HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
FRIDAY, February 1, 1867.The House met at 9 o'clock A. M.
The reading of the journal of yesterday was dispensed with.
ABSENCE.
Messrs. Wilson, Donaldson, Tebbs, Shanks, Daggy, Mason, Ross, Barritt, Schammahorn, Edmonson, McCarthy, Stackhouse, Peele, Carter, Morrison and Inman obtained leave of absence till next week.
ADJOURNMENT TILL MONDAY.
Mr. ROSS moved an order that when the House adjourns today, it shall stand adjourned till Monday 2 o'clock.
After debate and sundry propositions to amend.
Mr. NEWCOMB moved ineffectually to lay the subject on the table - affirmative 35, negative 36.
Mr. Ross' motion was then rejected.
Mr. VAWTER submitted the following:
Resolved, That in future this House will not grant any member leave of absence except on account of sickness of himself or his family.
It was laid on the table.
RULES FOR THE NEXT HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
The SPEAKER laid before the House the receipt of the State Librarian for 200 copies of the rules of the House of Representatives, deposited in the Library un der an order of the House, for the use of the next House of Representatives.
It was ordered to be spread on the Journal.
PETITIONS AND MEMORIALS.
Messrs. McLean, Newcomb and Daggy presented memorials for claims, which, (without reading) were referred to the Claims Committee.
Mr. MOORE presented the memorial of Wm. Ecclebarger and others, lessees of water power in the town of Harrison, Decatur county, with reference to losses sustained by them on account of no supply of water. It was referred to the Committee on Canals.
Mr. PEELLE presented the petition of sun-dry citizens of Wayne county, on the subject of protecting Turnpike companies from the depredations of swine. It was referred to the Committee on Rights and Privileges.
Messrs. Spencer, McMurray, Donaldson, Evans, McClusky, Erwin, Black, Smith of Lagrange, McFadden, Ferris, and Griggs severally presented petitions for a prohibitory Liquor law, which (without reading) were referred to the Committee on Temperance.
Mr. WOLFER presented the petition of citizens of Warren county, asking for laws for land drainage, and with refereence to changing and fencing highways. It was referred to the Committee on Roads.
Mr. HUGHES presented the memorial of members of the Ellettsville Quarterly Conference, for an inquiry into the propriety of amending the law - vol. 1, p. 69, Revised Statutes-so as to equalize church taxation - exempting parsonages. It was referred to theCommittee on Ways and Means.
On motion by Mr. MILLER, it was
Resolved, That three hundred copies of there report of the committee appointed at the last session of the General Assembly to investigate the Sinking Fund accompanying the Governor's message, be printed for the use of the House.
Mr. NEWCOMB, from the Committee on Ways and Means, reported that, in compliance with the act of March 4, 1861, said Committee (in the presence of the Auditor and Treasurer State) did burn and destroy of the six per cent war loan bonds a sum amounting to $101,000. It was ordered to be spread on the Journal.
He also returned the Benevolent Institution bill [S. No. 98,] recommending its passage.
From the Judiciary Committee - Mr. HUGHES returned his compounding and concealing crimes bill [H. R. 158,] with four amendments, recommending its passage. Mr. BAKER returned the Clerks' Justices' and Notaries' bill [S. No. 22,] recommending its passage. Also, Mr. Bird's Township Trustee (may administer oaths) bill [H. R. 137,] recommending that it do not pass; which was laid on the table.
Mr. DAGGY, from the Judiciary Committee, returned Mr. Fuller's County Treasurer's settlement bill [H. R. 161] and Mr. Stackhouse's assessment law amendment bill [H. R. 188] recommending their reference to the Committee on Way and Means. It was so ordered.
Mr. SMITH, of Lagrange, from a majority of the Judiciary Committee, returned Mr. Brucker's bill, [H. R. 81] prescribing that children under sixteen years of age, employed in the factories of this state, shall not be worked longer than ten hours a day, recommending its passage.
