HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
MONDAY, February 11, 1867.The House met at 2 o'clock P. M. pursuant to adjournment.
On motion of Mr. STAFFORD, the reading of the journal of Saturday was dispensed with.
Mr. Watson, Mr. Wolflin and Mr. Baker obtained leave of absence on account of sickness, &c.
On motion of Mr. LITSON, the Military Committee had leave of absence for Wednesday to visit the Soldiers' Home.
PETITIONS AND MEMORIALS.
The SPEAKER laid before the House a paper in a claim from a man in Illinois; which was referred to the Committee on Claims.
Messrs. GEISENDORF and WRIGHT presented petitions which (without reading) were referred to the Committee on Temperance.
Mr. SHANKS presented a petition from sundry citizens asking for indemnity on account of losses by the Morgan raid.
REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES.
Mr. DAGGY, from the Committee on the Judiciary, returned Mr. McLean's benevolent private institutions perpetuity bill, [H. R. 54,] recommending its passage.
Mr. McLEAN said this bill was of such importance to his people as to involve the investment of a property of about $300,000, and dependent on the life of a single individual.
On his motion the order of business was dispensed with, and the bill was read the second time and passed to the engrossment and third reading.
Mr. MILLER, from the Judiciary Committee, returned Mr. Peelle s innkeepers' liabilities bill [H. R. 111,] recommending page: 200[View Page 200] its indefinite postponement.
The report was concurred in.
SOLDIERS' RELIEF FUND.
Mr. GREEN submitted the following:
Resolved, That the present fund, known as the Soldiers' Relief Fund, be transferred to the Common School Fund of the State ; and that the Committee on Military Affairs be instructed to report a bill to that effect.
Mr. G. said he was a member of the Committee on Military Affairs. He was informed that sometime during the early stages of the late war this soldiers' relief fund was enacted by law. And when the war ceased in 1865, the object for which this fund was enacted ceased also. There no longer remained any necessity for this method of providing for soldiers' families. And now there was accumulated the sum of about $25,000 of this fund in the. State Treasury, which he proposed to place in the common school fund. There was no question but that this General Assembly would amply proivde for the Soldiers' Home; and then there were other ways of providing for that institution without the assistance of this fund. About $3,500 of this fund had already taken that direction; and he was one of the committee that reported in favor of it, and the Governer's check for a part of it.
Mr. WRIGHT proposed to make it a resolution of inquiry.
Mr. GREEN acquiesced, and modified his resolution accordingly.
The resolution was then adopted.
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. SPENCER, a joint resolution [H. R. 13] instructing our Senators and requesting our Representatives in Congress to secure the passage of a law by which damages and losses incurred by certain citizens of Indiana on account of the raid of John Morgan and other rebels may be repaid. It was passed to the second reading.
By Mr. NEWCOMB, [H. R. 262] to amend the sections 2 and 6 of the act to incorporate the Widows and Orphans' Asylum at Indianapolis, approved February 13, 1851. It was passed to the second reading.
By Mr. WOLFE, [H. R. 263] to amend section 104 of the act to amend the general tax law. [It changes the per centum for collecting taxes from 5 per cent, to 10 per cent.] It was referred to the Committee on Fees and Salaries.
By Mr. WRIGHT, [H. R. 264] to legalize the sale of certain seminary lands in Jasper county to Marion L. Spitwell and Margaret Stackhouse.
By Mr. HONNEUS, [H. R. 265] to amend sections 9 and 17 of the common school law. [For publishing a statement of the condition of the common schoolsc - oncerning transfers of citizens for school purposes from one township to another.] It was referred to the Committee on Education .
By Mr. McLEAN [H. R. 266] to provide for the teaching of the German language in the common schools of this State, and to provide that the branches required from time to time to be taught in the common schools may be taught in the German language upon proper application It was referred to the Committee on Education.
By Mr. MORRISON, [H. R. 267] to authorize the clerks of the Circuit Courts to procure aid furnish Justices of the Peace with books to be used by them as dockets. [At the expense ot the county ] It was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
By Mr. WOODS, [H. R. 268] supplemental to the act regulating general elections and prescribing the duty of officers in relation thereto. It was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mr. DAGGY, [H. R. 269] to amend the 15th sectioa of the general practice act. [Case? in which suits in attachment may be commenced and prosecuted ] It was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mr. WILSON, [H. R. 270] regulating divorces. [The Clerk of the Circuit Court to hear and determine the case fee $50divorced party marrying within two years, to be held guilty of a felony, &c.] It was referred to the Committee on Rights and Privileges.
By Mr. McMURRAY, [H. R. 271] to annul section 7 of the general city corporation law. [Respecting the improvements of streets and alleys ] It was referred to the Committee on Corporations.
By Mr. MOORE, [H. R. 272] to create the 22d District of the Court, of Common Pleas in the State of Indiana, fixing the time of holding the Courts therein, and repealing, &c. [The District to include the counties of Rush, Decatur and Ripley.] It was referred to the Committee on the Organization of Courts.
