rights of any other peaceful citizen, and I certainly do not believe that the personal rights of the members of this body are in danger from our fellow-citizens here. But, sir, such a thing has, been threatened. Threats of violence have been made against a member of this House from a source calling itself a Vigilance Committee. "We are informed through the press that there is such an organization as a Vigilance Committee in this city. Have we not seen both in the Indianapolis Journal and in the State Sentinel, that there has been a formal tender to that Vigilance Committee, of the services of an armed body of troops to aid that organization in carrying out its objects? I can not see why the raising of this committee can be objected to. The object is the protection of the rights of members of this body, and the preservation of the public peace. A proposition to investigate any source of public danger, can not reflect upon any honest man. An honest man is not afraid of investigation. If the public peace is threatened it is our duty to inquire into the matter. We can all remember that reign of terror which was inaugurated in San Francisco, California, by a Vigilance Committee there, which doubtless sprung from resources as significant as that before us,and what was the result? There was a complete overturning of law and order. Even the lives of peaceful citizens were endangered, and terror pervaded the city just as long as they usurped the power of the law. "With such an example in our country, sir, it is impossible to say what results might not follow from the irresponsible action of a Vigilance Committee anywhere in our midst. If we look back on the French Revolution we find all the horrors of that revolution growing out of the ascendancy of a Vigilance Committee in the city of Paris - acts of lawless violence and scenes of terror too horrible for description. But it may be that the objects of the organization of this committee are fair and honorable. If so, they will not themselves object to investigation. Mr. Speaker, to show you that the apprehensions set forth in the resolution are not without foundation, I would refer you to the action of the Governor, the Executive of the State, who has found it necessary to place a heavy guard in one of the buildings of this city for its protection. I understand that last Sunday night the Governor ordered a guard to be stationed in the Sentinel Building to protect it from an apprehended attack. "Would the Governor have done that if he had not believed there was danger at hand? Should the apprehensions and the judgment of the Governor be disregarded in such a case? I say no, Mr. Speaker. I say it is the duty of this body to investigate the matter. If there is an organization in this city with a view to overturn the laws, obstructing the rights of commerce, or in any manner going beyond the legal rights of the citizen, I say it is our duty to investigate the matter and stop it in its very infancy.
Mr. CRAIN. Mr. Speaker, I am not aware that we are sitting here to investigate what people are doing out of doors. There may be Vigilance Committees in other towns, and if we were to undertake here to investigate them, I think we might have a good time of it. I doubt whether there is not, at this time, a Vigilance Committee, in some sense, in every town in the State; and it seems to me simply absurd for this body to attempt the investigation of a Vigilance Committee in this city, if there be one. Sir, we have laws for the State of Indiana; and certainly this House does not undertake to enforce the laws. It is unnecessary. The gentleman talks about a certain building being guarded. I know nothing about that, nor do I care. I suppose this city has laws and a police force; and I suppose it is their province to take care that they are executed; and not that this House should raise a Committee to investigate Vigilance Committees for them. I say again, that I do not know that there is a Vigilance Committee here, but I know there are Vigilance Committees in other towns of the State; and I know that they are necessary in some places, as was shown by the letter just now presented from his county by the gentleman from Martin, [Mr. Dobbins.] And I repeat, that it is sometimes necessary to provide for the public safety in this manner, if the police cannot do it. I think that it is not our province to interfere; for if it was, we might have to send a Committee to Evansville, Lafayette, and other places. I hope the House will not entertain for a moment the idea of passing any such resolution as this.