Mr. ROSS, from a minority of said committee, dissented for these reasons: 1. The provision applying to manufacturing employments only, is an unjust discrimination. 2. It is direct, interference with the duties and responsibilities of parents and guardians. 3. The manufactories enumerated in the bill can not be successfully operated with less than twelve hours labor each day, and this bill would take from them one-sixth of this time. 4. It will prevent persons of proper age from procuring employment in factories. And 5. The law should not interfere with family relations without an imperious necessity.
The SPEAKER held, that minority reports are pleadings, and ought not to go on the journal.
page: 145[View Page 145]RULES.
Mr. PEELLE now called up his motion, filed yesterday, that the orders of the day shall be called at 10 o'clock instead of 11 o'clock.
The motion was agreed to.
TRIAL ON "INFORMATION."
Mr. HUGHES, from a majority of the Committe on the Judiciary, returned Mr. Hamilton's trial upon information in criminaI cases bill [H. R. 71,] recommending that it do not pass.
Mr. MILLER, from the minority of said Committee, reported the opinion that thebill should be amended by adding approriately these words: "When the party accused is confined in the county jail on such charge " The minority report is signed Messrs. Miller and Bedford.
The SPEAKER. The question is or concurring in the report of the majority.
Mr. MILLER said it was to relieve the tax payer, by giving the prisoner a speedy trial. Under the report of the majority he can't have his trial till a grand jury shall pass on his case.
Mr. HUGHES replied. He could conceive of a cheaper plan than that recommended by the minority - just send any man to the penitentiary without any trial - at all! But his old common law prejudices compelled him to hold that a man should never be put upon trial for felony without presentment or indictment. He would not lightly put upon any the odium of trial for crime. He had seen enough of this within the past few years of provost marshal's and military trials. He was for going back to the ancient ways of the Republic. Nothing but the commotions of civil war could reconcile him to such things.
NATIONAL CURRENCY.
Here the subject was passed over for the consideration of Mr. Crain's National currency joint resolution, H. R. No. 2,and it was read by the Clerk.
Mr. McLEAN demanded the previous question; and there was a second by the House.
Mr. CRAIN closed the debate under the rule. He treated it as a financial - not a political question. There was nothing political in the simple question whether it is good policy for the Nation to take up the interest-bearing debt first; or whether we should first withdraw the non-interest bearing debt? - greenbacks. The Secretary of the Treasury was taking up these latter at the rate of four millions per month, because a law of Congress gave him his discretion to do so. And so the Secretary as endeavoring as fast as possible to come down to a specie basis - a policy which must destroy the manufacturing interests of the country. This resolution was no more directing a censure against the Secretary of the Treasury than against the Congress of the United States.
Mr. HUGHES moved to lay the joint resolution on the table - demanding the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered, and being taken resulted - yeas 55. nays 30.
So the motion was lost.
Mr. HUGHES moved to reconsider the vote, by which the House seconded the demand for the previous question. He did so at the request of others who desired to debate the resolution. He did not himself desire to be heard further.
Mr. NEWCOMB, Mr. McLEAN, Mr. CRAIN, and Mr. MILLER discussed the question of order whether it was accordant with parliamentary law for the author of a proposition to close the debate under the previous question, settling the question in the affirmative.
Mr. SHUEY moved to lay the motion to reconsider on the table.
The, vote on the latter motion resulted yeas 44, nays 32.
So the motion was laid on the table.
The question was then taken on the adoption of the joint resolution - resulting - yeas 59, nays 24 - as follows:
YEAS - Messrs. Belford, Bischof, Black, Brucker, Campbell, Chambers, Crain, Daggy, Donaldson, Dunn, Erwin, Evans, Ferris, Foulke, Funk, Gordon, Greer, Griggs, Hartman, Hamilton, Higgins, Hopkins, Hudson, Martin, Mason, McCarthy, McClasky, McLean, McMurray, Miller, Moore, Newcomb, North, Peelle, Prather, Ratliff. Ross, Rosser, Sabin, Shook, Shoaff, Shuey, Skidmore, Smith of Lagrange, Smith of Wabash, Spencer, Stafford, Stewart, Thrasher, Thomas, Wason, Watson, Williams, Wilson, Wolfer, Wolflin, Wright and Mr. Speaker - 59.
