HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
WEDNESDAY, May 1, 1861.On motion by Mr. HAYS, the reading of the journal was dispensed with.
HOSPITAL FOR THE INSANE.
Mr. KENDRICK, from the Committee on Benevolent Institutions, to which was referred the communication of the officers of the Indiana Hospital for the Insane, reported a recommendation for an additional appropriation of $2,700 for repairs and supplies of said institution. He explained the recommendation of the committee, and set forth, in its specific objects of repairs of the roof of the building, and the supply of bedding, coal, &c., the necessity of the appropriation.
On motion by Mr. NEBEKER, the report was recommitted to the same committee, with instructions to report a bill in conformity therewith.
RELIEF BILLS.
Mr. WILLIAMS introduced a bill (27) providing for relief by valuation and appraisement, from execution and judgment upon all contracts hereafter made.
Mr. STOTSENBERG introduced a bill (28) providing for the redemption of real property sold upon execution within this State: [defendant may redeem the same any time within one year, by paying the purchase-money with 10 per cent, interest - the purchaser to be entitled to the growing crop, &c.]
These bills were severally passed to the second reacting.
CONSTITUTIONAL OBLIGATIONS.
Mr. LANE. Mr. Speaker, I move a reconsideration of the vote of yesterday adopting the joint resolution from the Senate, No. 3, drawn by Senator Steele. I am satisfied that there is a good deal of buncomb in those resolutions; and I think there are some things in them calculated to irritate rather than allay any ill feeling the Kentucky people may hold against us. These resolutions are not addressed to the Governor of Kentucky, for he is understood to be a secessionist. What then do we mean in those resolutions when we say that when a dozen Union-loving men shall call upon us, we will go over in little squads and help them there against the secessionists? Such a declaration as that would do more to irritate the people of Kentucky against us than anything that could possibly be done here. I move the reconsideration in order that for the present we may lay the resolution on the table. I think they should be better matured.
Mr, STOTSENBERG. What section of the resolution does the gentleman from Putnam desire to consider again?
Mr. LANE. The latter part of the last (the third) resolution.
Mr. STOTSENBERG. Does he not consider it the duty of all loyal men to defend Union men in the State of Kentucky, or in any other State?
Mr. LANE. It seems to me that we should wait to be called upon for that purpose by the proper authorities - that we should not, as individuals, go over there with arms to help them.
Mr. DOBBINS. I hope the House will not reconsider that vote. These resolutions under, went mature deliberation in the Senate. I happened to be there at the time of the vote on them, and I saw that they gave them very careful attention. I think, sir, that it is nothing more than right and proper that we should do everything in our power to sustain the Union men in Kentucky or any other State - no matter which - even in the extreme South If we find men struggling against rebellion, it is our duty to say to them, we are ready to stand by you in the defence of our government and our common rights; to let them know that the State of Indiana, while she is firm in maintaining the Union, is determined also to be just - determined not to make war on the institution of slavery. These resolutions express this: that every patriotic citizen of the State of Indiana is determined to maintain the Union for the love he has for the Union, and not for his hatred of the South, and the slavery of the South. I regard the man going into war now to express his hatred of the South as not a true Union man - as guilty, in fact, of moral treason against the Union We all engage in this strife for the love we bear toward our Union and its government, as our fathers made it, and not on account of sectional hatred. I trust the House will not reconsider the vote.
