IN SENATE.
MONDAY, February 25, 1861.The Senate was called to order by Mr WAGNER.
Mr. WHITE introduced a bill [243] to amend the title of an act concerning promissory notes and bills of exchange, approved May 12, 1852, so as to include bonds and other instruments of writing, and so to amend section 1 of said act; which was passed the first reading.
WORK FOR COMMITTEES.
Senate bills, introduced Saturday, were read the second time and referred to committees,viz.:
- FinanceMessrs. Bearss' 233, and Mr. March's 242.
- Judiciary-Messrs. DeHart's 235, Miller's 23T, and Studabaker's 239.
- Agriculture-Mr. Anthony's 236.
- Corporations-Mr. O'Brien's 238.
- Banks-Mr. Tarkington's 240.
- County and Township Business-Mr. Miller's 241.
Mr. White's 234 was ordered engrossed.
The following House bills were read and referred to appropriate committees, viz :
Organization of Courts-The bill [H. R. 3] to provide for holding common pleas courts in Newton county.
The bill [H. R. 39] to authorize the formation of new counties, &c., coming up-
Mr. ANTHONY made an ineffectual motion to pass it over informally.
Mr. HULL. If it could be made the special order for some hour to-morrow, I would consent; but I wish to press the matter because it has to be acted upon so as to reach rny county this week, or else it will be indifferent to me whether it is passed at all or not.
The bill being read by the Secretary-
Mr. HULL. Upon consultation with some of the friends of this measure, I will move to refer it to the Judiciary Committee, with instructions to report it back to-morrow morning.
Mr. ANTHONY. If gentlemen are willing to let this bill go to the committee without these instructions, I have no objections, but I will not consent to have a matter of this importance hurried through in this way with only a dozen members in the Senate.
Mr. HULL. All the members of that committee will certainly be here this afternoon. I must insist that we take action upon this bill as soon as possible; it is due to my county at least.
Mr. TURNER. This is a matter of great importance, and action should be had upon it immediately. Commissioners' courts will be held in all the counties of the State a week from to-day, and this bill, if passed, should be passed before that time.
Mr. CLAYPOOL moved to amend, viz.: "provided nothing in this act contained shall effect any county now fully organized under existing laws."
Mr. ANTHONY. We are acting upon an important proposition without a quorum There is no necessity for pressing this matter m this way.
Mr. HULL modified his motion at the suggestion of Mr. MILLER, so as to direct the committee to report back the bill day after tomorrow.
On motion by Mr. TARKINGTON the instructions to report back were laid on the table.
Mr. WILLIAMS offered a substitute for the amendment, to-wit: "Nothing in this bill shall be so construed as to interfere with the formation of the county of Newton."
The bill, with pending amendments, was referred to the Judiciary Committee.
The bill H. R. 103 was referred to the Committee on Roads.
The bill H. R. 44 was referred to the Judiciary Committee with an amendment proposed by Mr. MILLER to strike out " three years" and insert "five years" as also were the bills H. R, 107 and 167.
The bill H. R. 199 was referred to the Committee on Agriculture, with an amendment by Mr. WOLFE, legalizing purchases heretofore made.
The bill H. R. 283 was passed the first reading.
NUMBER OF MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATURE.
Mr. LOMAX offered the following:
Resolved, That the Joint Committee on Apportionment be instructed to inquire into the expediency of reducing the number of Senators to thirty, and the number of Representatives to sixty; and if such reduction be expedient to report a bill apportioning the State accordingly.
The resolution was adopted by consent.
SESSION HOURS.
Mr. CARNAHAN offered the following:
Resolved, That during the remainder of this session the Senate will meet at half-past eight o'clock a. m. and half-past one o'clock p. m. of each day.
Which lies on the table for one day.
Mr. MILLER presented two petitions from citizens of Marshall county, praying for a law to sell fermenated liquors, such as small beer, cider and native wine, without license; referred to the Committee on Temperance; and for the protection of fish in the small lakes of the State; referred to the Committee on Rights Privileges.
On motion by Mr. FERGUSON his bill 109 was taken from the table and placed on the files.
And then (at 11) came the recess till 2.
AFTERNOON SESSION
The PRESIDENT announced the special order for this hour to be the consideration of the Select Committee's bill, introduced Saturday, making an appropriation of $500 for the erection of,a monument to Hon. Jonathan Jennings-the question being on an amendment to the amendment.
Mr. WAGNER accepted the amendment to his amendment, appropriating $2,500 for the erection of a monument on the Tippecanoe Battle Ground.
page: 280[View Page 280]Mr. WOLFE moved to lay the amendment on the table.
Mr. RAY should vote for this motion because he considered the effect of the amendment would be to kill the bill.
The motion was agreed to by yeas 20, nays 15.
The majority report of the committee was then concurred in by yeas 22, nays 18; and then the bill [244] was thus passed to the second reading.
PAY OF COMMISSIONERS.
