricultural Society-T. G. Nelson, president-memoralizing the Legislature for a tax on dogs.
REPORTS FROM THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE.
Mr. BUNDY returned Mr. Brucker's alien land bill [64,] with an amendment, striking out all after the enacting clause, and inserting provisions to the effect. That it shall be lawful for non-resident aliens to acquire, inherit, hold and convey real estate to the same as though they were citizens of the United States for the term of eight years from and after the acquisition, at the final settlement of the estate from which it is derived ; and in case the alien is a minor, it shall be held in trust for such minor. 2. If such alien die before the expiration of the said term of eight years, then his heirs shall hold and enjoy his rights so acquired, if they also be non-residents and aliens; but if citizens of the United States they shall hold as though their ancestor had been a citizen, &c.; and so amended the committee recommend passage.
The report was concurred in, and the bill ordered to be engrossed.
Mr. VEATCH returned the bill [S. 7,] supplemental to the act of May G, 1852, concerning real property and the alienation thereof, recommending passage.
It was ordered to the third reading.
He also returned Mr. Stot en berg's fugitive biil [187], with a recommendation that it be laid on the table. The report admits that the bill contains many good provisions. It it almost an exact copy of the statute in the Revised, page 1030. But the first section is objectionable-giving power to the justice of the peace, &c., upon complaint, charging a person with crime, to cause such person to be arrested; and upon a mere preliminary examination to order such person to be conveyed out of the State, and removed to the State or terri page: 235[View Page 235]tory from which it is alleged he has fled. Such power should never be exercised but with the greatest caution, &c. But a graver objection in a legal point of view is, that it is clearly and manifestly in conflict with the the Constitution United States, which leaves the power of regulating arrests of fugitives labor or from justice as amongst the several States exclusively with Congress. [2d Ind. Reps p. 396, and the Prigg case, 16th Peters, p. 539.] &c., &c.
Mr. STOTSENBERG moved that the report be referred to the Committee of Thirteen on the State of the Union. He was only sorry that the Judiciary Committee had not spent as much time and labor in developing and combining the good parts of the bill, as they in exposing the parts objectionable. The gave the right of examination before proper tribunals, provided for testimony, and some way of getting fees-very much improving the present law in these respects It proposed nothing about fugitives from labor.
Mr. VEATCH. The committee did not think it any part of their duty to take up the subject and make a new bill.
Mr. BUNDY. It would deprive any person his liberty against whom there might be rought a frivolous charge.
The report was concurred in, and accordingly the bill was laid on the table.
Mr. WOODHULL returned Mr. Grover's bill [191] to amend sections 176 and 190 of the practice act, with an amendment striking but that which refers to section 190.The amendment was concurred in, and then the bill was ordered to be engrossed.
Mr. BUNDY returned Mr. Jones of Tippecanoe's bill [168] authorizing suits for alimony in certain cases, with a motion to lay it on the table; which was concurred in.
He also returned Mr. Roberts' Promissory Note bill [167], recommending passage.
It was ordered to be engrossed.
Mr. VEATCH returned Mr. Atkisson's Surviving Partners' bill [98], recommending indefinite postponement. The committee say, its iffect would be to tie up large amounts of property to the slow processes of administration ; but to meet one of its objects, they recommend a bill, numbered 238, entitled, A bill supplemental to the act of March 5. 1859, to require surviving partners to file inventories appraisements, and affidavits with the Clerk of the Court of Common Pleas.
The report was concurred in, and the new bill was passed to the second reading.
Mr. WOODHULL returned the committee bill [161] to amend the 11th section of the Treasury system act of 1859, with a motion to lay it on the table :
Mr. BINGHAM returned Mr. Moss' bill [177], to regulate the remission of fines and forfeitures, with the same motion:
These reports were concurred in.
Mr. CASON returned Mr. Wells' slackwater navigation bill [188], recommending passage.
It was ordered engrossed.
Mr. VEATH returned Mr. Parrett's salary bill [42], with a statement in writing that the sections (1 and 2) proposed to be amended fire very long and incorrectly recited in the bill. The only change proposed is to reduce the salaries of the Circuit Prosecutors, and provide a salary of $300 a year for the District, Attorney. They reason against the reduction, and recommend that the bill be laid on the table, and give place for a substitute.
Mr. PARRETT did not see any necessity for a new bill. The force of the objections of the report was confined to the reduction of $200 in the salary of the Circuit Prosecutor. Criminal matters now nearly all go to the Common Pleas, and that part of the duty of the Circuit Prosecutor was performed by the District Attorney. And the Circuit Prosecutor hncl fees in divorce cases, which the District Attorney did not get. Five hundred dollars a piece would be too much. The change he desired could not be made without the formality in his bill. He moved to re-commit.