Mr. PARRETT. Mr. Speaker, in regard to this resolution, I agree with the gentleman from Martin, (Mr. Dobbins,) and disagree with the gentleman from Putnam (Mr. Lane.) In the first blush it struck me that the resolutions were unnecessary, because they are the same in tone and sentiment that have been promulgated in this House, more than fifty times during the last session and the present. There is no objections to urge against them, except in one portion where we speak of assisting the Kentuckians. I suppose there can be no objection to that branch of the joint resolution, which says we are opposed to interference with their peculiar institution. Nobody complains of that section. There is no complaint about that part which says we are at all times ready to assist Union men against traitors. The language used in regard to assisting Kentuckians is simply being a little more specific in regard to the State of Kentucky than any other State; and I say that is proper and right. The state of Kentucky lies contiguous to us. We are nearer to her people than to the people of any other State now proposing to overthrow the Government of the United States; and any language page: 47[View Page 47] speaking more tenderly from this place for Kentuckians is not out of place at this time. I say this - I am opposed to all traitors and all rebels every where. And if a man up north is so desirous of carrying out his own abstract views and feelings for the overthrow of slavery that he will rise up and join a party for the overthrow of this government, I would fight him as soon as any other traitor. Then why reconsider that vote? The vote is right, and it is useless to spend time upon it. This we have announced by it; it has been announced by the people, from every stump in the State, and will be so announced as long as men are found in the State to stand up for the Constitution and laws, Instead of reconsidering it, I would rather vote upon it again. [Applause.] Gentlemen sometimes talk about bowing down to men. Sir, I will get on my knees to any man who loves the government well enough to fight for it. I am one not afraid to get down. In my town the other day, when they were talking about who was to blame for this exigency, I told them to put the whole blame upon me; that I would bear it; that this was no time to find fault, but to fight. Let us fight for our country and its institutions. Such was the feeling among us up there, and I pity the man who feels other wise. I don't believe that the gentleman from Putnam feels otherwise than I do. I think when we come to understand each other we will be found about of the same mind. These men, sir, these Union men we will assist when we can, that is when we are authorized to do so - when we are called upon by the proper authorities.
Mr. ROBERTS. I have but a word to say in in regard to the motion of the gentleman from Putnam (Mr. Lane) to reconsider. The resolutions which were gotten up in the Senate, and reported - to and approved by this House, on yesterday, are nothing but buncomb! They are a well-studied dodge from the beginning to the end. In no case do they come squarely up to the crisis. It is true, sir, that in times of peace and quiet they would do well enough. The sentiments they express are correct. But, sir, I repeat that they do not meet the exigencies of the case, and therefore are worthless.
Mr. Speaker, our country is in a state of civil war and rebellion. Traitors have been and are now conspiring to break up the Government. They are now marshaling their armies upon our Southern coast, with the avowed purpose of seizing on the Federal Capitol, and overthrowing the constituted authorities of the country. For these acts of treason and rebellion they have no excuse. None at all, sir, as against the General Government. This rebellion has become formidable, so much so that it has become the duty - the bounden duty - of the Administration at Washington to call upon the military power of the country - the people - to put down these insurrectionary proceedings, it not being in the power of the Government to do so in the ordinary way. Sir, the people have responded to that call in a manner unparalleled in the history of any country, and I believe it to be the duty of this body to do so also, in such terms that we cannot be misunderstood. The Senate resolutions do not do this. They fall far short of it. What we desire to accomplish, by the reconsideration, is, to meet the case fully.
Now, sir, a word in regard to Kentucky, as she has been referred to by gentlemen who have preceded me. I have no objection to extending the right hand of fellowship to the Union men of Kentucky. I believe there are hundreds of loyal men in that brave, old State. But, while many of her sous are true to the Union, the official power of that State occupy a hostile position to the Government. The Governor of that State has refused, in very insolent terms, to respond to the call of the President affirmatively, but still desires us to understand that Kentucky occupies, as between the rebellionists and the Government, neutral gronud - aye, more - armed neutrality! Sir, in my judgment the official power of that State occupies a more dangerous position to the Government than even South Carolina. Armed neutrality! Think of it! Sir, such a position as that, at a time like this, is utterly impossible. If Kentucky is for the Government, let her say so, and then we will understand her. But she is now, through the official power of the State, acting as a kind of break-water between South Carolina and the Government, showing all the while an easy hand to that rebel State, while she is giving no compact to the authorities at Washington. This will not do. But, sir, I hope the people of ''Old Kentuck" will take the matter in their own hands and place their State right on the record. There are strong ties which bind us to Kentucky, and we do not want them severed. Let her, then, declare herself for the Union, and Indiana will stand by her to the death. Toward Kentucky we will entertain no other feeling than that of brotherly love, so long as she remains true to us and the Union.
