IN SENATE.
FRIDAY, December, 15 1865.The PRESIDENT pro tem. called the Senate to order at 9 o'clock A. M.
On motion by Mr. GIFFORD, the reading of yesterday's journal was dispensed with.
Mr. WARD, from the Committee on Corporations, returned Mr. Allison's city gas works bill, S. No. 296, with amendments.
Mr. TERRY, from the Committee on Swamp Lands, returned Mr. Wrightfs bill, S. No. 308, for the relief of persons who have made entry of lands where the State cannot make a good title; with amendments.
He also returned Mr. McClurg's bill, S. No. 310, amending sections 1 and 2 of the wet lands and drainage Act of March 7, 1863; recommending its passage.
These bills were passed to the third reading.
NEGRO TESTIMONY.
The Senate proceeded to the consideration of the special order for this hour, viz.: Mr. Ward's bill, S. No. 219, defining who shall be competent witnesses in any court of this State - [all persons, without distinction of color] - the question beeng on concurring in the committee amendment, inserting appropriately the words "or blood."
Mr. McCLURG was not in favor of this bill, but did not think it made one particle of difference, as to the force the bill will have, whether this amendment be adopted or not. The idea, in proposing the amendment was simply to make the bill more positive in its terms - merely explanatory. He expected to make opposition to the bill upon principle. It seemed like fighting a man of straw to oppose this amendment.
Mr. VAN BUSKIRK could see a good deal in the amendment. It amounted to something more than redundancy. He could find persons in Indianapolis said to have negro blood in them, as white as he; and such persons would be excluded from testifying on account of color unless this amendment was made.
Mr. OYLER thought it was part of our duty to make the laws plain - so that they could not be misunderstood.
The Committee amendment was then agreed to by yeas 26, nays 21 - as follows:
YEAS - Messrs. Allison, Beeson, Bennett, Bonham, Brown of Hamilton, Cason, Chapman, Cullen, Culver, Davis, Dykes, Hyatt, McClurg, Milligan, Niles, Noyes, Oyler, Reagan, Richmond, Terry, Thompson, Van Buskirk, Ward, Woods, Wright, and Mr President - 26
NAYS - Messrs Barker, Bowman, Bradley, Brown of Warren, Carson, Cobb, Corbin, Douglas, Downey, English, Finch, Fuller, Gifford, Hord, Jinkens, Marshall, Mason, Moore, Newlin, Stages, and Vawter - 21
Mr. DOWNEY then offered his amendment, proposed last Tuesday forenoon.
Mr. ALLISON moved to amend the amendment by adding this; "except such persons as shall have borne arms in the late war for the suppression of the rebellion."
This amendment was agreed to.
The amendment as amended was rejected by yeas 48, nays 0.
On motion of Mr. OYLER, the vote adopting the amendment to the amendment was reconsidered by yeas 26, nays 22.
Mr, YAWTER raised the point of order that this proceeding was unparliamentary.
The PRESIDENT decided the point of order not well taken.
Mr. ALLISON withdrew his amendment.
On motion of Mr. OYLER the vote rejecting the amendment [Mr. Downey's] was reconsidered by yeas 24, nays 22.
The question recurring on the adoption of the amendment -
Mr. DOWNEY said the object of his amendment was to do that which a provision in the 13th Art. of the State Constitution requires the General Assembly to do. Instead of holding out inducements by offering privileges to this class, he held it to be a duty required of this General Assembly so to legislate as to discourage them from coming into the State. He was in favor of allowing those colored persons who were in the State at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, the right of testifying in Courts of Justice; but he was opposed to extending that right to any colored persons who were not here at that time, or who may hereafter come here in violation of the 13th Art. of the Constitution of the State.
The amendment [Mr. Downey's] was agreed to by yeas 26,nays 22 - as follows:
YEAS - Messrs Allison, Beeson, Bennett, Bonham, Brown, of Hamilton, Cason, Chapman, Cullen, Culver, Davis, Downey, Dykes, Hyatt, Milligan, Niles, Noyes, Oyler, Reagan, Richmond, Terry, Thompson, Van Buskirk, Ward, Woods, Wright, and Mr. President - 26.
NAYS - Messrs. Barber, Bowman, Brad'ey, Brown of Wells, Carson, Cobb, Corbin, Doug'as, English, Finch, Fuller, Gifford, Hanna, Hord, Ji kens, Marshall, McCurg, Mason, Moore, Newlin, Staggs, and Vawter - 22.