Mr. PROSSER hoped the motion would not prevail. The salary of the Circuit Prosecutors was not sufficient now. He would rather give them $200 more than take one dollar from their salary. We have in general inefficient prosecutors-young men of little inexperience; and the reason was the insufficiency of the salary. They were unable to conduct important criminal cases.
Mr. PARRETT. Is not the largest part of the criminal business thrown upon the District Prosecutor?
Mr PROSSER. And the fees also.
Mr. PARRETT. Have not the Circuit Prosecutors the same fees?
Mr. PROSSER. They have. But in many cases the District Prosecutor makes more out of the minor prosecutions than the Circuit Prosecutor with his salary. People in his part of the State have to put their hands into their own pockets and hire help in criminal cases.
Mr. FISHER concurred generally in Mr. Prosser's remarks. The State would be the gainer by paying the judge's salary to the Circuit Prosecutor. He recited a case which had cost the State $500 in extra fees. Throwing the business into the Common Please did not change the case. Reduction of these salaries would work injury. He moved to lay the motion to re-commit on the table, which was lost, no quorum voting.
Mr. PROSSER proposed to amend Mr. Parrett's motion, by adding instructions to inquire into the expediency of raising the salary of the Circuit Prosecutors to $700, and giving the District Prosecutors $300.
Mr. PARRETT'S motion, thus amended, was agreed to by consent.
Mr. McLEAN obtained leave to introduce a biil [139], to amend the 6th section of the as page: 236[View Page 236]sessment act(exempting certain public property from taxation): which was passed to the second reading.
Mr. COLLINS of Adams, obtained leave to submit a resolution, which was adopted, instructing the Judiciary Committee to inquire and report on the question, as to who are entitled to the benefit of our common schools.
Mr. McLEAN, Mr. COLLINS of Whitley, Mr. KNOWLTON, and Mr HOLCOMB were successively refused leave to offer propositions out of order.
Mr. Anderson's highway bill [193] was passed the second reading, and referred to the Committee on Roads.
On motion of Mr. KNOWLTON, Mr. Bundy's Salary bill [143] was taken up and referred to a Select Committee, viz., Messrs. Knowlton, Veatch, and Edson.
Mr. Kendrick's Governor's House bill [194] and Mr. Fordyce's Sinking Fund bill [200], were referred to the Committee on Ways and Means.
Mr. Lane's Railroad Incorporation bill [195] coming up(Mr. L. stated that the only change of the act of 1852 proposed is to extend the limitation of railroad charters to 20 years instead of 10 years. They had a road in which a vast, amount of money had been expended, and the charter of that road would expire before the meeting of the next Legislature)and Mr. Hopkins' Courts of Conciliation bill [15] were ordered to be engrossed.
Mr. Burgess' bill [196], giving clerks probate jurisdiction ; Mr. Williams' bill [222], for the organization of Life Insurance Companies ; Mr. Thompson's bill [199](he said it made agricultural societies joint stock companies, and extended their right to hold land from 20 acres to 80 acres)these bills were severally referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. Stotsenberg's bill [197]-Recorders to issue marriage licenses-was laid on the table.
WORK FOR COMMITTEES.
On motion by Mr. BRANHAM, the House proceeded to the consideration of bills on the second reading.
The Senate bill [S. 74] to amend the 4th (prairie lien) section of the Game laws, coming up on the second reading-
Mr. MOODY proposed to strike out "February" and "September," and insert "March" and "August."
Mr. KNOWLTON proposed to amend by way of a new bill not read.
Mr. HOLCOMB also proposed an amendment not read.
On motion of Mr. McLEAN, the bill and amendments were referred to the Committee on Rights and Privileges.The bill [S. 49] to provide for struck juries, &c., coming up-
Mr. FRASlER proposed (out of order) the word "moon" before the word "struck."
The bill was read the second time, and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. Parrett's bill [201] to create the 17th Judicial Circuit, &c., was read the second time, and referred to the Committee on the Organization of Courts.
Mr. Knowlton's mechanics' lien bill [202] to amend section 650, art. 6, of the practice act, was considered and referred to the Committee on Corporations.
Mr. KNOWLTON asked and obtained to introduce a bill [240] to fix the time of holding the courts of the 10th circuit, and to provide for adjourned terms-counties of Grant, Wabash, Huntington, Miami, Cass and Carroll.] It was passed to the second reading; and, under a suspension of the rules, it was read the second time, and referred to the Committee on Organization of Courts of Justice-together with-
Mr. FISHER'S amendment, "Provided that neither the Judge nor Prosecuting Attorney shall receive any extra compensation for holding such adjourned and special terms."
AGENT OF STATE.
Mr. McLEAN asked leave to introduce a concurrent resolution for a committee (three on the part of the House) to examine the books, papers, bonds, stocks. &c., in the office of Agent of State in Wall street, New York, and report whether the interests of the State require additional safeguards to be around said office; and that the Governor make such allowance for the service as he may think proper, &c.