Mr. FRASIER. I shall vote for reconsideration. I consider those resolutions as loosely drawn and full of buncombe. What do I care about the men of Kentucky coming over here to defend the wives and daughters of former times? That was all right in its time. This House passed a resolution early in the session, which satisfied my mind. It was very short - not more than half a dozen lines long; But the Senate very coolly laid that on the table and sent these resolutions back to us. They are full of obscurity, and it is manifest that gentlemen here have not yet been able to find out their meaning.
Mr. NEWMAN. It seems to me there is inconsistency in the meaning of that joint resolution, if there is any meaning in it at all. I see here in the first resolution-
The SPEAKER, (Mr. McLean in the chair.) The Chair would inform the gentleman that the printed resolution to which he refers is not in the engrossed copy.
Several voices. "Read the resolution."
The engrossed resolutions were then read by the Clerk.
Mr. NEWMAN resumed. The printed copy of the first resolution states about all that we want. It states the position as I conceive of the people of Indiana. But the other resolutions seem to repudiate the first. In the present difficulties it is plainly our duty and the duty of all loyal States to repudiate those States that repudiate the General Government. Kentucky has page: 48[View Page 48] repudiated the General Government and so places herself before us as an enemy. Now it seems to me that a State repudiating the Federal Constitution by assuming a neutral position is a more dangerous enemy than one that comes out openly in opppsition, It gives them an opportunity to cover up their war schemes, under the plea that they are still in the Union. It is only when they come out boldly that we know how to treat them. Kentucky has placed hereself in that position. No doubt there are hundreds and thousands of loyal men in Kentucky who are willing to make any sacrifice for the Union; and so I believe there are in the Southern States; but we must deal with facts as they exist. We must deal with the authorities of those States. If they have bad rulers upon themselves must rest the consequences. This is the only way we can deal with States; therefore, we must deal with Kentucky as an enemy to the Federal Government. As for the expression of sympathy with Union men in all the States, I think it is right to do so. I will do everything I can to encourage them. But I am unwilling that they shall get any advantage of us by assuming that they are Union men, and then when they get all the advantage of us they can, throw off the cloak. I have been credibly informed of Kentucky, that the moment she gets what advantage she can from her neutrality, the first fire she will make will be at this Union. I have been told that the late appointment suggested by the Governor of Kentucky, of Governors to come together and see if something could not be done for conciliation was not attended by Gov. Magoffin himself.
A VOICE. He sent an irresposible man in his place.
Mr. NEWMAN. Gov. Magoffin failed to fulfil his own appointment whilst our Governor and the Governor of Ohio attended promptly. This shows the hollow heartedness of their professions. Gentlemen had said here that they have relatives in Kentucky. So have I - relatives scattered all over the Southern States. But I look upon this matter in this light. If it should come to pass with us that we should meet in opposing ranks on the field of contest for and against the Union, the consequences must rest upon them. I could have no more good feeling for any relative of mine engaged in an attempt to overthrow the best government in the world, than for any other person engaged in the same business. Hardly so much: for I feel that they all ought to know better. Looking upon the resolutions in this light, sir, they amount to nothing in my judgment; and I think there is no use in wasting words about them. Let us take a bold and decided stand, and press this matter to a consummation.
Mr. STOTSENBERG. The gentleman from Wayne, [Mr. Newman,] has taken special pains to setup a man of straw and knock it down again. He has based his argument upon a section that is not in the joint resolution. Sir, what are we called upon to do with respect to this question of an armed neutrality in Kentucky. I am informed by the votes of 84 men on this floor, voting for this resolution, yesterday, that they all "have the utmost confidence in the patriotism of Kentucky." The resolution passed unanimously - the gentleman from Dearborn, [Mr. Roberts] and the gentleman from Wayne voted for it: I think ought not to be ashamed of it. This resolution, sir, states the true position that ought be taken by every individual and every State this Union. Why are we bound to assume that Kentuckians are all traitors, and engaged in armed rebellion against the Government?
