a very high opinion of the gentlemen who make these Reports, but now I feel that the State is running very fast into bankruptcy, and, as far as my vote is concerned, I will not make an appropriation of a single dollar that the State can save.
The yeas and nays were now taken, and resulted as follows:
YEAS - Messrs. Anthony, Bearss, Beeson, Berry, Campbell, Claypool, Conner, Culver, Dickinson, Ferguson, Hamilton, Johnston, Jones, Landers, March, Mellett, Odell, Robinson, Shoemaker, Shoulders, Stone, Tarkington., Tee-garden, Turner, Wagner and White - 26.
NAYS - Messrs. Blair, Carnahan, Cobb, Conley, Hull, Line, Miller, Ray, Shields, Slack, Studabakcr, Williams, Wilson and Wolfe - 14.
Pending the roll call -
Mr. CLAYPOOL said: I shall vote to lay the resolution on the table for the reason that I do not know when this session will adjourn. If the session should be protracted till the latter part of this month for the purpose of perfecting its legislation, then it might become necessary to publish these Reports; and I will then go with the Senator from Shelby. For the present I shall vote to lay the resolution on the table.
Mr. TARKINGTON said: I am inclined to take these Reports, but from the fact that I understand it is quite likely there will be an adjourned session and we can vote for them hereafter, I shall vote for the motion to lay on the table, not meaning to reject them.
Mr. WAGNER said: At the end of the session, which I apprehend will be at the end of forty days, although there may be a recess of a week or two, I will be willing to vote for the resolution; but at this time certainly not.
The result of the vote was then announced - yeas 26, nays 14 - as above recorded.
So the resolution lies on the table.
Mr. COBB offered the following joint resolution [S. No. 4]:
A joint resolution authorizing the Governor to employ medical aid for the soldiers, at Camp Morton No. 2.
WHEREAS, There are a number of soldiers in the service of the State, at Camp Morton No. 2; AND WHEREAS, said soldiers have no medical aid provided for them by the State, therefore,
Be it Resolved by the Senate of the State of Indiana, (The House of Representatives concurring therein,) That. His Excellency, the Governor, be and is hereby authorized to contract, on the part of the State, with some responsible physician, on such terms as he may deem proper, to visit said camp and render such medical aid as may be necessary for the health and comfort of the soldiers quartered therein.
Mr. COBB. I have made inquiry with reference to the facts contained in this resolution, and I understand there is no medical aid in Camp Morton No. 2; and I understand there are some soldiers there in bad health. I think it is necessary that some medical aid should be procured for them, and therefore I introduced this resolution, and think it ought to pass.
The joint resolution was adopted by yeas 40, nays 0.
THE DISTRIBUTION OF ARMS.
On motion by Mr. FERGUSON, his arms bill, (reported from the military committee early this morning,) was taken from the files and read the third time.
Mr. FERGUSON. I will state the necessity for this bill. The other day we passed a bill in regard to the distribution of arms in the different counties, in which there was a proviso, authorizing their distribution according to the 69th chapter of the Revised Statutes of 1852. That chapter requires county boards to make the distribution to volunteer companies, and the object of this bill is to make incorporated cities and towns give the bonds, instead of the companies themselves, and relieve the companies of that necessity. Some little conflict is now going on, as to how these arms shall be distributed.
The bill then finally passed the Senate by yeas 36, nays 0.
RE-ORGANIZATION OF THE MILITIA.
On motion by Mr. BLAIR, Senator Anthony's military bill (introduced yesterday afternoon) was taken from the files, under a dispensation of the rules - yeas 41, nays 0 - read the second time by title only, and referred to the Committee on Military Affairs.
BIBLES FOR INDIANA VOLUNTEERS.
The PRESIDENT directed the' Secretary to read a communication from Col. J. J. Reynolds, commanding at Camp Morton, recommending to the favorable consideration of officers and members of the Legislature the appeal from the Indianapolis Female Bible Society for aid in the matter of procuring bibles and testaments to be distributed among the Indiana volunteers.