Mr. NEBEKER objected. There was a resolution on that subject.
RAILROAD VALUATIONS.
The SPEAKER laid before the House a communication from the Auditor of State responding to a resolution of the 28th of January, for information in regard to the reduction of value in the assessment of railroads The Michigan Central has been reduced to $9,000 per mile; the Michigan Southern and Northern Indiana to $8,000; the Pittsburg, Ft. Wayne and Chicago 7,000; the Louisville, New Albany and Chicago $750; Cincinnati, Peru and Chicago $1,500; Jeffersonvilie $3,000; Madisonviile and Indianapolis $4,000.
It was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means.
GIBSON COUNTY SWAMPLANDS.
Mr. HOLCOMB asked, but was refused leave, to submit a resolution directing the State Auditor to report the amount of swamp land funds received and placed to the credit of Gibson county-the amount paid out-to whom and for what purpose.
The SPEAKER announced Mr. Bingham as Chairman of the Committee to consider Mr. Fisher's resolution for the expulsion of Messrs. Moody and Heffren-Mr. Veatch having been excused on account of personal considerations.
The House then adjourned till Monday o'clock p. m.
page: 237[View Page 237]IN SENATE.
MONDAY, February 18,1861.On motion of Mr. MURRAY, the reading of Saturday's journal was dispensed with.
REPORTS FROM THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Were made, returning the following bills, with the recommendations severally named :
- By Mr. MARCH: His bill 157, amending sections 1, 11, and 12 of the exemption act of 1852-passage.
- By Mr. CONNER: His bill 101 concerning auditor's tax deed-passage with amendments.
- By Mr. CLAYPOOL: Senator Dehart's bill, 163, to amend sec. 467 of the Practice Act-passage.
- Mr. DEHART, from the Committee on Printing, returned Senator Wagner's bill, 172, recommending passage.
Which reports were severally concurred in.
PETITIONS, MEMORIALS, &C.
By Mr. CARNAHAN: Praying that members of the Legislature may be required to put their names upon the record on the bill providing for the payment of losses sustained by sheep-killing dogs; which was referred to the Committee on Agriculture.
By Mr. HAMILTON: which was referred to the Committee on Federal Relations without reading.
SESSION HOURS.
Mr. MURRAY offered the following :
Resolved, That the rule upon the meeting and adjournment of the Senate be so changed as to require two sessions as formerly, to take effect from and after to-morrow, at 2 o'clock.
Which was adopted by yeas 24, nays 12.
NEW PROPOSITIONS.
The following bills were introduced, and severally passed the first reading :
By Mr. WHITE: [198] making thirty days immediately preceding the meeting of county boards sufficient notice of the location, vacation, or change of highways.
By Mr. STONE: [194] empowering county boards to employ competent persons at any time, to investigate the books, vouchers, accounts, &c., of County Auditors and Treasurers.
By Mr. CARNAHAN: [195] To secure the collection of rent in certain cases, and to enable persons of small means to rent lands without giving personal or other security therefor.
By Mr. WILSON: [196] To amend section 6 of an act concerning interest on money, approved May 27, 1852.
By Mr. MILLER: [197] To exempt from taxation for corporation purposes, personal estates under the control of guardians in certain oases.
CONGRESSIONAL RE-DISTRICTING OF THE STATE.
The PRESIDENT laid before the Senate an official statement of the population of Indiana, under the 8th census.
On motion by Mr. MARCH, it was referred to a joint Committee of five on the part of the Senate, and six on the part of the House, to be appointed by the presiding officers thereof after consultation, so that one committee man may be chosen from each district.
A MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE
Announced the passage by that body of the joint resolutions, S. 6-see pages 68 and 158 ; also, the passage of the bill [H. R. 89] to authorize the formation of new counties, and repealing all laws inconsistent therewith.
BANKS AND BANKING.
Mr. Claypool's bill 86-see pages 86,150,219 of these reports-being read the third time-Mr. C. explained his bill, as heretofore.
Was finally passed by yeas 86, nays 2.
JASPER AND NEWTON COUNTIES.
On motion by Mr. TURNER, the bill [H. R. 119] concerning the tax duplicate of Newton county, being read the third time.
Mr. TURNER explained its provisions.
Was finally passed by yeas 40, nays 0.
STATIONERY AND POSTAGE FOR MEMBERS; AND
AN
OFFICIAL REPORTER FOR EACH HOUSE.
On motion by Mr. CONLEY, his bill [S. 55] providing for stationery and postage [$20] for members of the Legislature, for the employment of reporters, and the publication of its proceedings in certain newspapers was taken from the table.
Mr. CONLEY explained its provisions.
Mr. BEESON mode an ineffectual motion to recommit to the Committee on Finance, by striking out "$10" (each of stationery and postage), and insert "$5."