Mr. ROBERTS interposing. I did not say people of Kentucky, but their official power.
Mr. STOTSENBERG. Why can't we wait? Why can't we suspend our judgment till Legislature of Kentucky shall convenene Monday? Why can't we wait till they decide for themselves that they do not wish to uphold the Constitution and laws? Is it because treason on able words have been uttered in Kentucky either by the Governor or somebody else? Is that a sufficient reason for us to declare ourselves ready to fight her to-morrow? The gentleman says we must take a bold stand. Must we, because there are secessionists in Kentucky, forth-with declare that State in rebellion, and just march our forces over the river and put her down? No, sir; so long as Kentuckians are citizens of the United States - so long as they subscribe to the sentiment that we have a Constitution and laws made in pursuance thereof which must be maintained and enforced - so long as they maintain that position, the gentleman and we all are bound to stand up to this resolution we have passed. So long as there are ten men in Kentucky who stand up for the Union, we are bound to rally to their aid and protect them against traitors, come from whatever quarter they may. Sir, if it were necessary, we are called upon by our duty as citizens to sustain the Union men in South Carolina. Let us be ready, then at the proper time, to go into Kentucky or anywhere, for the preservation of the Union and the protection of Union men. That is what the resolution contemplates. It does not say we shall go there as a mob; that we shall march across in; Kentucky unauthorized by the proper authorities, But when the proclamation comes for us to rail for the protection of the sons and daughters of those who stood by our Fathers in former times, then we should be ready. Then let us not precipital matters. So far as business interests are concerned all Kentuckians are for the Union, as far as I know. We are bound to believe the people of Kentucky are for the Union, no matter what their Governor may say. Sir, it you want to presuppose and say Kentucky is out of the Union, then reconsider this resolution and do it. But I counsel that, until Kentucky declares herself unmistakably out of the Union, we had better give our aid and countenance to her Union men. Sir, I wish you could hear these Kentuckians talk, as I have heard them. How they do talk to us! I have been moved when they addressed almost in tones of anguish: "What shall we do?" they say. "We are fighting the secession element: can you help us? We know you can't come over with your troops, but you can come to us with your sympathies. We can fight it down, if you do not precipitate a war." I have said them in reply, (and I hope the General Assembly will not falsify my words,) that we will stand by our friends in Kentucky and help them to fight page: 49[View Page 49] secession, with all the influences and means in our power.
Mr. Speaker ALLEN, (Mr. Bundy in the chair.) I do not propose to consider the status of Kentucky, as to whether she is loyal or not; but I shall inquire what is the status of Indiana? I can not think gentlemen have read these resolutions carefully; for if they had, it seems to me that the gentleman from Floyd and others, would not oppose their reconsideration. What does this third resolution propose? It proposes that the people of Indiana, not in pursuance of law, not in obedience to the order of the President of the United States, shall march into Kentucky and assist the Union men. This third resolution proposes that we pledge the State of Indiana, in defiance of legal authority, in defiance of the Constitution of the United States and of this State, to march her forces into Kentucky, whenever called upon by Kentucky herself. * * * What right have we to pledge that the forces of the State of Indiana shall go out of the State without first being required by the President of the United States? Have we any power, but upon the requisition of the President of the United States, to call out the militia of the State? Have we any constitutional right to pledge the forces of Indiana to be marched into Kentucky upon the call of the Legislature of of the Executive of Kentucky? I call the attention of the House to the following language of the third resolution: "We stand ready at the call of Kentucky to aid them as brothers." Not at the call of the President; not in pursuance of the Constitution of the United States or of this State, but in violation and disregard of all. Why sir, we place ourselves in the attitude of rebellion against the Government of the United States, and I apprehend that there is no member on this floor desirous of placing himself in this attitude.
Mr. STOTSENBERG. If the Secessionists were murdering the Kentuckians, would it not be our duty to go and protect them?