Pending the call -
Mr. CASON, in explanation of his vote, said: I am opposed to the amendment of the Senator of Ohio, excepting and not allowing negroes to testify, who have come into the State in violation of the thirteenth article of the Constitution. I do not mean that I would violate any provision of the Constitution, but I understand that the amendment to the Constitution of the United States has been adopted by a requisite number of States, and it is now the fundamental law of the land. The amendment of the Constitution makes negroes citizens of the State, and annuls and abrogates all laws, whether constitutional or legislative, restoring the liberty of this class of people, Under its provisions we have no more right to prohibit a negro from coming into this State than we have an Englishman. The question then arises whether we will obey the Constitution of the United States, abrogating the thirteenth article of our State Constitution, or obey a provision already null and void. But it is evident that we can pass no law without the amendment of the Senator of Ohio, and as it is better to have the law with this amendment than no law, for the reason that it goes a part of the way toward doing justice to this race of people, I shall vote for the amendment. I vote "aye."
Mr. CULLEN said: My speech has been made by the Senator from Boone [Mr. Cason.] With that understanding I vote "aye."
Mr. OYLER said: Endorsing the remarks of the Senator from Boone, and for the same reasons, I vote "aye."
Mr. THOMPSON in casting this vote did not wish to be considered as being in favor of any Government or Constitution that abridges in any way the natural rights of man; but under the circumstances, as we must have, some page: 206[View Page 206] protection, not only for ourselves, but for the colored people, he should vote "aye."
Mr. VAN BUSKIRK said the amendment did not cover all he wanted, but he had confidence in the onward march of civilization, and believed this thirteenth article would be wiped out at no distant day; and when that is done this very law itself will give to all negro persons in Indiana the right to testify. He voted " aye."
Mr. DUNNING (Mr. Beeson in the Chair) was in favor of the thirteenth article at the time of its adoption, and had been for it ever since, until he had become satisfied that the effects of this great rebellion which we have just suppressed would abolish slavery, and now, although he expected to follow the dictates of his judgment as to all questions which may come lip in the future, he was disposed to take it in broken doses. He was not prepared to go the length of other gentlemen. He voted "aye."
The result of the vote was then announced as above recorded.
So the amendment was adopted.
On motion by Mr. BENNETT - yeas 26, nays 23 - the bill was considered as engrossed, and read the third time.
It was passed the Senate by yeas 28, nays 21 - as follows:
YEAS - Messrs. Allison, Beeson, Bennett, Bonham, Brown of Hamilton, Cason, Chapman, Cullen, Culver, Davis, Downey, Dykes, Hyatt, Milligan, Niles, Noyes, Oyler,Reagan, Richmond, Terry, Thompson, Van Buskirk, Ward, Woods, Wright, and Mr. President - 28.
NAYS - Messrs. Barker, Bonham, Bradley, Brown of Wells, Carson, Cobb, Corbin, Douglas, English, Finch, Fuller, Hanna, Hord, Jinkens, Marshall, McClurg, Mason, Moore, Newlin, Staggs, ard Vawter - 21.
THE STATE DEBT.
The Senate proceeded to the consideration of the state debt bills H. R. No. 285, and S. No. 279 - the special order for this hour - the question being on concurrence'in the majority report.
Mr. CULLEN, although he considered the provision, in effect, already in the bill S. No. 279, in order to make it more plain, moved to amend by inserting in line eight, section eight, after the word "State" the following: "As fast as moneys from year to year accumulate in said State debt sinking fund, which said fund is irrevokably pledged for the redemption of said stocks and bonds."
Mr. OYLER being entitled to the floor gave way for -
Mr. BROWN, of Wells, who, without any intention to cut off debate, moved the previous question. He was convinced further debate would do no good; this legislative session as drawing rapidly to a close; we have a great deal of unfinished business before us, and if we consume the time in useless discussion, important legislation will be defeated.
The demand for the previous question was seconded by the Senate, and under its operation -
The amendment [Mr. Cullen's] was agreed to.
The question recurring on concurrence in the majority report of the special committee, recommending that the bill H. R. 285 be amended by striking out from the enacting clause and inserting the bill S. No. 279 in lieu.
It was read, and the committee substitute by yeas 31, nays 16.
The Committee amendment striking out the title of the bill, H. R. 285, and inserting in lieu the title of the bill S. 279, was agreed to.
Mr. BENNETT moved that the bill be engrossed and read the third time now.
Mr. CHAPMAN raised a point of order that the bill had not yet been read the second time.
After a conversational debate -
The PRESIDENT pro tem. decided the point of order not well taken.
The motion was agreed to and -
The bill was read the third time.