Mr. MURRAY. This bill provides that our reports shall be the same as are now published in the BREVIER LEGISLATIVE REPORTS, and I undertake to say that you cannot get a single paper in this city to publish these reports in full. Now, what condition will the Legislalature be in ? We will hire Reporters, and then we have got to pay printers for publishing their reports. Look over the Sentinel, at the reports made up by the gentlemen who are engaged in making up these BREVIER REPORTS, and you will see they are cut down nearly one-half you read along, and every once in a while you see a paragraph to this effect: "After proceedings, which are crowded out;" or "further proceedings will appear in the BREVIER LEGISLATIVE REPORTS." The Sentinel is unable to find room for these reports; but we take, three of these papers-all we propose to take if we hire our own Reporters-and still the Sentinel curtails these reports one-third, or nearly one-half. It does seem to me that is a bad arrangement, and we would have to go to the double expense of hiring printers after hiring Reporters. Another thing: I think $10 is putting it on pretty steep for postage stamps, and $10 for stationery ; that makes $20, in addition to the pay we all have, which is an indirect way of raising our wages.
Mr. MARCH. $10 seems to me to be an extravagant amount for stationery. If we propose to raise our wages, I would prefer to do it open page: 238[View Page 238] and above board. I move to recommit with the following instructions: strike out "$10," and insert "$5," so far as it refers to stationery.
Mr. CONLEY. These reports are very full, and this bill provides the papers cannot be taken unless the reports are printed in full. If the papers do not so publish them, we are under no obligation to take them. It would reduce the number of papers usually taken by the Legislature.
Mr. MURRAY [interrupting.] What is the use of hiring Reporters if our proceedings are not to be published?
Mr. CONLEY. I understand the two leading journals of this city will publish them-their subscribers will demand it of them.
Mr. MURRAY moved as additional instructions to strike out "$10" and insert "$6."
Mr. BLAIR moved as additional instructions to strike out all that relates to the publication of the proceedings of the Legislature and the taking of Daily papers.
The motion to refer was agreed to.
PURE BEER, WINE OR CIDER.
Mr. LINE'S bill 8see page 25 of these reports-being read the third time-
Mr. L. said: The only amendment to the law of 1859 is that this bill simply permits persons to sell unadulterated beer, native wine and cider without license.
Mr. RAY. I am opposed to the bill because our present law is bad enough and it would be unjust to the whisky sellers that have paid for their license to plant hundreds of little lager beer and adulterated wine saloons around them, to debauch the community still worse than it now is. Whisky shops are bad enough when held under strict responsibility, but when you give a loose rein to whisky shops under such a bill as this, you might as well abolish all law, and give them a free right to the track.
Mr. NEWCOMB. I coincide with the remarks made by the gentleman from Shelby, [Mr. Ray.] We have a law which is satisfactory to the people. I move, as a test now of the sense of the Senate, to re-commit, with instructions to amend by providing that a license may be granted for the sale of pure beer, wine and cider, for half the price now charged.
Mr. LINE. I hope the Senate will not consent to refer the bill, but will take the question fairly upon it as it is.
On motion by Mr. LANDERS, the bill and pending instructions were laid on the table by yeas 26, nays 10.
[Leave of absence was obtained for Mr. Mellett during the week.]
[Mr. Wilson's bill 17-see page 3O of these Reports-being read the third time, Mr. MARCH called attention to the fact that this bill was laid upon the table in accordance with a recommendation of the Judiciary Committee[see page 193 of these Reports.] The Secretary's record being against him, on his motion the bill was laid on the table.]
WHO MAY ADMINISTER OATHS GENERALLY
Mr. Dickinson's bill 25-see page 30 of these Reports-coming up-
On Mr. D.'s motion, by unanimous consent, notaries public were included in the bill.
It was finally passed by yeas 38, nays 0.
PRIVATE ROADS
Senator Miller's bill 36-see page 66 of these Reports-being read the third time-
Mr. MILLER. There is no law on the statute book allowing a person to have a private road through another's land, and this bill provides a way.
Was finally passed by yeas 36, nays 3.
DOCKET BOOKS FOR JUSTICES OF THE PEACE.
A Select Committee's bill, 38-see page 46 of these Reports-being read the third time-
Mr. CLAYPOOL. This bill tends in a small way to create a large expense. It will take $150 out of the county treasury every year or two. We have had no difficulty or complaint from justices in reference to their books. If their business will not justify a docket, they had better resign.
Mr. LINE. The Select Committee drew up that bill in compliance with a petition. Why do you ask justices of the peace to get their own dockets, when you furnish every other class of county officers with their books? The justice receives poor compensation, and he renders a great deal of service to the State, for which he gets no pay at all. It seems to me as a matter of right to justices, that the people of the State of Indiana should furnish their dockets. It is public property, and he must surrender it when he goes out of office.
Was passed by yeas 26, nays 14.
TO PREVENT ILLEGAL VOTING.