Mr. ALLEN. It would be our duty to go, as citizens of Indiana, but not by State authority. I ask the gentleman if it would be in our power to go as a State?
Mr. SIOTSENBERG. As individuals, it would be our duty to go; but as a State, we should wait for the authority of the General Government.
Mr. ALLEN. Then does not this resolution pledge the State to go at the call of Kentucky? "And we stand ready at the call of Kentucky to aid them as brothers." * * * I am not willing that this State shall pledge her whole force and strength to the State of Kentucky or any other State, for the simple reason that she has neither the legal nor the constitutional power to do so. I stand opposed to that principle I trust the vote will be reconsidered, and that this matter will be referred to a committee. Let it be properly matured, and let nothing go forth from this body that will show a disposition on the par of the State of Indiana to violate the Federal compact.
Mr. WOODHALL said there seemed to be too much effort here to make expression by resolution. We had been called here to prepare our selves to respond to the President of the Unites States. He regarded it as our duty simply to pass the needed bills, and then to declare our loyalty through the loud-mouthed cannon, and through strong-armed men on the tented field.
Mr PACKARD. The resolutions were to submit an answer to the question whether this was to be a war of aggression on the institution of slavery. The opposition to them then must come from those who would prosecute the war as as an aggression upon the slavery of the South.
Mr. SMITH, of Bartholomew, was willing to see the resolution amended in one particular, and could for that purpose be willing to reconsider.
Mr. CRAIN should vote for the reconsiders-ion. This was not to say he was opposed to every sentiment in the resolutions. If we pledge he military force of the State, it should be done n a constitutional way.
MR. ROBBINS. The gentleman from Allen was fearful that there was a constitutional difficulty in the third resolution. He would read the - first resolution, and qualify the last by that. The qualification of readiness to aid was under the authority of the Constitution of the United States. He opposed the motion to reconsider.
Mr. HOLCOMB demanded the previous question and there was a second.
The yeas and nays being demanded and taken on the main question, viz: Shall the vote be reconsidered? The result was - yeas 51, nays 32 - as follows:
AYES - Messrs. Anderson, Brucker, Bryan, Bundy, Campbell, Cason, Collins of Whitloy, Crain, Dashiel, Epperson, Erwin, Feagler, Ferguson, Fisher, Fordyce, Fraley, Frasier, Gore, Hall, Harvey, Haworth, Heffren, Henricks, Hudson, Hard, Jones of Vermillion, Jones of Wayne, Kendrick, Lane, Lee, Lightner, Moorman, Nebeker, Newman, Orr, Kandall, Roberts, Sherman, Smith of Miami, Stevenson, Thomas, Thompson, Turner, Underwood, Wells, Williams, Wilson, Woodhull, Woods, and Mr. Speaker - 51.
NOES - Messrs. Atkinson, Black, Brett, Chapman, Combs, Cooprider, Davis, Dobbins, Fleming, Ford, Gifford, Hayes, Holcomb, Hopkins, Horton, Howard, Jenkinson, Kitchen, Knowlton, Lods, McClurg, McLean, Moss, Mutz, Owens, Packard, Parrett, Prow, Robbins, Stotsenburg, Trier, and Warrum - 32.
So the vote adopting the joint resolution was reconsidered.
>Mr. MeLEAN rose and moved that the joint resolution be referred to a select committee of five.
Mr. ORR moved ineffectually to refer it to the Committee on Federal Relations.
And then they were referred to a select committee, namely: Messrs. McLean, Crain, Heffren, Newman and Bundy.
TWO MILLION LOAN.
Mr. McLEAN, from the Committee on Ways and Means, returned Mr. Fisher's loan bill [22] with amendments, viz:
Amend the first section by filling the blank so as to authorise the Governor to issue the bonds of the State to the amount of two millions of dollars, and insert appropriately these words: "And of the said issue of two millions, five hundred thousand shall be in bonds of $500, and the residue in bonds of $1,000." And inserting as one of the Loan Commissioners, the name of John H. O'Boyle in the place of Allen Hamilton.