It was passed the Senate, by yeas 30, nays 18, as follows:
YEAS - Messrs. Allison, Bennett, Bonham, Bowman Bradley, Brown of Wells, Carson, Cobb, Corbin, Cullen, Davis, Douglas, Downey, Dykes, Finch, Gifford, Hanna, Hyatt, Jinkens, McClurg, Mason, Milligan, Newlin Niles, Oyler, Richmond, Staggs, Van Buskirk, Vawter and Mr, President - 30.
NAYS - Messrs Barker, Beeson, Brown of Hamilton, Cason, Chapman, Culver, English, Fuller, Hord, Marshall, Moore, Noyes, Reagan, Terry, Thompson, Ward, Woods, and Wright - 13.
Pending the roll call -
Mr. ALLISON, in explanation of his vote, said he regarded a defeat of this bill as much as to say that we shall not have a bill for the adjustment of the State debt during the session. There are many features in the bill he did not like, but rather than go home without a bill for the purpose indicated he would vote "aye."
Mr. CHAPMAN said he voted against this bill because he believed we had no right to repeal the law creating a State Agency in New York until all these bonds are fully paid.
Mr. HORD said he had desired to give reasons at length for opposing this measure - he had numerous facts and figures to present against its passage - but he could not recite them now in the limited time In which he supposed the Senate would require him to present the reasons for his vote. He deprecated the course pursued by the friends of the bill in thrusting it upon the Senate under the operations of the previous, question; and trusted it would be defeated in the House.
Mr. VAWTER, in explanation of his vote, said: I came here determined to vote for some adjustment of our State debt. I believe the debt will be due on the 19th of January, 1866; I feel that the honor of Indiana requires an adjustment. I voted in favor of the Branham bill on the motion to strike it out from the enacting clause. I regret that that bill could not have'been amended and passed. The Bradley bill, now on its passage, was this morning, on my suggestion, amended so as to create a fund that will in eight years discharge the debt. The bill under consideration having been amended in this particular is no longer liable to the objection made by me last evening. The bill, now on its passage, is not entirely satisfactory to me. But it is the only bill before the Senate providing for the payment of the State debt. A vote against that bill will place me in .the position of repudiating any and all arrangement for the paying of the debt. I do not want to occupy that position, and I shall vote, under all the circumstances, for the bill, as not the best but as the only plan for the payment of the debt. I love Indiana too well to stand opposed to the payment of her debts. If I believed that the debt was not due I should vote against any bill whatever. But entertaing the other page: 207[View Page 207] view, and earnestly desiring so see this incumbus removed, I vote "aye."
The result was then announced as above recorded, and so the bill passed the Senate.
Mr. FINCH introduced a bill [S. No. 313] for An Act to amend sections 1 and 4 of An Act to reorganize the Evansville Insurance Company, which was passed to the second reading.
And then the Senate took a recess till 2 o'clock P. M.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
The Senate proceeded to the consideration of the special order for this hour, viz: Mr. Dunning's bill, S. No. 40, establishing an Agricultural College at Bloomington. A division of the question on Mr. Culver's amendment having been demanded, the first question will be on striking out.
Mr. DUNNING withdrew his demand for a division of the question.
Mr. BEESON moved to amend the amendment by striking out all after the word "Act" and insert this: "locate the Agricultural College in the county of Wayne by the citizens depositing $100,000 in the Citizens Bank of Richmond, subject to the order of the Board of Trustees of said college for the use of said college."
Mr. B. gave reasons for the location as proposed in the amendment, which he considered paramount. The great principles involved in this question have been ably discussed, and the simple point remaining is, where shall the College be located? The citizens of Wayne county would feel proud to have it located there; and having no college buildings sufficient, they have proposed to give $100,000 in money. He referred to the enterprise and energy of her people; the richness of her soil; the extent of her manufactories; and declared that "old Wayne" stood pre-eminent in many things, and second to no county in the State in every thing which pertains to the happiness and enioyment of man.
Mr. VAWTER made an ineffectual motion - yeas 22, nays 25 - to lay the amendment to the amendment on the table.
Mr. VAN BUSKIRK moved to recommit the bill to the Special Committee, with instructions to report a substitute leaving the Trustees of the Indiana Agricultural College free to locate the same where a donation may be given not less than $100,000, &c.
On motion of Mr. CULLEN the motion to refer was laid on the table by yeas 34, nays 15.
Mr. BENNETT moved that the Senate resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole for the consideration of this subject. His object was to obtain the sense of the Senate by a kind of ballot in the Committee - no record of which would appear on the Senate journals.
Mr. DUNNING (Mr. Williams in the Chair) opposed this motion. He desired a square vote on each locality.
Mr. WRIGHT regarded this whole college matter as a consummate humbug, and believed that it would prove a leach upon the treasury.