Mr. WAGNER. A committee of the officers of the society named in the communication are here. They desire to furnish to each soldier a copy of the bible, to be purchased by the contributions of individuals, and they will be most happy to receive any contribution that Senators and Representatives choose to make. The ladies have already supplied many soldiers, and they intend to supply every soldier. This is their object - it explains itself and needs no explanation or encomium.
page: 54[View Page 54]Mr. TURNER. I move that the Senator from Warren [Mr. Wagner] be appointed a committee of one to go round with a hat.
Mr. WAGNER. I apprehend that would not suit the taste of the ladies.
Mr. TURNER withdrew his motion.
And then came the recess till two o'clock.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
A message from the House, enclosing amendments of that body to Senator Stone's $25,000 bill, [12] introduced Saturday, was taken up, the amendments considered and referred to the committee on Finance.
Mr. MARCH, from the Judiciary Committee, returned Senator Cravens' felony bill, [5] see Page 8 of the BREVIER REPORTS, recommending passage, with the following amendments: Insert after the word "thereof," 9th line, 5th part of 1st section, the words: "Or any military post, fortification or military stores." Insert in the first blank in section 2,"the words "ten thousand dollars;" in the second blank the word "two;" in the third blank insert "twenty-one." Strike out the proviso of said section. Strike out the third section. Strike out of the fourth section the words "with or without process."
The report was concurred in and the amendments were adopted.
On motion by Mr. CONNER, the bill was considered as engrossed and read the third time.
Mr. WOLFE. Mr. President. Although a member of the Judiciary Committee I was not aware that this bill was to be reported on until it was sent up to the Secretary's desk just now. I am not complaining, however, of that. But there was a good deal of division of opinion in the committee as to what should be done in the matter. There were three bills before the committee, and not a unanimity of opinion in regard to either one of them as to what kind of legislation ought to be adopted for the purpose of meeting the extraordinary condition of affairs in which we are involved. A good many of the things in this bill would be provided for by a simple provision against treason, and I believe it is the intention of the committee to prepare a bill defining treason and the punishment therefor. Several things in this bill, and all which relates to regulating commerce between the States, I think, would be proper subjects of legislation for the Congress of the United States. For the doing of any of the things contained in this act I can have no excuse for any man because they ought not to be done. But there is danger that this Legislature may go too far; and while they are attempting to prevent acts that ought not to be done, the law itself would become an engine by which harmless transactions would be prohibited, under the bill as it was originally introduced or with the amendments proposed by the committee. This bill can become an engine of oppression in the hands of the officials of the State. The bill as it stands in the printed copy, in section 4, provides:
SEC. 4. Every judge of a court, Justice of the peace, mayor or recorder of a city, sheriff, coroner, marshal of a city, and constable shall have power, and it shall be his duty to prevent violations of this act, and for that purpose every such officer shall have power, with or without process, to arrest persons and seize property any where within the jurisdiction of this - State, and to call to his aft the power of his county, and any military force in the service of the State in such county.
Now I am opposed to giving any such power in the hands of officers without legal process. The amendment, as proposed by the committee to this section is to strike out the words "with or with, out process." I contend that that leaves the matter precisely as in the printed bill. That the power is conferred upon the officers to act and they will have the power to act without proceaa, I can never give my sanction to a law which will give to any one officer or number of officers, upon their own motion and without proper legal process of law, to take such extraordinary proceedings over persons and property in the State of Indiana. Before I will vote to surrender my private rights and the liberties of the people of Indiana, I would suffer my right arm to fall. Which would liberty in Indiana be worth if every constable and justice of the peace would have a right to do as he thinks proper, and be irresponsible to every human being upon earth? I think the bill should be amended in that particular.