Mr. Landers' bill 46-see page 69 of these Reports-being read the third time-
Mr. LANDERS. Senators will see the penalty is increased in this bill for the violation of the election laws. Under the old law the penalty was not sufficient to prevent illegal voting. I am satisfied this bill will tend, to a great extent, to preserve the purity of the ballot box.
Was finally passed by yeas 38, nays 2.
STOCK KILLED BY RAILROADS.
Mr. Craven's bill 48-see page 69 of these Reports-being read the third time-
Mr. HULL moved to recommit, with instructions that the Committee on Corporations so amend the bill as to provide for reciprocal responsibility in maintaining the fences along railroads where the same may run through farms, to be built by the railroads ; railroads shall not be held responsible for the killing of stock at the crossings of public highways, nor except in cases of negligence on their part; but if by the carelessness of farmers, the road is to pay one-half the assessed value of the page: 239[View Page 239] stock so killed-and if payment be delayed beyond thirty days, then the full value.
[A message from the House announced the passage of the bill [H. R. 5], limiting the power of County Commissioners in the assessment and collection of taxes.]
Mr. HULL. I hope the bill will be recommitted, that both parties may be made reciprocally responsible. If a railroad company should build good fences, they would not remain so unless the farmers were partly ressponsible for keeping them up. It is my desire that justice should be done to both parties. A portion of these instructions are substantially such as are proposed by the Ohio and Mississippi Railroad Co.
Mr. SHIELDS. The amendment is wholly inoperative, I think, in every particular; and the bill is insufficient to make the regulations the people demand.
Mr. CONNER moved to amend the amendment (though opposed to the instructions even after being so amended), by striking out all that part that requires owners of lands adjoining railroads to aid in fencing the road or maintaining the fence.
Mr. HULL accepted the amendment.
Mr. RAY. The bill as reported ought to pass. It is desired to remedy what is supposed to be a weakness in the present law.
Mr. MURRAY. I am in favor of striking from the bill all that relates to the liability of railroad companies for stock killed at the crossings of public highways. I think it is unjust lo impose upon them liabilities, when it is impossible to protect themselves.
Mr. CRAVEN obtained the floor, but the hour for adjournment cut off his remarks.
And then the Senate adjourned.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
MONDAY, February 18, 1861.PETITIONS AND MEMORIALS.
Mr. JENKINSON, Mr. PARRETT, and Mr. POLK each presented petitions for protection against sheep-killing dogs; which were referred to the Committee on Agriculture.
Mr. GIFFORD presented, a memorial for legislation to correct the exorbitant appraizement of the Harrison, New Trenton and Brookfield Turnpike road; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means.
Mr. EDSON presented a memorial for a Joint resolution, asking the Peace Convention and instructing our Senators and requesting our Representatives in Congress, to use their influence for the adoption of the Crittenden propositions for peace.
Mr. HEFFREN presented a petition, numerously signed, for the same object.
They were referred to the Committee of Thirteen.
Mr. WOODHULL presented a petition ugued-by 104 citizens, praying for the repeal of the statute giving force and effect, to the 13th article of the Constitution regarding negroes and mulattoes.
On motion by Mr. HOLCOMB, it was laid on the table.
Mr. HOLCOMB presented a memorial embracing resolutions of a meeting of citizens in the town of Francisco, (Robert N. Brooks presiding,) calling for a velinquishment of the States' interest in the Wabash and Erie Canal, and for the said company to keep the canal in navigable order; which was referred to the Committee on Canals.
Mr. ERWIN presented the petition of sundry citizens and members of the bar of Lawrence county, remonstrating against the proprosed new Circuit to be composed of the counties of Lawrence, Monroe. Greene, Brown, &c.
CALUMET FEEDER DAM.
Mr. VEATCH, from the Committee on the Judiciary, returned Mr. Wood's resolution relative to damages occasioned by the Calumet Feeder Dam overflowing lands in Lake county, and recommended the adoption of the following:
Resolved, That the Attorney General of the State be requested to examine into the matter complained of in relation to the damage done to the lands in Lake and adjoining counties by the Calumet Feeder Dam; and report to the House what measures are necessary to remedy the evils complained of.
This resolution was adopted.
Mr. McLEAN, from the Committee on the Organization of Counties, returned Mr. Prosser's bill (151) for the erection of the 14th Judicial Circuit, and Mr. Kendrick's Marion County Judicial Circuit bill, recommending their indefinite postponement, and reporting a bill in lieu of both, viz : a bill (241) to prescribe what counties shall hereafter compose the od, 5th and 6th Judicial Circuits; to fix the times, &c.
The report was concurred in, and the new bill was passed to the second reading.
Mr. FORD, from the Committee on County and Township Business, returned Mr. Black's bill (100) to authorize township trustees to sign saline land certificates, recommending its passage; and it was ordered to be engrossed.
DOG LICENSE.