Mr. FISHER. The original bill provided for the issuing of the bonds of one thousand dollar denomination - all of them. The committee generally were of the opinion that a portion of these bonds had better be of the denomination of five hundred dollars. That change made the other amendments necessary. The real question page: 50[View Page 50] to be determined upon the proposed amendments is, whether we shall issue part of the bonds for five hundred dollars or all of them for a thousand dollars each. The reason of the change striking out the name of Allen Hamilton, was because he is ineligible. He holds the place of a member of the General Assembly; and the Constitution reads that no Senator or Representative shall be eligible to hold any office created during the time he was a member of the Legislature. But the only question is about the five hundred dollar bonds. I am still compelled to differ with the committee. I am of opinion they should all be thousand dollar bonds. As the matter of filling the blank with "two millions" perhaps it would have been better at present to have continued that in blank till we shall have a report from the Military Committee. The amount may be too much or too little - that depends upon the action of the General Assembly. If we pass the six regiment bill it will be too little; if we do not it will be perhaps too much. We have already appropriated five hundred thousand dollars for arms, which, with the Governor's contingent fund included, is six hundred thousand dollars. It is contemplated that this loan shall cover these appropriations and all others made during the session. There is also provision for levying a tax of five cents on the hundred dollars, to pay the interest on this loan, and to provide a sinking fund for the payment of the principal. That levy according to the assessment, will raise two him hundred and thirty thousand dollars a year. The amount required to pay the interest will be one hundred and twenty thousand dollars, leaving the rest to go into the sinking fund for the redemption of the principal.
Mr. CRAIN. A portion of the committee thought that under all the circumstances, it might be a better policy to issue some of'the bonds of a lower denomination, in order that they might be taken by citizens of our own State. It may be that our people, farmers and others, who de sire to loan money, would prefer to loan it in this direction, because of the advantage of exchange and of the exemption from taxation - which would make such an investment two per cent, better than an ordinary loan. For this reason I have thought it best to have a portion of the bonds of the denomination of five hundred dollars.
Mr. HEFFREN. We understood the gentleman from Parke to say that whoever holds these bonds, would not be taxed upon them.
Mr. CRAIN. There is nothing in the bill to that effect. I believe State stocks are not taxed.
Mr. FISHER and Mr. HEFFREN. The gentleman is mistaken.
Mr. CRAIN. There is a provision in the bill which provides that these bonds shall not be put into market, except as the exigencies of the case may require.
The report was then concurred in, the amendments adopted, and so the bill was ordered to be engrossed.
Mr. PARRETT. Would it not be well to make the amount of the loan in the bill, blank for the present?
Mr. McLEAN. No more bonds will be issued than the necessities of the State shall require.
EXPENSES OF THE WAR PREPARATION.
Mr. SMITH, of Bartholomew, submitted following:
Resolved, That the committee on Ways and Means inquire into the probable expense of the present war preparations - what portion thereof will have to be paid by the State of Indiana, and what by the General Government, and report at an early day.
Mr. FOSTER said the House had all the data. It depended on the passage of the six regiment bill.
Mr. BUNDY. It was impossible to divide the military expense between the State and General Government.
Mr. SMITH withdrew his resolution.
Mr. FISHER introduced a bill [29] to amen the 9th section of the act entitled an act to authorize and regulate the business of general banking, passed March 3, 1858, which was passed to the second reading.
On motion of Mr. FISHER, (the rules being suspended for the purpose,) the bill was read the second time and referred to the Committee on Banks.
Mr. BUNDY proposed an amendment, viz: "Provided said protested bills may be redeemed at any time before the sale of such stocks;" which went along with the bill with the same amendment.
Mr. HOLCOMB submitted the following, which was adopted.
Resolved, That a committee of three be appointed to investigate the report of the volunteer companies to the Adjutant General's office, and report to this House the order in which such reports were made.