Mr. Speaker ALLEN. (Mr. Jones of Tippecanoe in the Chair.) Mr. Speaker: I regret that this resolution has been introduced. I do so, be cause the preamble sets out by assuming that there is an unauthorized and illegal body of men organized in this town for the purpose of doing unauthorized and illegal acts, and then closes with a resolution which would make this Legislature guilty of an act of usurpation - an act which, by the Constitution, we have no right to do. The preamble to the resolution assumes lawlessness on the part of a body in this town, and then the resolution asks the Legislature to recognize such page: 86[View Page 86] lawlessness by doing itself an act which it has no power to do. We are told by the gentleman from Marshall [Mr. Packard] that under the dread of this Vigilance Committee it has become necessary to set a guard for the protection of the property of one of the citizens of this town. I ask the gentleman if the property has been disturbed by that mob? and if it has I would ask him further, if this Legislature would have any power what-ever to legislate with reference to the matter? The only way in which acts of lawless violence can be punished is through the interposition of our courts. The citizen whose rights are invaded or trampled under foot must appeal to the law for redress, and to the law alone. I ask the gentleman who introduced the resolution what power this House has to make the proposed investigation? Suppose all the facts were duly reported and attested to the House, as cited in this preamble, can the House punish such acts? or can the House pass an ex post facto law, and prescribe punishment after the offense is committed? Again, I ask the gentleman if the committee should be appointed has the Legislature the power to confer upon a committee the power to administer the requisite oaths to take the testimony in the case? Suppose a Vigilance Committee exists in this city - I know not if there is one; and suppose Mr. A., a citizen here, is called to testify as to whether there is such an organization, has this House the power to compel the witness to testify to the point? Suppose the case were in a court of justice, and a party is brought in and required to testify in a matter that implicates himself, can the court compel him to testify? and has the House greater power in such a case than the courts? Has the House the power to authorize investigations of unauthorized, illegal bodies of men? I assume that it has not; but its province is legislation, and it is the province of the courts to investigate and punish crime. Now, so far as the protection of the members of this body is concerned, there is no question but that the House may take such necessary steps to arraign and punish as may be expedient, if the personal liberty of any of its members be placed in jeopardy; but then the case must be fully presented, as to the facts, before the House would be authorized to entertain a motion. The House would not have power to appoint a committee to inquire whether Mr. A. is in any danger of having his liberty or his person violated; until the fact shall have been made apparent the House can not inquire. It is certain then that the House has no right to inquire into the objects and intentions of bodies of men, whether they call themselves Vigilance Committees, or by any other name. As remarked by the gentleman from Parke, (Mr. Crain,) if you start out to inquire after the objects and purposes of Vigilance Committees, there is no telling where it will end. I am quite certain, if there is a Vigilance Committee in this town, the entire tinue of the session might be fruitlessly consumed in the matter of inquiring into it. Now suppose a party should undertake to prevent the shipping of provisions from the depot, have not the shippers their remedy at law? Can the Legislature declare that they shall be punished? or that their organization shall cease to exist? Have we not tribunals organized by laws under the Constitution? and have not these tribunals the sole power to investigate all violations of the rights of citizens? Then let not the Legislature usurp the power of the courts, but if parties suffer damage from such causes let them appeal to the proper tribunals, and let not this Legislature guilty of usurpation.
Mr. DOBBINS had no doubt as to the power of the House to protect its members. The city of Indianapolis was responsible for the acts of this Vigilance Committee. He was governed in his action here solely by his own judgment, and stood responsible to the people of the county of Martin, and when the people of that county shall find that he had failed to represent them as he ought, he was ready to go home. He understood that one of the objects of this Vigilance Committee was to control the action and judgment of members on this floor; and, so far as that was concerned, he was ready to vote for the investigation. He would let that body know that they can not control his judgment. Outside of that he did not think we had any business with them. So far as regards the anonymous threats that have been made against members, he was ready and anxious for the investigation.
Mr. FISHER. I deprecate, as much as any member can, these anonymous letters to members of this House. I admit that Vigilance Committees may be necessary under some peculiar circumstance, but in all cases where they are not necessary, they are an intolerable nuisance. Whenever they undertake to influence members of this House they are entirely out of character. No circumstance will justify that. And if that is to be continued and the attempt should be made to control the Legislature by violence, the only way to avoid it is by adjourning to some other place. But as it respects this inquiry, the proposition is to raise a committee, with power to send for persons and papers. This will unquestionably result in a very large expenditure of money, and I am unable to see any possible good that can grow out of it. You may find that there is a Vigilance Committee; you may find that such a letter as that read here last Saturday was written; but you will hardly find evidence that any body of men is responsible for it. Any man might write such a paper - it might be some individual wanting to play smart. I was disposed to think, when it was read Saturday, that some person was endeavoring to play off a hoax. I did not regard it as a serious thing. But suppose it was all that is claimed for it, my opinion is that it has failed to produce the result intended. I do not suppose that there is a member on this floor whose vote or action is to be influenced by a paper of that kind in the slightest degree. I do not feel disposed to boast of my courage, for it has never been tried - I never had a fight in my life - but it seems to me that I should have no more fears about such a paper as that, than though it were a piece of blank paper. And I presume the gentleman from Bartholomew had no fears about it. I presume he has not thought of personal violence from that source; and I presume he never could be influenced by any such threats in the course of action he adopts here. I can gee no good, sir, to grow out of this investigation. It seems to me that the appointment of page: 87[View Page 87] this committee would be treating the matter with ore seriousness than it deserves. I think the best way is to treat it with perfect contempt.