The PRESIDENT announced another special order, viz.: The consideration of Mr. Conner's resolution, offered on Saturday, providing pay to the Peace Commissioners.
The resolution was adopted.
FISCAL AFFAIRS OF THE STATE.
On motion of Mr. WAGNER, the joint resolution H. R. 31-see page 245 of these Reports-appointing an investigating commission, was taken up, and passed by yeas 28, nays 10.
THE EMBEZZLEMENT BILL.
Mr. March's bill 1 coming up on the third reading, on his motion it was recommitted to the Judiciary Committee, with instructions to strike out all that relates to State officers.
LICENSE FOR THE SALE OF LIQUORS.
Mr Cravens' bill 20-described on page 30 of these Reports-being read the third time-
Mr. CRAVENS. There is only one provision in, the bill, and that is simply the principle of popular sovereignty as applied to drinking and liquors. It provides that the applicant for license, or parties to the remonstrance, may have an appeal from the Board of County Commissioners to the Circuit Court, and there a trial by jury shall be final.
Mr. SLACK would not vote for the bill unless the Common Pleas Court have concurrent jurisdiction in these cases.
Mr. CRAVENS would not object to that.
Mr. WOLFE. If there was nothing but popular sovereignty in the bill I should vote for it, but I understand it gives to every individual in the county the power to prevent the issuing of licenses at the proper time, and until the action of the circuit court should be had upon it. I am opposed to any such clogs as this being put to the present law,-which is about as good as we can well make it. If it is right to grant licenses, it is not right to permit a single individual to thwart the intention of the law in this way. There is less evil under a license law than under a quart law. This bill is for the purpose of obstructing the issuing of licenses, and I cannot vote for it.
Mr. RAY. The bill is objectionable on the points made by the Senator from Harrison. The present law I believe to be as acceptable as any law could be to the varied sentiments of our population. The people are acquiescing in it. By this bill you might tie up a license one or two years; for you can always find a man more or less tinctured with the fanaticism of temperance who will remonstrate; and the docket of the Circuit Court would be filled with such cases. I oppose it on these grounds, for I am in favor of giving the present liquor law a fair trial as it is.
Mr. CRAVENS. The provisions of this bin will not contravene any provision of the old law. With that law, as it was intended and as it ought to be, I am satisfied. What is th benefit of a right to a remonstrance unless something can be accomplished by it? [He cited a case in point decided by the Supreme Court.] This bill is simply to make effective the provisions of the law which says that parties dissenting shall have the privilege of remonstrance.
Mr. LANDERS. I shall have to vote against this bill from the fact that the people of my county are satisfied with the law we now have-and I would vote for 110 change unless it be to compel parties to procure license to sell a greater quantity than a quart at a time.
Mr. MELLETT. I can see nothing in the objections raised to this bill. In order to make the law perfect, and as it was intended give to the remonstrants the right of appeal-do justice to all the parties.
Mr. MILLER made an ineffectual demand for the previous question.
Mr. WOLFE made an ineffectual motion to indefinitely postpone the bill-yeas 14, nays 26.
Mr. MARCH. The present law ought to be entitled "An act making the selling of liquor respectable;" this bill cannot make it more obnoxious, and may improve it.
Mr. CARNAHAN. 1 shall vote against the bill, because I believe county boards are fully competent so settle the matter. I have heard no complaint, in my section, of the law as it now stands.
On Mr. SLACK'S motion, and by unanimous consent, the bill was amended so as to provide for an appeal to the Common Pleas Court, also.
Mr. WHITE. I am opposed to much more legislation on this subject, but believe I will vote for this bill.
Mr. WAGNER. I shall vote for this bill because I don't think our county Commissioners and Court juries will permit men to sell liquor hereafter.
The bill was then finally passed by-years 26, nays 15-as follows:
YEAS-Messrs. Anthony, Bearss, Beeson, Berry, Blair, Campbell, Claypool, Conner, Craven of Madison, Cravens of Jefferson, Culver, DeHart, Grubb, Hull, March, Mellett, Miller, Newcomb, Robinson, Steele, Stone, Tarkington, Teegarden, Turner, Wagner, and White-26.
NAYS-Messrs. Carnahan, Cobb, Ferguson, Jones, Landers, Line, Lomax, Ray, Shields, Shoemaker, Shoulders, Slack, Studabaker, Williams, and Wolfe-15.
QUALIFICATION OF VOTERS.
Mr. Blair s bill S. 30-see pages 45, 217 and 218 of these reports-was read the third time.
page: 281[View Page 281]On Mr. LANDER'S motion the bill was amended by consent so as to require the voter to vote in the ward in which he may reside, at all State elections.
Mr. MARCH. I believe this bill comes as near meeting the views of a majority of the Senate as it can be made. This matter has been before two or three committees and I believe we had better vote for it as it is, than to run the risk of delays and attempts to modify it.