Mr. DAVIS, from the Committee on Agriculture, returned Mr. Veatch's Dog bill (175), with a motion to lay it on the table; which was concurred in.
He also returned Mr. Anderson's Dog License and Damage bill (176), with verbal amendments, and adding a clause, making the fund arising therefrom a common school fund distributable annually in the township where it shall accrue.
The amendments were concurred in, and the bill was ordered to be engrossed.
Mr. TURNER, from the same Committee, returned Mr. Polk'e Dog bill, with a motion that it be laid on the table; which was concurred in.
page: 240[View Page 240]Mr. PARETT, from the Committee on Temperance, returned the petition of Susan B. Hunt and others, for a, Prohibitory Liquor law, with a statement that legislation would be not only inexpedient, but destructive of the end sought, because such a law, under the decision of the Courts, would be unconstitutional and void; and thereupon recommending that it be laid on the table.
The report was concurred in.
Mr. JONES of Wayne, from the Select Committee thereon, returned the resolution for a revision of the rates of tolls on plank and McAdamized roads, reporting further legislation unnecessary; which was concurred in.
Mr. BRYANT, from the Select Committee thereon, returned the resolution for fencing the Tippecanoe Battle Ground, reporting thereupon a bill (242) to provide for the enclosure of the Tippecanoe Battle Ground, and making an appropriation therefor ; which was passed to a second reading.
The bills (S. 177) to amend the Common Pleas act of March 5, 1859, coming up in order on the Calendar, it was passed to the second reading.
THE SELECT COMMITTEE ON FIGHTING.
The SPEAKER makes this Committee to consist of Messrs. Bingham, Ford, Haworth, Crain and Brett.
Mr. PROSSER asked and obtained leave to introduce a bill (243) fixing the times of holding the Courts in the First Judicial Circuit, and repealing, &c.
Mr. JONES of Tippecanoe,(244). To amend section 1, of the act of March 2, 1859, fixing the times of Courts in the 12th Judicial Circuit.
Mr. ROBERTS: [245] declaratory of the meaning of the first clause of the 8th section, and also the 9th section of article 2. part 2, chapter 1, of the Revised Code of 1852.
Which were severally passed to the second reading.
Mr. HOLCOMB asked leave to submit his Gibson swamp land fund resolution; but it was objected to.
Mr. Hurd's bill [203 To provide for the registration of births, marriages and deaths, coming up in order on the calendar, it was ordered to be engrossed.
Mr. Cooprider's ditch bill [204] was referred to the Committee on Swamp Lands.Mr. Williams' free turnpike bill [205] was referred to the Committee on County and Township Business.
Mr. Roberts' bill [206] supplemental to article 9, sec. 156, part second of the Code, providing for attachment, &c., was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
EXTRA COMPENSATION OF CLERKS AND SHERIFFS.
The SPEAKER announced the special order, viz : The consideration of Mr. Jenkinson's bill [H. R. 5] to restrict the taxing power of the Board of County Commissioners (to 50cents on the $100)-the question being, Shall the bill be engrossed?
Mr. JENKINSON moved that it be considered as engrossed, and put upon its final passage.
Mr. WOODHULL was opposed to the bill. There was a limit as to legislation on this question of taxation beyond which it would not be safe to go. If the people desired this change, we should have petitions for it. It was a proposition to take from the people the right to take care of their own affairs. His county people wanted this privilege. They were without railroads, and their land valuations were less than the average of good land, in railroad localities. They tried limiting themselves to fifty cents on the $100, and it run them into debt. They wanted to erect new county buildings, &c., which they could not, if this bill pass. He showed also that it I would work injuriously even in Allen, the gentleman's own county. The effect-of this bill in his county would be to compel them to borrow money.
Mr. JENKINSON. The object of the bill was to economize. He gave examples to show the necessity for it. The county officers are making too much money. The people of Allen county were now paying 75 cents tax on the $100 for county purposes; and he was sent here for the express purpose of restraining the taxing power of the Commissioners to 50 cents on the $100. He would take a contract to carry on the county of Steuben for the proceeds of a tax of 50 cents on the $100. The bill would beget economy. It was a wise rule to furnish no more public money than is necessary. There were not fifty men in Allen county opposed to this bill, and he wanted to extend its benefits to all the people in the State. It would cut off the treasury cormorants.
Mr. BUNDY proposed to amend the Committees amendment, by striking out "fifty cents" and inserting "one dollar," as the limitation of the taxing power. He would go as far as any to accommodate the gentleman from Allen, but it should not be forgotten that we are here, every man not merely for his own county, but for the State at large. Allen was a rich county, with many miles of railroad, and after she had been so enriched, he was surprised to see this proposition corning from their representative. He was not prepared to say to the Commissioners of Allen county, that they could not make the levy necessary to pay debts already contracted for railroads or county improvements. That must be the object, to avoid the payment of county debts It looked too much like repudiation for him to sanction it.