Mr. CASON offered the following:
Resolved, That the Senate proceed to vote viva voce, for a place to locate the Agricultural College, and the place receiving a majority of the votes shall be the place where said college shall be located, and the bill now under considorat on shall be recommitted with instructions to amend the bill by inserting the same.
Mr. NILES opposed the resolution, regarding it as preposterous to limit the vote of Senators, in finally fixing the location of this college, to one of the three points named in the several propositions before the Senate.
He spoke decidedly in favor of Indianapolis as the most central and accessible point, and argued to the Senate that to locate such an institution at a point inconvenient of access, would defeat the chief object of the grant and tend to make the institution like our other colleges, a mere schooe for boys, and it would be as unwise as to have located the French Polytechnic Institute elsewhere than at Paris.
Mr. COBB declared in favor of locating the college at Bloomington. Let this endowment go hand in hand with the Institution already placed thereby a donation from Congress many years ago. He regarded that as the only situation that would give satisfaction to the people of the State at large.
The resolution was adopted.
Mr. THOMPSON submitted the following, that Marion county might be considered as before the Senate:
Resolved, That if the citizens of Marion county, or any part of them, shall, within the next five days, or before the 17th inst, shaIl offer, for the use and location of the Agricultural College, two hundred acres of land situated within three miles of Indianapolis, and suitable for the location of said College, and shall offer one hundred thousand dollars to be expended in the erection of suitable buildings, on said location, then the said Agricultural College should be located on said laud, and in Marion County, Indiana.
The Senate then proceeded to choose a location by ballot.
The first ballot resulted: for Bloomington, 18; for Tippecanoe Battle Ground, 12; for Indianapolis, 11; for Richmond, 5; for Winnemac, 1; for blank, 1.
The second ballot resulted: for Bloomington, 20; for Tippecanoe Battle Ground, 15; for Indianapolis, 8; for Richmond, 2; for Huntington, 1; for blank, 1.
The third ballot resulted: For Bloomington, 18; for Tippecanoe Battle Ground, 17; for Indianapolis, 12; blank, 1.
The fourth ballot resulted: For Bloomington, 22; for Tippecanoe Battle Ground, 15; for Indianopolis, 11; blank, 1.
The fifth ballot resulted: For Bloomington, 24; for Tippecanoe Battle Ground, 20; for Indianapolis, 3; blank, 1.
Pending the ballot, Mr. THOMPSON again urged upon Senators the superior advantages of Indianapolis as a location for this College.
The sixth ballot resulted: For Bloomington, 29; for Tippecanoe Battle Ground, 18; for Indianapolis, 1; blank, 1, as follows:
Those who voted for Bloomington were:
Messrs Barker, Bonham, Bowman, Bradley, Browm of Hamilton, Brown of Wells, Cobb, Corbin, Cullen, Douglas, Downey, Dykes, English, Finch, Fuller, Gifford, Hord, Hyatt, Jinkens, Marshall, Mason, Moore, Richmond, Staffers, VanBuskirk, Vawter, Ward, Williams, and Mr. President - 29.
Those who voted for Tippecanoe Battle Ground were:
Messrs. Allison, Beeson, Bennett, Carson, Cason, Chapman, Culver, Davis, Hanna, McClurg, Milligan, Newlin, Noyes, Oyler, Reagan, Terry, and Woods - 17.
Mr. Niles and Mr. Thompson voted for Indianapolis.
Mr. Wright voted for "blank."
Bloomington having received a majority of votes cast the bill was recommitted in accordance page: 208[View Page 208] with the provisions of the resolution authorizing the balloting.
ENUMERATION OF INHABITANTS.
On motion by Mr. CULLEN, his Census bill S. No. 298, (described on page 147 of the BREVIER LEGISLATIVE REPORTS) was read the third time.
Mr. WRIGHT contended that the assessor could take the census without adding to his labors: it would be much more simple, and could oe done at no cost.
Mr. BENNETT said that was the plan as it stood for years under the old law, and it did not work well.
The bill was passed by yeas 39, nays 2.
On motion by Mr. FINCH, his Evansville Insurance Company Charter bill S. No. 318, (introduced this morning) was read by title only, and referred to the Committee on Corporations.
On motion by Mr. BONHAM the bill, H. R. No. 270, concerning the per diem of members and officers of the General Assembly, was read the second time.
On motion of Mr. BENNETT the Senate amendment relating to paying clerks and doorkeepers a salary in future, was stricken from the bill by yeas 32, nays 10.
On motion by Mr. VAWTER the bill was amended so that its provisions shall apply only to this session.
On motion by Mr. BENNETT the bill was further amended by striking therefrom "$4" wherever it occurs,"and inserting "5" in lieu.
The bill passed to the third reading.
And then the Senate adjourned.