If it is attempted to stop the commerce between this State and other States it should be done in a legal way. It is insisted and claimed that it is proper for the State of Indiana to regulate commerce between her citizens and the citizens of Southern States who may not be in rebellion against the General Government; but I will not undertake to go so far as to say whether we have the right to do so or not. Gentlemen who have conversed with me unanimously agree that it is proper for the Congress of the United States to legislate upon this subject, but the necessity is urged at the present time - before the Congress of the United States shall assemble - and therefore it is necessary to pass a bill something after the fashion of this one. And I do not know bit what there may be some truth in this view of the case. There may be a necessity for present action. I am rather inclined to think there is, for this reason: That unless some law is made, properly guarded, to prevent the exportation of pro duce and contraband articles to the Southern States, mobs, vigilance committees, or whatever else they may be denominated, will attempt to do it. To prevent these things being done in an illegal manner, I grant, it may be necessary to pass some law to regulate this matter. But, sir, there are other things in the bill that may lead to abuses ten times worse than any condition of things we have ever had in this free country. The first clause of the first section provides:
That it shall be unlawful for any person or persons to do, or to advise, or counsel any other person to do, or to directly or indirectly assist, aid or abet in doing, or to advise or counsel any other person to aid, assist or abet in doing any or either of the things below in this section specified.
You do not only propose to punish men for what they do, following the spirit of the constitution, which says treason shall consist only in an overt act of levying war or giving aid and comfort to the enemy in times of war, but you go farther than that, and make it an engine that can be used to prevent the liberty of speech and of the press. I admit the things ought not to be done that are prohibited here, but how easy it is to construe an innocent act or innocent counsel page: 55[View Page 55] into penal acts, especially by partizan officers, in times of excitement such as we now have. But I understand it to be the settled doctrine that when Congress undertakes to regulate commerce between the States of this Union it will nullify or supercede the acts of this Legislature; and as Congress will most likely do so at an early day there can be no great hurry for our action, except it be to meet a temporary necessity of the case, and to that extent by a properly framed law I am willing to go.
Another objection I have to the bill, which I wish to state before the vote is taken, is this: It is, sir, legislating upon the supposition which is taken for granted, and which I undertake to say is a falsehood, that there are men in the State of Indiana who would be guilty of counseling treason, or of doing any act except those acts which amount to lawful commerce. But as to those other acts here provided against it is a gratuitous libel upon the State of Indiana to say that there are any set of men any where in the State who would undertake, by combining, counseling, or any other act to betray the State or the Federal Government in the hands of the enemies. Why, sir, what do we behold in testimony of the loyalty and patriotism of the people of the State of Indiana? The Capital is literally overrun with men of all parties who have volunteered to show their devotion to the stars and stripes on the battle field, if need be, in defense of our glorious flag. I do not believe there is a traitor in the State. I know there are men who were opposed to the policy which has brought these things upon the country; but sir, when the government which has the right to decide the questions of peace and war, commands the services of the people, party and all party divisions cease, and we are all as one man for the Union, the Constitution and the enforcement of the laws. But while this is true, we are not willing that liberty should be stricken down, that free speech and the press should be under the irresponsible censorship of constables and justices of the peace.
Mr. CONNER. I shall confine my remarks to the several principles of the bill and not to the details. I do not remember that the Senator from Harrison proposed any amendment in committee, so far as it relates to the details of the bill, although he may have done so. It affords me some gratification to know that this bill was introduced by the Hon. Senator from Jefferson one of the counties on the border. Let me call the attention of the Senate for a moment to some of the facts and circumstances which surround us. A number of the States of this Union are in open rebellion to the government of the United States. We are looking, if we take the word of gentlemen residing upon the border counties, for raids to be made upon the soil of Indiana by a portion of those seceded States. We have heard from time to time that it was necessary to spend a large amount of money for the purpose of putting arms into the hands of those citizens in order that they may protect their persons and property. Now what is the purpose contemplated by this bill? It is the purpose of this bill to regulate commerce between the States - to interfere with the legitimate and honest trade between Indiana and Kentucky, or any other loyal State? The only purpose is to prevent persons of this State from enlisting in the secession organizations for the purpose of furnishing the rebel government with supplies, and more especially to prevent the shipping of produce to the Southern seceded States. It does not propose to interfere with the trade between the citizens of Indiana and Kentucky if the produce is not to be used for the purpose of strengthening the hands of our enemies. Our neighbors of Cincinnati are complaining that while they shut their port against the exportation of produce, Indiana is in the habit of permitting large quantities to be shipped to the South every day. Is this right? I say it is not right. Gentlemen say that it is a slander upon the people of Indiana to assume that they would be guilty of anything in this bill. They may as well say that it a slander to have a criminal code upon our statute books, because by having a criminal code it presupposes that there are persons who commit arson, murder, rapine and all sorts of crimes. It was only yesterday that I took up a morning paper and read of immense shipments of produce from New Albany to the South, but I was gratified to learn, on showing the paragraph to the Senator from Floyd, that it occurred some weeks ago, though I had supposed from reading the article, that it had occurred recently. I hope we will hear of no such thing occurring there in the future. I am willing, as far as my vote is concerned, to vote a reasonable amount of money to put Indiana in a proper state of defense against our enemies, and at the same time I regard it as my duty to give my vote for the prohibition of provisions for the purpose of strengthening the hands of our enemies. I will not detain the Senate longer. As far as I am concerned I am prepared to vote for this bill.