Mr. JENKINSON. His bill would raise $30,000 in Allen. $7,000 would pay the interest on their county debt; and when this $100.000 should become due, years hence, this act could be repealed. The object was to page: 241[View Page 241] check extravagance-for two years at least, if the House refuse this bill, there would not be left a corporal's guard of Republicans in Allen county. He would go home and tell them, you asked the Legislature for a fish, and they gave you a stone.
Mr. WOODHULL had stated that the tax in Allen was 65 cents on the $100. He read a statement from an ex-sheriff and the treasurer of Allen for the source of his information, This bill was an application for repudiation of county debts.
Mr. JENKINSON. It was the county officers who were making opposition to this bill.
Mr. GRESHAM. This was a matter belonging peculiarly to the people of the several counties. Even if they abused themselves in the matter of taxation, it was none of our business here. He moved that the bill and amendment, be indefinitely postponed.
Mr. JENKINSON demanded the yeas and nays, which being ordered and taken, resulted-yeas 33, nays 48 : so the House refused to postpone.
Mr. NEBEKER demanded the previous question ; and there was a second.
The first question being on the amendment of Mr. Bundy, it was rejected: and then the Committee's amendment was adopted, and the bill was ordered to be engrossed.
Mr. JENKINSON moved that the bill be considered and engrossed ; which was agreed to.
Mr. WOODHULL ineffectually demanded a call of the House.
Mr. ROBBINS moved that the bill be read the third time now.
Mr. F RASIER. Was it the province of the Legislature to restrain county improvements ? or was it not the true Democratic principle to allow the people to attend to their own business? He preferred that the bill take the regular course.
The bill was ordered to the third reading.
Mr. FRASIER spoke against the bill. It was exceeding the power of legislation. The matter of couunty improvement was peculiarly the business of the people of the county. He ventilated the reasons which had brought about this demand from Allen county. The remedy was not in legislation here, but in revolutionizing through the ballot box, and turning out the Treasury cormorants. His county had never been in debt, from one year to the other, since he had resided there. They wanted county buildings, and should the Legisture step in and prevent them? He was willing the gentleman should have all the partizan benefit of the defeat of this measure in Allen county.
Mr. PARRETT. Popular sovereignty was all right enough. But when men couldn't govern themselves, they ought to be governed. Allen county had been and still was the "Egypt" of the State. He was for this bill, because it was demanded by the people. Honesty in the county affairs was essential, and restraints were essential where honesty was wanting.
Mr. WOODHULL spoke for the general credit of the people and officers of his county.
Mr. PARRETT disclaimed personal imputations; but insisted that honesty and restraints were both necessary. The gentleman from Allen had confessed that their Democratic county administration had so ruined that, county, that they could not get along without Republican help; and he was going to help them now by voting for this bill.
The bill was then passed the third reading in the House-yeas 55, nays 25-as follows :
AYES-Messrs. Atkisson, Bingham, Brett, Brucker, Burgess, Collins of Adams, Combs, Cooprider, Davis, Edson, Erwin, Ferguson, Fisher, Fleming, Ford, Fraley, Gifford, Hall, Hayes, Heffren, Henricks, Holcomb, Hopkins, Howard, Hudson, Hurd, Jenkinson, Jones of Tippecanoe, Kendrick, Kitchen, Knowlton, Lods, Lightner, McLean, Moody, Moss, Mutz, Nebeker, Parrett, Pitts, Prosser, Kagan, Randall, Bobbins, Roberts, Smith of Miami, Trier, Turner, Underwood, Veatch, Warrum, Wilson, Woods, Mr. Speaker-55.
NAYS-Messrs. Black, Boydston, Branham, Bundy, Campbell, Cason, Grain, Fordyce, Frasier, Gresham, Harvey, Haworth. Horton, Jones of Wayne, Lee, Moorman, Newman, Orr, Sherman, Sloan, Thomas, Thompson, Wells, Williams, Woodhull-25.
EXTRA SERVICES OF CLERKS AND SHERIFFS.
The House now resumed the unfinished business, viz: Mr. Nebeker's bill [8] for allowance for extra services of clerks and sheriffs, the question being on the adoption of the Judiciary Committee's amendment by way of substitute, to the effect, that the annual compensation for extra service shall not exceed $100; but such allowance shall not be made until said clerk or sheriff shall have filed with the County Commissioners his affidavit embracing a detailed statement of such extra service.
Mr. FRASIER proposed to amend the amendment, by extending the discretion of allowance to sheriffs to $200; which was laid on the table.
Mr. EDSON proposed, that said extra services be paid the same fees for similar services as determined by law; which was laid on the table.
Mr. BLAKE proposed to amend, by striking out the requisition for a detailed statement and affidavit.
On motion of Mr. CASON, it was also laid on the table.