Mr. SHIELDS. I cannot see the necessity Of passing any law that will disfrancise any actual settler. It is our policy to make the right of suffrage as free as possible; and a bona fide resident of this State moving his family from one county to another should not be deprived of his right to vote.
Mr. STUDABAKER. I believe the word "residence" has a legal significance and that it is not in the power of the Legislature to change its meaning by requiring a certain length of time. Residence consists in the intention of a person to remain ; and if that is the correct view it is not in the power of the Legislature to say he shall not have the right to vote until he resides in a precinct 15 or 30 days. I think the provisions of this bill ought to be the law, but under the Constitution cannot; that its passage would produce litigation ; and these are the reasons why I shall vote against it.
Mr. MARCH. The object of this law is to prevent the transmigration of voters-this moving from one county to another. If such a rule could be be adopted I should like to see no man excluded, but that cannot be done, and I hope the bill may pass as it is.
Mr. WOLFE reveiwed the provisions of the bill, and desired, but failed to obtain unanimous consent, to add a provision to the clause concerning foreign vote is " that such certificates shall not be required of such voter."
Mr. FERGUSON. We ought to be careful in keeping out fraudulent voters, not to disfranchise legal ones. With the Senator from Adams, [Mr. Studabaker,] I cannot vote for this bill because of constitutional objections.
The was then finally passed by yeas 29, nays 11-as follows :
YEAS-Messrs. Anthony, Barss, Beeson, Berry, Blair, Campbell, Claypool, Conner, Cravens of Jefferson, DeHart, Grubb, Hull, Jones, Landers, March, Mellett, Miller, Ray, Robinson, Shields, Shoemaker, Steele, Stone, Tarkington, Teegarden, Turner, Wagner, White, and Williams-29.
NAYS-Messrs. Carnahan, Cobb, Craven of Madison' Ferguson, Line, Lomax, Newcomb, Shoulders, Slack, Studabaker, and Wolfe-11.
THE PROTECTION OF FISH.
Mr. Claypool's bill S. 40-see pages 46, 164 and 170 of these Reports-was read the third time.
Mr. SLACK moved to recommit, with instructions to amend so as to except "any other stream, river, bayou or pond in the State of Indiana."
Mr. CLAYPOOL objected to any amendment. It seems to be the desire of Senators to pass some bill of this kind; the one under consideration had been perfected in Committee, and was probably as near right as it could be made.
Mr. MILLER submitted additional instructions, viz : to exempt the St. Joseph and Kankakee rivers.
Mr. COBB made an ineffectual motion-yeas 18, nays 22-to indefinitely postpone the bill.
Mr. SLACK. I think the bill is unconstitutional, and that the catfish, dogfish, suckers, and other fishes dwelling in the streams that are excepted, have no more rights than the fish in other streams. [Laughter.] It is giving privileges and immunities to one class which are denied to another. Seriously, I do think the bill is a local one, for it makes exceptions in certain localities.
Mr. CARNAHAN. I regard this law as not only a local law, but a foolish law. Such laws are not required, and are only a source of contention and strife.
On motion by Mr. LINE, the motion to re-recommit was laid on the table-yeas 21, nays 15.
Mr. MILLER asked, but failed to obtain leave, to amend the bill by unanimous consent, so as to except the St. Joseph river.The bill was then rejected by yeas 16, nays 22, as follows :
YEAS-Messrs. Anthony, Bearss, Beeson, Blair, Claypool, Craven of Madison, Cravens of Jefferson, DeHart, Grubb, Hull, Line, March, Mellett, Newcomb, Steele, and Wagner-16.
NAYS-Messrs.Berry,Campbell, Carnahan, Cobb, Jones, Landers, Lomax, Miller, Ray, Robinson, Shields, Shoemaker, Shoulders, Slack, Stone, Studabaker, Tarkington, Teegarden, Turner, White, Williams and Wolfe-22.
COMMON PLEAS' ATTORNEY' SALARY.
Mr. Line's bill S. 54-see pages 69, 171 and and 192 of these Reports-was read the third time.
Mr. NEWCOMB explained its provision.
Mr. WOLFE. I think this is not the kind of a bill we ought to pass. It gouges a little too deep. I think the clause that pays prosecuting attorneys out of the county treasury is particularly objectionable, and on account of that section I will have to vote against it.
On motion by Mr. MELLETT, the bill was recommitted, with instructions to strike out all in relation to paying fees out of the county treasury.
POLL TAX FOR COUNTY PURPOSES.
Mr. Wolfe's bills 57-see pages 69 and 194 of these Reports-was read the third time.
Mr. W. explained his bill, as before.
The bill was then finally passed, by yeas 28, nays 6.
NEW PROPOSITIONS.
Mr. MARCH, by leave, introduced a bill [245,] for the relief of Joseph Moore.
Mr. HULL introduced a bill [246,] supplementary to an act to provide for the election and appointment of supervisors of highways, &c., approved March 5, 1859.
Which were passed the first reading.
And then the Senate adjourned.