Mr. BUNDY was not here on Saturday, when the gentleman from Bartholomew submitted the letter in question. This was the only attempt that had been brought to light in which any show of a disposition had been made to influence the action of this House. So far as that letter goes it was a breach of privilege. For if there is anything sacred in a representative government it is the right of a man to speak and vote here, being responsible alone to his constituents. His people had elected him to represent them, and if he fails he must answer to them and to nobody else. I am impressed, however, that too much dignity and importance will be given this thing. We are getting up an investigation - perhaps an expensive investigation in time and money for the purpose of finding out whether that letter was written for the purpose of intimidation. If it be the act of an individual; Mr. Speaker, I am happy to inform the House and country that the gentleman from Bartholomew is abundantly able to protect himself. He can go it safe upon his own muscle. As to that branch of the resolution to which the gentleman from Marshall and Starke spoke at length, that is going beyond the province of this House. I refer to that branch of the resolution which look to the fact of the hindrance of property from peaceably passing over the public roads and highways. It is the business of the courts of law, created by the authority of this House under the constitution, to protect all persons in their rights of property; that is not at all the business of this House. Then, sir, I am impressed with the belief that in this good city of Indiandianapolis, so famed for its churches, and in past time at least, famous also for its morality and religion, its republicanism and respect for the laws, there is no need for such a supervision by this body. And if I knew that such an irresponsible body as a Vigilance Committee did exist here, I should still be constrained to vote against any resolution of this kind. But if it were made apparent to me that any member of this House needs protection, I should go as far as any man to protect him in the exercise of all his rights and privileges here. These sacred rights of representatives have been seduously guarded ever since legislative assemblies have been convened. It is the right of speaking and acting and owing responsibility alone to his constituents. Whenever I shall find that this right has been infringed upon, as the representative of a free people, I shall be as ready as any member to show to the community that the members of this House are to stay here and do the business of the people without being responsible to any power except that which has sent them here. I am obliged, however, to think that gentlemen have exhibited too much sensitiveness about this, and seeing no other occasion for investigation, I shall feel constrained to vote against the resolution.
Mr. PACKARD. When we are assured that there is such an organization, and when, as I might say, they were backed up with troops, I say then that it becomes a question of importance. When an organized body of soldiers tender their services to the Vigilance Committee for the purpose of carrying out their objects, it then becomes necessary for the Legislature, whose members have been menaced with its power, to investigate the objects of that committee. Some further importance, also, should be attached to this matter from the fact that the Governor has been obliged to order a guard for the protection of property.
Mr. BUNDY. Has the Legislature the power to protect the property of private individuals?
Mr. PACKARD. I suppose not. But that resolution sets forth these facts in order to show the lawless character of this committee, and that therefore its threats ought to receive a due amount of attention. The very fact that it has arrested attention outside of this House calls for action here. These things are set forth in the preamble for the purpose of showing that the body is of some magnitude. As far as the right of examining witnesses is concerned, I can not see any difficulty about that.
Mr. CASON. Suppose, upon investigation, you should find every thing as charged against this committee true, in what manner would you punish parties?
Mr. PACKARD. I will answer you in the true Yankee manner. How would you protect this body from a mob threatening violence? Why, simply by becoming informed with respect to the mob, and then by being able to ward off all approach of danger. I say then again that we hare an undoubted right to investigate with respect to any invasion of the personal rights of members of this House. And we have a right to examine witnesses under oath. The gentleman from Henry [Mr. Bundy] says the gentleman from Bartholomew [Mr. Smith] is physically able to resist any man that may attack him, but neither the gentleman from Bartholomew, nor any other man, is able to resist the midnight assassin.
Mr. SMITH of Bartholomew remembered that this matter was treated lightly, and recited his conversation about the Vigilance Committee on Saturday in the Sentinel office; that he came immediately down to the State House, and within twenty minutes afterwards he received the letter. He did not dread the prowess of any one man, but perhaps he could not stand against a mob. But, as Prentice said once to a mob, he knew that a thousand men could destroy hie property, but select out one man and I'll fight him all the way though. So far as his personal security was concerned he did ask for any better body guard than the Republican members on this floor.
Mr. McCLURG. Certainly no man deprecated more than he the attempt to intimidate any member on this floor; but it seemed to him that there is something in this resolution that could not be legitimately carried out. It seemed to him that its adoption would be a nugatory act of legislation. Suppose this committee of investigation to be formed, and it would be ascertained by them that there was a Vigilance Committee, banded for unlawful objects, what control would this House have over the matter? Till some act is committed nothing could be done. No court could have jurisdiction before the act. How then could this House recognize intentions. It was in the power of this body to pass an expost facto law. Certainly that portion of the resolution which page: 88[View Page 88] looks to the investigation of intentions was clearly nugatory. If everything sought after could be found out, even then the resolution would be nugatory.
Mr. FORD recommended that every member in danger from Vigilance Committees turn himself, also, into a Vigilance Committee and take care of himself. [Laughter.]
Mr. ORR concurred in the views of those opposed to the adoption of the resolution.
Mr. KENDRICK. I do not think we need be scared over this. I am acquainted with the people of Indianapolis, and I satisfied that they are a safe people.