The question recurring on the committee's amendment-
Mr. BUNDY said that $100 was too small. It was not enough for extra services required in all the large counties. He could not vote for so low a restriction.
Mr. PROSSER. It was enough in the small counties ; and in the large counties, where the officers get rich in four years, it was certainly enough.
Mr. FRASIER believed that the sheriff did twice as much work for nothing as the clerk, and the office was not as lucrative.
Mr. JENKINSON thought $100 was enough. It would prevent abuse.
page: 242[View Page 242]Mr. BUNDY proposed to extend the limitation to $150; which was laid on the table.
Mr. GORE proposed to amend the commit tees's amendment, by adding a clause, that no allowance shall be made in any count} where the number of inhabitants exceed 3,000 which was laid on the table.
The Judiciary Committee's amendment was now adopted.
On motion of Mr. NEBEKER, the bill was considered as engrossed, and passed the third reading-yeas 76, nays 3.
On motion of Mr. DAVIS, the House now took up the consideration of bills in the calendar on the third reading.
Mr. Cameron's bill [3], to provide for the Common Pleas in Newton county, coming up it was passed the final reading in the House yeas 71, nays 0.
Mr. HOLCOMB asked, but could not obtain leave, to submit a resolution for two sessions a day.
Mr. Speaker Allen's bill [13], for refunding license money illegally collected under the act of June 15, 1852, coming up; and no quorum voting thereon-
The House adjourned.
IN SENATE
TUESDAY, February 19,1861.On motion by Mr. LINE, the reading of yesterday's journal was dispensed with.
Mr. FERGUSON presented a petition from citizens of Clark county, praying that a monument be erected over the grave of Jonathan Jennings, the first Governor of Indiana, which was referred to a Select Committee, viz : Senators Ferguson, Slack and Newcomb.
Mr. COBB presented the petition of 723 citizens, praying that an act be passed for the relief of the treasurer of Martin county, whose office was robbed of $2,300 ; which was referred to a Select Committee, viz: Senators Cobb, Murray, Anthony, Steele, Claypool and Craven.
THE EMBEZZLEMENT BILL.
Mr. WAGNER, from the Finance Committee, returned the embezzlement bill (H. R. 1)-described on page 175 of these Reports-recommending passage with immaterial amend merits.
Mr. MURRAY moved to recommit the bill, with instructions to make its penalties applicable to county and township treasurers.
Mr. WAGNER explained its provisions.
Mr. TARKINGTON. I want to vote for this bill. I am willing county treasurers shall be liable to the amount of their bonds alone (let it be sufficient), and let them do what they please with the money. I think that is the safest way.
Mr. MURRAY. This Senate adopted a similar amendment when the Senate bill, identical with this one, was before it: and I want to know if a change has come over the spirit of their dreams. I hope the Senate will insist upon the position it has taken.
Mr. LINE. I have concluded to vote for this bill, even if it does not refer to any but State officers.
Mr. CONNER. I will go as far as any Senator to protect the public funds, either State county, or township. It would be wrong to impose penalties upon county or township treasurers for depositing funds in their possession, when they have no safe to keep them in. I think the Judiciary Committee should examine this bill. I want to be assured it is right, and then I will vote for it. I move to refer, with instructions to report in what manner it affects county and township treasurers.
Mr. MURRAY withdrew his motion.
Mr. MARCH. I am in favor of passing the same laws affecting county and township treasurers that applies to the State treasurer. I am willing to vote for this bill, embracing only the custody of State funds, and then vote to pass the Senate bill embracing also county and township treasurers. I believe every county in the State is able to provide a safe, and it is policy for them to do so. I am opposed to recommitting the bill, trusting the Senate will pass the other bill also, and throw the responsibility upon the House.
Mr. ROBINSON. I hope this bill will not be recommitted.
Mr. RAY. For one I am not in favor of the passage of the Senate bill, for the reason that the expense for safes would be disproportionate to the benefit arising therefrom. It would involve an expense greater than all the thefts of county funds in the State would amount to. I think it proper the State Treasury should be better guarded than it has been. Corruptly speaking, there has not been a dollar lost by any of the Democratic State officers.
Mr. CONNER withdrew his motion, and proposed to amend, by unanimous consent, hat nothing in this act shall be so construed is to prevent county treasurers from depositing funds, for safe keeping only; at the risk of such county treasurers so depositing.
Mr. WAGNER opposed motions to refer.
[A MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE
Announced the passage by that body of the bill [H. R. 8], providing for allowances to clerks of courts, &c. Also : the bill [H. R. 3] to provide for holding Common Pleas courts in Newton county.]
Mr. SHIELDS. I would be very glad to see the bill passed as it is; but I do not see why i cannot be so amended as to apply to county nd township officers as well. If any funds should be guarded, it is the county and township funds.
Mr. WILLIAMS submitted additional instructions, that the Judiciary Committee report what effect this bill will have upon county treasurers, and also to incorporate the amend