By Mr. McMURRAY, [H. R. 273] to amend section 7 of the act, to provide a general system of Common Schools. [To require Trustees to make exhibits of the school funds with which they are charged.] It was referred to the Committee on Education.
By Mr. MONTGOMERY, [H. R. 274] to amend section seven of the act providing for the election of clerks of the Circuit Courts and prescribing some of their duties, etc. [It is to get the unclaimed jury and witness fees and forfeitures money into the Common School fund.] It was referred to the Committee on Education.
ANOTHER CLERK.
Mr. CAMPBELL submitted the following :
WHEREAS, The Committee on Public Expenditures have been directed by this House to keep a record of their proceedings ; therefore-
Resolved, That said committee be authorized to employ a clerk, who shall be paid only for actual time he serves.
It was adopted.
SOAP-STONE STOVE COMPANY.
Mr. McLEAN asked and obtained leave to withdraw from the Clerk's files his soap-stone stove bill [H. R. 204] having become satisfied that it was unconstitutional some of its provisions.
SUPREME COURT ROOMS.
On motion by Mr. NEWCOMB, the Supreme Court bill [S. 168] was taken up, the question being on Mr. Prather's motion to refer the bill and pending amendment by Mr. Newcomb to the special joint committee on that subject.
It was so referred.
THE CALENDAR.
The Langdon vs. Applegate peal bill [S. 63] was taken up, read the sec- page: 201[View Page 201] ond time, and referred to the Judiciary Committee.
STATE LIBRARIAN.
Librarian bill [S. 5] coming up on the second reading, with the amendment of the Committee on Fees and Salaries, raising the pay of the Librarian to $1,500
Mr. SHUEY and Mr. VAWTER were in favor of the amendment. It raised the salary from $1,200 to $1,500.
Mr. MILLER moved to lay the amendment on the table.
The motion was agreed to - affirmative 42, negative not reported.
The bill was then passed to the engrossment.
LOUISVILLE, NEW ALBANY AND CHICAGO RAILROAD.
The SPEAKER laid before the House a communication from the Auditor of State, responding to Mr. Honneus's resolution of the House, adopted on the 31st of January, in relation to the dismissal of the suit gainst the Louisville, New Albany and Chicago Railroad Company for taxes. It is accompanied by a letter from the Attorney General to the Auditor, explaining his reasons for such dismissal. The letter sets forth these facts: That in 1853-'4, this railroad tax list was made out under the erroneous impression that the word "stock" referred to the subscribed capital of the Company. But the Supreme Court has decided that this word means the actual property owned by the Company. That property was then valued at $750 per mile. And the Company have paid their taxes on this arrangement. The Attorney General does not claim that this compromise is legally binding, &c.
ROADS.
The Turnpike act amendment bill [S. 11] amending sections 3 and 14 of the act of March 6, 1865, coming up on the second reading, with the committee's amendments striking out all after the enacting clause and inserting new matter -
Mr. VAWTER proposed to amend by allowing the owners of adjoining lands to choose between roads for which they shall be taxed; and so as to allow the company to drain the road through adjoining lands at the expense of the owner.
On the motion of Mr. DAGGY the bill and pending amendments were referred to the Committee on the Judiciary with instructions to inquire into the constitutionality of the law itself, and the expediency of repealing the entire law.
Mr. ROSS proposed to amend the 3d section so as to provide what where one-half or greater portion of any subdivision of government land lie within three-fourths of a mile of the road the whole shall be taxed if less than one-half lie within three-fourths of a mile, then none of it shall be taxed.13
Mr. MONTGOMERY proposed to amend in the 3d section so that all real estate outside of town corporate limits, and within three-fourths of a mile of said road, shall be taxed for such road construction in proportion to the value of such realty on the Auditor's books, as follows: lands lying within one-fourth mile for one-half of the cost of construction; lands lying within one-half mile and over one-fourth shall be taxed for one-third of the cost of construction: and lands within three-fourths of a mile and over one-half a mile shall pay one-sixth of the cost of construction,with a proviso. He said the design of the amendment was that the owners of land that receive the most benefit from the road shall pay the most for its construction.
The amendments go with the bill to the Committee.
THE CALENDAR.
On motion by Mr. CRAIN, the House proceeded to the consideration of bills of House in the Calendar on the second reading.
Mr. McLain's Normal School Amendment bill [H. R. 15] coming up, it was referred to the Committee on Education.
Mr. Matthis' David Stevenson joint resolution [H. R. 10] was passed to the third reading.
Mr. McFadin's Old Soldiers' joint resolution [H. R. 11] was passed to the third reading.
Mr. Shuey's Town School House Tax bill [H. R. 27] coming up -
Mr. SHUEY explained that it was to confer upon Town Trustees the same privilege with regard to school houses that is now enjoyed by cities: that they may go into debt for a school house to the extent of $30,000.
Mr. GEISENDORF was in favor of the bill.
On motion by Mr. WOLFE, it was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.Mr. Hughes' Locomotive Engineer Amendment bill [H. R. 40] coming up -
On the motion of Mr. SMITH, of Lagrange, it was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary - with Mr. Prather's amendment: "That no person shall be licensed as a locomotive engineer who has not attained the age of twenty-five years."