NAYS - Messrs. Baker, Bird, Crowe, Douglass, Edmondson, Fuller, Green, Honneus, Hostetter, Hughes, Hungate, Inman, Riser, Long of Jackson, Matthis, McFadin, Montgomery, O'Neil, Shanks, Shull, Thacher, Van Valkenburg, Vawter and White - 24.
So the joint resolution was finally passed be House of Representatives.
TRIAL ON "INFORMATION."
The House retsrned to the consideration of Mr. Hughes' report from a majority of the Committee on the Judiciary, adverse to he passage of Mr. Hamilton's trial on information bill [H. R. No. 71]
Mr. KIZER being entitled to the floor, supported the minority report.
Mr. HAMILTON. The great objection to trial on information was that it brought he facts before the public, which he was not careful to answer. But the object was to avoid the expense of keeping the man in all, and to give a speedy trial - a principle both just and politic.
Mr. WILLIAMS stood for the constitutional provision, that a man shall not be page: 146[View Page 146] tried for crime but upon presentment or indictment.
Mr. BELFORD could see no objection to investing the circuit prosectuor with the same power now exercised by the district prosecutor in the Court of Common Pleas; and the Constitutional provision was as much against the one as the other. He answered Mr. Hughes' objections to the bill. The reference to the one man power was not applicable; for here was a man already under arrest and in custody; and the arrest and confinement was in the very nature of an indictment. Did this give the prosecutor any more power than he now possesses? Does not the prosecutor now compound and enter a nolle prosequi? He spoke till the hour of 11 o'clock.
STATE REVENUES.
The House now took up the consideration of the Committee on Ways and Means revenue bill [H. R. 190] and read through by the Clerk.
Whereupon, the House resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole - Mr. Higgins in the Chair - and took up the consideration of the bill [H. R. No. 190] to raise revenues for the years 1867 and 1868. The bill levies a tax of 20 cents on each $100, and 75 cents on each poll.
Mr. NEWCOMB said the Committee on Ways and Means, advising with the Auditor, came to the conclusion that it would be safe to make the reduction of assessments on property from 25 to 20 cents on the $100.
Mr. ROSS proposed to amend by striking out "75," and inserting "50" in lieu. The poll tax was the most distasteful and oppressive of all the powers of taxation, and he supposed it would not materially affect the revenue.
Mr. CRAIN. What amount of revenue would 20 cents raise?
Mr. NEWCOMB said a reduction of one-fifth was expected on personal property - none, of course, on real estate. It was estimated that the total revenue, deducting delinquencies, would be $1,118,968, which was $143,000 above the Auditor's estimate of expenses, leaving out the expenses of the Benevolent Institutions, &c.
Mr. KIZER commended the prudent considerations taken by the Committee; but desired, if possible, a lower rate per cent.
Mr. BIRD was in favor of the amendment. A poll tax is onerous on the poorer classes. From the statement of Mr. Newcomb, he thought the revenue would be sufficient with this reduction of the poll tax.
Mr. HARTMAN. With reference to all taxation, he said it was all in the nature of the poll tax at last: and whilst replying to objections to the poll tax, as such, he was (understood to favor the reduction.
Mr. Speaker BRANHAM hoped the amendment would not prevail. He did not think it was desired by any class of our people - even the poorer classes. How do you reach this class? Their political influence was as great - the very same - as that of the wealthiest class. And the only way they support the expenses of government was by this poll tax. His opinion was this; That the entire current expenses of the government should be met by the poll tax; and that property taxation should do the rest And this was the principle upon which the Committee on Ways and Means bad proceeded. Here was the only question with him: Was this poll tax more than this class can pay? He thought, of course, that the levy ought to be reduced to the lowest point possible. But the committee was groping in the dark somewhat, because the General Assembly had not determined whether there should be given all that the benevolent institutions ask. Neither has it been determined what shall be done with the Morgan raid claims and the military claims, which under the present system were not likely to be settled n a great number of years. With with reference to the soldiers' claims upon us, they ought to receive prompt attention. The weight of the war was a heavy burden upon the counties, and the State should relieve them as far as possible. There was hardly anything impossible to the energy of the American people; but the attempts being made in a high quarter to leap the chasm by a speedy return to a gold basis, he regarded as the course that would keep the country farthest from that result. Was there a man in the State fit to cast a ballot, who would be unwilling to pay for the policy which his votes have dictated?