Whereupon the SPEAKER appointed said committee, namely: Messrs. Holcomb, Hopkins and Chapman.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
Mr. JENKINSON, by unanimous consent, submitted a resolution for a board of medical examination of not less than five, to be appointed by the Governor, to examine applicants for places of surgeon and assistant surgeon in the sixth regiment - prescribing that no person shall be examined as an applicant for surgeon unless he has been a regular practitioner for ten years, and none for assistant surgeon unless he shall have been a practitioner for five years.
Mr. ROBERTS stated that the Governor had informed him that these appointments were all made.
Mr. JENKINSON then withdrew the resolution.
STOCK BANK SECURITIES.
Mr. FISHER, from the Committee on Banks, returned his bill [29] to amend the ninth section, of the general banking law, with amendments, to-wit: strike out section 9 after the words "Auditor of State," and insert "whenever in the opinion of the Governor, Treasurer and Secretary of State it shall be deemed advisable, having in view the condition of the market."
He said in the original bill it was provided that in case of protested notes the Auditor shall proceed upon the securities within one year, and not until the end of six months to make payment. The amendment leaves it discretionary with the Governor, Treasurer and Secretary of State, at any time, to sell the securities, having in view page: 51[View Page 51] the bond market, and still requiring it to be done within the year. But within that time they may sell the stock and redeem the notes at discretion.
Mr. KNOWLTON. Is that bill designed to legalize bank suspensions?
Mr. FISHER. No sir; the object is merely this: There are five or six hundred thousand dollars of Indiana State bonds in the stock banks. It is possible that some banks, banking on these stocks, may be protested in such times as these, and the object is to give a discretion to the Governor as to the time when these bonds shall be put into the market. If injudiciously thrust upon the market it might have the effect of depreciating their value; for example he may not probably put them into the market until after the coupon bonds of the State hereafter to be issued maybe negotiated.
Mr. GRAIN. It is not for the benefit of the banks but of the bill-holders.
Mr. FISHER. The original prohibited sales of stocks till after six months. The committee thought also, that, on account of the failing character of Southern seceding States stocks, it might be desirable to sell such stocks sooner than six months.
Mr. RAGAN. As this was an important bill, he would move that it lie on the table and be printed.
Mr. CRAIN. There is but just one thing in the bill - barely one section - as explained.
Mr. RAGAN could not scrutinize the bill without having it before him.
Mr. FRASIER. Any man could understand' the difference between not selling till the end of six months, and selling sooner, at the discretion of the State officers.
The report of the committee was concurred in, and the amendments' were adopted.
On motion by Mr. FISHER, the bill was ordered to be engrossed.
VOLUNTEER FAMILY AID.
Mr. VEATCH, from the Judiciary Committee, returned the volunteer family aid bill [S. 6] recommending its passage. He stated that there was a House bill transmitted with better provisions in some respects, which it was probable would pass. All he asked was that the report be concurred in, and that the bill be left on the files tor the present.
The report was concurred in.
THE $25,000 BILL.
Mr. VEATCH, from the Committee on the Judiciary, returned the Auditor's deposit bill, [S. 12] recommending its passage.
Mr. STOTSENBERG inquired how this $25,000 was to be paid?
Mr. FISHER. Out of the Governor's contingent fund. But to make it sure he asked, unanimous consent to put such a clause into the bill.
And then the bill, as thus amended, was passed to the final reading in the House of Representatives - yeas 69, nays 0.
ADJOURNMENT TO A DAY CERTAIN.
On motion of Mr. BUNDY, the House took up the Senate amendment to Mr. McLean's concurrent resolution to adjourn the session from next Friday till Tuesday the 21st inst., viz.: shortening the recess till Thursday, the 16th inst., and adding mileage.
The question being shall the House concur? -
The SPEAKER said: The military bill has not yet been disposed of, nor the treason bill, nor the six regiment bill. These and almost every other important bill remain undisposed of. It does seem to the Chair that we had better remain here a few days and dispose of some of these important measures than go home and when we return have to begin anew. On Monday next the Kentucky Legislature, meets. That makes another necessity for us to remain in session, to see what is to be the action of that body upon the recommendation of Gov. Magoffin.