Mr. Shuey's fire limits bill [H. R. 96] coming up -
Mr. HARTMAN proposed to amend so that it shall require two-thirds of the owners of real estate to petition instead of a majority; which was adopted with a modifi- page: 202[View Page 202] cation so as to include only such owners as reside in town.
Mr. WOODS moved to amend by striking out the requirement for certifying the names of the land owners within the prescribed limits on the petition; which was also adopted.
The bill was then ordered to the third reading.
Mr. Peelle's house, burning penalty bil. [H. R. 130] coming up - the Judiciary Committee's amendment for including "unfinished buildings" was adopted; and then it was passed to the engrossment and third reading.
Mr. Woods' justices pleadings bill [H. R. 133] was passed to the engrossment.
On motion by Mr. GREER, Mr. Tebbs obtained leave of absence - his brother sick.
Mr. Grigg's town license bill [H. R. 145] came up with the Judiciary Committee's substitute. The substitute was adopted; and so the bill was ordered to the engrossment.
Mr. Geisendorf s mechanics lien bill [H. R. 159] was ordered to the engrossment.
WILL CASE APPEALS.
Mr. McLean's will case appeals bill [H. R. 163] coming up, with Judiciary Committee's favorable recommendation -
Mr. MILLER moved that it be indefinitely postponed.
Mr. DAGGY explained the necessity for the bill. It was to repeal the repealing act of last winter and reinstate cases pending in the Courts of Common Pleas which were prevented by that act from appealing to the Circuit Court.
Mr. CRAIN defended the repeal act of last winter, and opposed its repeal. He said it was designed to affect a particular ease wherein there was a will to give property to the wife to the exclusion of children.
Mr. WOODS believed there was merit in the bill. He stated that the law prior to the act of 1865 authorized will cases to be appealed from the Common Pleas to the Circuit Court; and the case in the Circuit Court could be put into shape for appeal to the Supreme Court. In this case referred to parties had neglected to place the record in the Common Pleas in shape for appeal to the Supreme Court, and before they could come into the Circuit Court, the act of 1855 cut off appeals from the Common Pleas to the Circuit Court. It seemed to the Judiciary Committee to be a trick of legislation to interfere with this particular case. Without discussing the abstract principle, the committee thought it best just to place these parties back where they were.
Mr. O'NEIL opposed the principle of appealing these will cases from the Common Pleas to the Circuit Court It favored litigation, which ought rather to be discouraged. He rehearsed the merits of the Terre Haute case, involved in this legislation. He understood that the evidence full and complete in that case. And this bill was to admit a new trial in a case which has been justly adjudicated. It was an attempt to revive the right of appeal to the Circuit Court, to give the advantage a of new trial to the supporters of an iniquitous will, now when a material witness for the contestants is no more.
Mr. CAMPBELL supposed, from the facts elicited, that almost every man here was prepared to support the bill. It was immaterial what the witness testified, or whether the witness were living or dead. He doubled not but that if the defeated party had succeeded in the particular case referred to, that party would have been here asking for this repeal, just as it is now asked for by the opposite party.
Mr. WILSON stated his opinion, and his reasons for it, that the bill should be indefinitely postponed.
Mr. ROSS saw no greater impropriety in allowing this case to be tried in the Circuit Court de novo, than in allowing any other will case to be so appealed and tried. If there was justice in allowing these will cases to be tried de novo more than any other cases, he was unable to see it. The law had better stand as it is.
Mr. SPENCER. It seemed to him that if this particular Terre Haute case did not involve a large amount of money, this bill would not have come in.
Mr. McLEAN said the Legislature should not legislate to impair vested rights. That was the character of the legislation proposed to be repealed by this bill. Gentlemen have no right to say that this bill is got upto meet a particular case. He argued generally, that these parties in the Terre Haute case could not have anticipated the action of the Legislature of 1865. This case ought to stand on the same ground with other similar cases. If the act of 1865 had contained a saving clause, this bill never would have been introduced.
Mr. MILLER insisted that this bill did not stand on its merits, but on the merits of isolated cases. It would open two cases to renewed litigation, now adjudicated and settled in his county, and there were others that would be in like manner disturbed.
Mr. DAGGY said this was a question of legal right and wrong. He insisted that legal principles were all developed by single cases. Were gentlemen prepared to cut off all appeals from the Common Pleas to the Circuit Court? He recited facts in the particular case referred to. He also rehearsed the legal right to appeal the case, page: 203[View Page 203] alleging the testimony of the deceased witness could be recovered.
Mr. LITSON, as hearing the case disinterestedly, held that the bill ought to be not merely postponed, but killed outright. It was simply a case bill.
The motion to indefinitely postpone was agreed to. Subsequently-
On motion by Mr. DUNN, the vote was reconsidered, and the bill was laid on the table.
Mr. MILLER asked and obtained leave to withdraw his report made this morning returning Mr. Peelle's innkeepers' bill [H. R. 111]-the vote being reconsidered by which the committee's report to postpone was concurred in.
The House then (under the rule,) adjourned till to-morrow morning 9 o'clock.