Mr. RAY. I feel disposed to offer a few remarks explanatory of my vote on this occasion. I think the bill is objectionable; first, because in its whole scope it is in derogation of the rights and authority of the Federal Government; and second, as a practical measure it is impolitic because it does not reach and accomplish the ends at which it aims. It is an attempt to regulate commerce between the States, which right is exclusively given by the constitution to the Congress of the United States. And again, it is going another step in that direction to which we are, I believe too much at present in the North, fatally tending, and that is to act as separate communities, separate States and independencies, in the prosecution of this war, as it is sometimes called, but which I say is merely an effort on the part of the Federal Government to put down rebellion. It will be a dangerous epoch in our history if we give way to this tendency to take the authority which is vested in the Federal Government into the hands of States, communities, and unauthorized mobs. That is the great danger we are in in the Northern States.
[Mr. R. spoke at length. His speech may be published hereafter.]
After speeches by Mr. MARCH in favor and Mr. WILLIAMS in opposition to the bill-
Mr. WOLFE moved to recommit the bill with page: 56[View Page 56] instructions to strike out all after the enacting clause and insert Senator Miller's bill, [4.]
On motion by Mr. CLAYPOOL, this motion was laid on the table - yeas 25, nays 16 - as follows:
YEAS - Messrs. Anthony, Bearss, Beeson, Berry, Blair, Campbell, Claypool, Conner, Cravens of Jefferson, Culver, Dickinson, Hamilton, Hull, Line, March, Mellett, Newcomb, Robinson, Steele, Stone,Studabaker, Tarkington, Teegarden, Turner and White - 25.
NAYS - Messrs. Carnahan, Cobb, Conley, Johnston, Jones, Landers, Miller, O'Brien, Odell, Ray, Shields, Shoemakers, Shoulders, Williams, Wilson and Wolfe - 16.
Mr. STUDABAKER said he had supposed that his amendment would have been adopted by consent, as he had not supposed that any Senator proposed to abridge the right of speech or the freedom of the press, and had offered the amendment more to prevent a misconstruction of the bill than to change any legal construction that might be given to the bill; but Senators objected to the amendment, therefore he must insist upon it. For his own part he desired to reserve the right to speak and write freely of the plans and purposes of the Administration, and unless that right existed there could be no liberty. He did not suppose it was intended to prevent anything of the kind, but hoped the power would not be placed in the hands of an irresponsible constable to seize a man because he might think he was about to say something that would be seditions. He closed by moving to recommit with instructions to amend by adding these words: "Nothing in this act shall be construed to abridge the right of speech or the freedom of the press," as heretofore understood.
Mr. CLAYPOOL replied.
Mr. MILLER offered the following instructions: Strike out the words "justice of peace, coroner and constable," in the 4th section. He preferred his bill on this subject to the one under consideration, but would waive his objections in view of the endorsement of this bill by the committee.
Mr. LANDERS offered the following instructions: Insert in lines twenty and thirty-three, in the first section, and in the first line in second section, the word "knowingly."
Mr. WOLFE offered the following instructions: Insert in the fourth line of the fourth section, be fore the words "to arrest," the words, "with legal process."
Mr. HAMILTON would like to see the bill amended in one or two particulars, but was prepared to vote for the bill anyhow.