Mr. STAFFORD combatted the assumption that a poor man has the same interest in the government as a rich man. The poll tax of 75 cents was a greater burden upon the poorer class than the entire tax upon the rich and well to do.
Mr. McFADIN counselled economy. But we could not legislate with reference to claims that may come in in the future. He considered that a 50 cents poll tax would be sufficient, and should be so taken. To whom little is given, but little should be required. And he eulogized their country's defenders - the bone and sinew class, upon whom the burdens of government should be made to rest as lightly as possible.
Mr. CHAMBERS demurred to the grudging remarks which might intimate that the poor man did not bear a sufficient tax burden to pay for the privilege of voting. He showed the disproportionate share of taxes which the poorer classes always pay; and while he was in favor of universal suffrage if he were to choose between the disfran- page: 147[View Page 147] chisement of the rich and the poor, he would say the former.
Mr. STEWART entertained a hope that the 20 cents could be reduced; and for that purpose he councelled sending the bill back to the Committee on Ways and Means, there to await the time when he may be able to make reliable estimates.
Mr. BAKER seemed to approve this course. The taxes were so enormous that he feared they could not be met.
Mr. NEWCOMB stated that the entire property tax would be $1,150,000.
Mr. BAKER. And add to this the sum of $30,000,000 required from the State of Indiana for federal taxation and the sum would involve a crushing burden which could hardly be borne. Taxes therefore should be raised when it would bear least heavily upon the masses. He was not prepared to vote on the amendment.
Mr. BELFORD. Would it not be better to keep this poll at 75 cents, and reduce the tax on property?
Mr. BAKER said he thought so. The producing interests of the county were taxed, especially for Federal purposes,which was a most objectionable form of taxation, and this, in fact, should be considered in making this levy.
Mr. NEWCOMB submitted a statement of figures, upon which the action of the Committee was based. The tax on property being reduced one-fifth, he would not now seriously object to the amendment offered by Mr. Ross.
The Committee then rose and the Chairman reported progress, and obtained leave to sit again.
The report was concurred in.
On motion by Mr. NEWCOMB, the further consideration of the bill was postponed, and it was made the special order for Tuesday at 11 o'clock.
NEW PROPOSITIONS.
Bills for acts of the General Assembly, numbered and titled to the following effect, were introduced and read the first time:
By Mr. GREEN, [H. R. 202] to amend the second section of the act to fix the time of holding the Court of Common Pleas in the Fifth District, repealing conflicting laws, and declaring when this act shall take effect. [The District is composed of the counties of Ohio, Switzerland, Ripley, Jefferson and Dearborn.] It was referred to a special Committee of members representing these counties, viz: Messrs. Green, North, Shook and Litson.
By Mr. SHOOK, [H. R. 203] similar title. It was referred to the same committee
By Mr. McLEAN, [H. K. 204] to incorporate the Indiana Soap Stone Stove Company. Referred to the Committee on Corporations.
By Mr. CAMPBELL, [H. R. 205] to declare and secure the rights of married women to real estate sold under execution. Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mr. WASON, [H. R. 206] authorizing township trustees, trustees of incorporated towns, ana common councils of cities, to levy a tax for school purposes, [not exceeding twenty-five cents on the one hundred dollars valuation of taxable property, and twenty-five cents on each taxable Poll.] Passed to the second reading.
Mr. WOODS presented a lengthy printed memorial [see Senate proceedings of today,] burlesquing the rum sellers' calling in an absurd presentation of their "wrongs" It was referred to the Committee on Temperance.
Mr. RATLIFF submitted the following:
Resolved, That the Speaker of the House of Representatives be authorized to appoint another floor page.
It was laid on the table.
Mr. McFADIN moved that when the House adjourns to-day it shall stand adjourned till Monday 2 o'clock.
Mr. CHAMBERS hoped it would be voted down. Those who stay in town can meet to-morrow morning, make reports and introduce bills.
Mr. McLEAN. We can do that business as well without a quorum as with.
Mr. McFADIN withdrew the motion.
The House then adjourned.