Mr. BOBBINS. Does the gentleman think that all the people in Indianapolis will be saved?
Mr. KENDRICK. I am not so certain that all the people in Indianapolis will be saved; neither am I certain that all the members of this House will be saved, I think these are very doubtful questions. I am certain as to the people in and about Indianapolis, they wish to respect and carry out the laws of the land; and if members continued to treat the citizens of Indianapolis with respect they will not be harmed. That I am willing to vouch for. I think, therefore, that on this subject, brethren, we ought to be dried up; [laughter,] and if any man has personal fears let him adopt the sentiment of the gentleman from Jackson, [Mr. Ford] to resolve himself into a committee of one and take care of himself.
Mr. WOOD was satisfied that there were people here attaching undue importance to this vigilance committee. The letter referred to might not have been written by the committee. There were such committees all over the State, organized under the promptings of the purest patriot ism. On his motion the resolution was laid on the table.
Mr. BINGHAM submitted the following, which was adopted:
Resolved, That the injunction of secrecy resting upon the proceedings of the House of Representatives of the 27th of April, ultimo, is removed, so far as to admit the publication of the action with closed doors on the bill No. 12, and the joint resolution submitted by Mr. Lane.
ADJOURNMENT TO A DAY CERTAIN.
Mr. WILKINSON submitted a resolution to adjourn the session from Thursday the 9th, to Tuesday the 28th of May - members of the General Assembly to receive mileage, but no per diem during said recess.
Mr. FISHER moved to refer the resolution to the Committee on the Judiciary, with instructions to inquire as to whether the time between the day of adjournment and reassembling will be counted in the forty days during which the Legislature is allowed to be in session.
Mr. PARRETT. Having done what we ought to do, he thought we ought to adjourn, and remain at home, subject to the call of the Governor - adjourn sine die, and not to a day certain. He hoped the resolution would go to the committee and that the committee would keep it there till we get ready to adjourn and go home like sensible men.
The motion was agreed to and the resolution referred accordingly.
SUPERINTENDENTS OF BENEVOLENT INSTITUTIONS.
Mr. VEATCH asked and obtained leave to introduce a bill [34] entitled an Act fixing the term of office of the Superintendent of the Hospital for the Insane, and the Superintendents of the Asylum for the Deaf and Dumb and the Asylum for the Blind, and providing when the election therefor shall be held.
It was passed to the second reading.
Mr. BUNDY moved a suspension of the rules and constitutional provisions to enable him to ask now for the second reading of the bill, whereupon the Constitution requires that the yeas and nays shall be recorded. But no quorum voting.
The House adjourned.
Enrolled Act No. 12, of the Senate.
AN ACT to legalize the act of the Auditor of State, in depositing certain bonds of the State in the branch, at Indianapolis, of the Bank of the State of Indiana, as security for twenty-five thousand dollars borrowed by the Governor, Auditor and Treasurer of State, raised to assume and provide for the payment of money by the State.
SECTION 1. Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Indiana, That whereas it becomes necessary, in order to comply with the requisition for troops recently made by the President of the United States, to procure a large sum of money for the use of the State, before the General Assembly could be convened; and whereas, the Governor and the Auditor, Treasurer and Secretary of State, upon their own private credit and responsibility, borrowed from the branch, at Indianapolis, of the Bank of the State of Indiana, for the use of the State, the sum of twenty-five thousand dollars, to be expended for and on behalf of the State in paying the expenses incurred and to be incurred, in raising and sustaining troops in compliance with the said requisition of the President; and whereas, the Governor and other officers of the State aforesaid, gave their promisory note for said money, dated April 17, 1861, payable on demand, to the order of C. L. Stevenson, Cashier of said branch bank, with interest; and to secure the payment of said note, the said Auditor of State deposited in said Branch Bank five per cent, bonds of the State of Indiana to the amount of thirty thousand dollars; therefore the borrowing of the said sum of twenty-five thousand dollars and the depositing of said bonds as security for the payment thereof, as above recited, are hereby declared to be legal and binding upon the State of Indiana, and the debt contracted as aforesaid is hereby assumed, and shall be paid by the State of Indiana out of the contingent fund of the Governor, appropriated by the General Assembly for the purpose of defraying the expenses of responding to the proclamation of the President of the United States for troops; and if no funds specifically provided for the purpose of paying said debts should be in the treasury when it becomes necessary to pay the same, then the said debt shall be paid out of any money that may be in the treasury and not otherwise specifically appropriated.
SEC. 2. There is an emergency which requires that this act shall take effect immediately - and it is therefore enacted that it shall take effect and be in force from and after its passage.
[Approved May 4, 1861. For legislative action page: 89[View Page 89] thereon, see pp. 23, 34, 38, 51, 54 and 63 of these Reports.]