Mr. President CRAVENS. (Mr. Tarkington in the Chair.) I frankly confess that I do not claim any credit for originating the bill under consideration, but I endorse every particular, every sentence and every line in it; and I regret that the committee on the judiciary has seen proper to emasculate the bill as it is. Now sir, what is this bill in aid of if it is not in aid of the right of the freedom of speech? What is this great uprising of the people for if it is not in defense of the freedom of speech, for in no government has that right been guaranteed as it has been by this government, and it is for aiding the power of this government in this direction that this bill is introduced. If any Senator here is honestly convinced that even a single sentence of this bill can be construed into a restriction or restraint of the freedom of speech, where that freedom ought to be indulged in under the constitutions of the State and of the United States, then I am perfectly willing to see the amendment of the Senator from Adams [Mr. Studabaker] incorporated. The first clause of the first section is the one introduced in evidence that this bill is intended to interfere with the freedom of speech. Is there any unnatural restraint there? Are we to sit quietly by if any of our citizens are disposed to write to the rebel government and slander and vilify us? or are we to sit calmly down at home and see our neighbors, with their sympathies, going out in letters, inviting an invasion of our firesides? Would this not be treason? - giving aid and comfort to the enemy? In time of peace had there been no insurrection there would have been no necessity, and no man upon this floor would have dreamed of introducing a bill of this sort. But Senators say why not permit those people to sell their provisions in order to fill our coffers with the money of traitors, though we may fatten, and pamper and strengthen traitors, that they may be the more able to rob us pf our lives. An affecting appeal was made by my friend on the left to my venerable friend on the right; but I apprehend there is no court on earth that would punish a man under those circumstances. But suppose there was an hostile army quartered opposite his own town or county, and it was the policy of those people to starve out that army, and we of Madison should sit down quietly and send out our provisions for the purpose of sustaining that army, what would our old friend say? Why sir, that thing is not so far removed from a possibility, a probability or even a fact.
The Senator from Shelby talks eloquently about mobs and mob violence. Let me say that this bill originated in an earnest and sincere desire to avoid that difficulty. I speak of facts cognizant by myself, not one week since, when I say that more than one large shipping house undertook to ship provisions to Louisville from Madison, thence to go direct by rail to feed the rebels in the city of Charleston; our people raised en masse and told them that that shipment was the last one to be made of those provisions that should go to fatten those people who would perhaps shoot down their own children. Sir, if it is right for the public sentiment to take this matter in hand, is it not right that public sentiment should be fortified by the laws of the land.
Sir, have you no laws upon your statute book punishing murder, and does that imply that every citizen within the borders of the State of Indiana is a murderer? Have you no laws against perjury, and are all your citizens consequently perjured villians and scoundrels? By no means, but these laws are to prevent and punish those crimes. It is to prevent the crime of treason that we ask for the passage of this bill. But gentlemen say it is assuming the rights and powers and privileges that do not belong to us - the only argument I heard on this floor yet against the bill. In answer to that objection I propose simply to refer to the Constitution of the United States.
page: 57[View Page 57][Mr. C. continued his remarks for some, but they are crowded out for want of time for preparation.]
Mr. MELLETT. I think the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Adams [Mr. Studabaker] is unnecessary - it would be but reenacting the Constitution of this State and of the United States, which I have always understood as still in force. I am satisfied with the general principles contained in this bill, and I do apprehend that if the bill is fairly considered gentlemen will find no objection to it. I object to the bill only so far as phraseology is concerned - there are too many words in the bill.
Mr. STUDABAKER withdrew his motion to recommit, and -
On motion by Mr. CONNER, the order to consider the bill as engrossed for the third reading was rescinded.
Mr. STUDABAKER then offered his instructions, as printed above, by way of amendment to the bill.
Mr. WAGNER and Mr. MELLETT discussed, attacked and defended the phraseology of the bill.
Mr. LANDERS moved to recommit the bill with the pending amendment.
Mr. WAGNER made an ineffectual motion - yeas 17, nays 20 - to lay this motion on the table.
Mr. MELLETT submitted instruction to strike out the fourth section.
And then the motion to recommit was agreed to.
On motion by Mr. WAGNER, the militia'bill [H. 21] was taken from the files; when he moved that the rules be suspended and read the bill the first and second times by title only.
The ayes and nays being demanded by a constitutional provision, and being taken -
The PRESIDENT reported no quorum voting.
And then the Senate adjourned.