Mr. STOTSENBERG concurred in the view of the Chair.
Mr. HOLCOMB submitted considerations in favor of the proposed recess.
Mr. FORD said it would require all the time till Friday night to consider two important bills before the body.
Messrs. SMITH of Bartholomew, ORR, FRASIER and VEATCH gave their views; and then -
On motion of Mr. Speaker ALLEN, [Mr. Lane in the chair] the resolution and engrossed amendment were laid on the table - affirmative 38, negative 37.
EXECUTIVE EXEMPTION.
Mr. VEATCH, from the Committee on the Judiciary, returned Mr. Hoicomb's resolution for an act to exempt the property of volunteers from sale or execution during their term of service, and reported the opinion that such an act would conflict with the constitution,and that the object could not be gained without passing a general law for exemption from execution that shall operate on all alike; so the committee submitted the matter for the consideration of the House.
The report was concurred in.
THE SIX REGIMENT BILL.
Mr. HEFFREN, from the Committee on Military Affairs, returned the six regiment bill [S. 1] with amendments, to-wit: In the first section strike out "six" and insert "seven" regiments. Insert appropriately, "the seventh regiment to be cavalry, and to be organized as hereinafter provided." Strike out "Lieutenant and Ensign," and insert "First and Second Lieutenants." Strike out "twelve months" and insert "three years." Insert appropriately, "that in the organization of said regiments preference shall be given to such counties as have not yet furnished men under the proclamation of the Governor." Add to section six to the effect that one of which regiments shall be cavalry; said regiment to consist of ten companies of fifty nine men each, rank and file. The cavalry shall not be mounted unless called into the service of the General Government or the exigencies of the State shall require it. The cavalry shall be enlisted for and during the war, and shall be selected in the order in which services have been offered.
Mr. HEFFREN. In the first place the committee agree to change the term of service. The Senate bill proposed the term of twelve months. The last call is for six regiments, to. serve three years, unless sooner discharged. "We have the bill to conform to that. The other page: 52[View Page 52] amendment is authorizing seven regiments instead of sixs - ix regiments to be composed of artillery and infantry and the seventh of cavalry - the cavalry to be enlisted for and during the war; their companies to consist of fifty-nine men each. The other amendment is to give those counties the preference which have not been able to get their men in under the first requisition. We provide also that the six regiments shall be divided into artillery and infantry, as the service may demand, and otherwise we make the bill conform to the regulations of the army of the United States in the matter of officering the companies. In section 3 we allow the Brigadier General to appoint his own staff, and we make no distinction between officers and men in regard to pay.
Mr. CASON moved that the bill and amendments lie on the table, and that 200 copies thereof be printed for the use of the House.
Mr. HEFFREN had no objection to lay the bill on the table, and make it the special order to-morrow morning. He referred to the amount of labor on the part of the committee to prepare the bill H. R. No. 21, which would probably supersede this.
Mr. CASON. The bill should be fully considered before voting.
Mr. ORR and Mr. SMITH of Bartholomew concurred with the gentleman from Boone.
Mr. PARRETT counselled to proceed cautiously. Perhaps both these bills would yet be superseded by a new bill, after we shall see the Governor's proclamation which will be in the papers to-morrow.
Mr. GRESHAM. It might be wisest to pass Over this bill altogether, and allow the enlistment for the six regiments to be made directly into the service of the United States.
Mr. Cason's motion to print was now agreed to, and the Speaker appointed that gentleman a committee to see that the said printing be done as soon as may be.
Mr. KENDRICK, (by leave,) introduced a bill [30] ranking appropriations [$2,700] for the Indiana Hospital for the Insane, which was passed to the second reading.
ORGANIZATION OF THE MILITIA.
On the motion of Mr. GRESHAM, the committee's militia bill was taken up and considered by sections.
Pending the consideration thereof -
The House adjourned.
