HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
FRIDAY, February 15, 1867.The House met at 9 o'clock.
On motion of Mr. SHUEY, the reading of the journal of yesterday was dispensed with.
PETITIONS AND MEMORIALS.
Mr. NEWLAND, Mr. BLANCH and Mr. HAMILTON presented petitions on the subject of Temperance; which were referred to the Committee on Temperance.
Mr. CROWE presented the petition of sundry citizens of Scott county, with reference to the Morgan raid ; which was referred to the Committee on Claims.
Mr. PEELLE presented the memorial of James Perry and others, members of the bar of Wayne county, on the subject of judicial apportionment; which was referred to the select committee on that matter.
Mr. SHANKS presented the petition of sundry citizens of Washington county, against the existing dog law ; which was referred to the Committee on Agriculture.
Mr. DANALDSON presented the memorial of John T. Campbell, Treasurer of Parke county, for amendment of sections 96 and 119 of the assessment laws, &c., which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means.
Mr. North obtained leave of absence till Wednesday.
Mr. Green obtained leave of absence - his mother deceased.
REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES.
Mr. CROWE, from the Committee on Claims reported against the allowance of the claim of John C. Walker, late agent of State.
It was concurred in.
Mr. SABIN, from the Committee on Fees and Salaries, returned the bill, S. 33, to increase the fees of Justices and Constables, recommending that it do not pass. The report was concurred in.
He also recommended the passage of Mr. Montgomery's Foreign Insurance Amendment bill, H.R. No. 261.
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. HIGGINS, for the Committee on the State Prison North, [H. R. 287] fixing the salaries and terms of office of the Directors of the State Prison North, and repealing laws in conflict therewith. It was passed to the second reading.
By Mr. CRAIN, [H. R. 288] to amend section 315 of article 18 of the General Practice act. [Concerning the time for service and publication of notice in actions set for trial.] It was passed to the second reading.
By Mr.MARTIN,.[H. R. 289] to amend section 1 of the act authorizing county agricultural societies, etc. It was referred to the Committee on Agriculture.
By Mr. BAKER [H R. 290] to amend the 29th section of the act defining misdemeanors and prescribing punishment therefor. [To leave it in the discretion of the court to fine in any sum not exceeding $500.]
By Mr. WOLFE, [H. R. 291] to equalize the benefits among the non commissioned officers and privates in the war, authorized under the two acts of 1865. It was referred to the Committee on Military Affairs.
By Mr. ROSS, [H. R. 292] in relation to practice in the trial of civil cases in the circuit and common pleas courts. It was referred to the Judiciary Committee.
By Mr. CAMPBELL, [H. R. 293] to fix the times of holding courts in the 5th judicial circuit, &c. [Hendricks and Marion counties.] It was passed to the second reading.
By Mr. GRIGGS, [H. R. 294] to disfranchise deserters from the army of the United States, and deserters from the draft - rendering them incapable of holding any office of trust or profit within this State. It was referred to the Judiciary Committee.
By Mr DAGGY, [H. R. 295] to authorize cities to prepare, execute, negotiate and sell bonds for the erection of school buildings, and finishing the same, and to levy taxes to pay such bonds, etc. [Twenty years bonds - to an amount not exceeding $30,000.]
By Mr. FULLER. [H.R. 296] to amend section 10 of the valuation and assessment act. [Copy of duplicate to be delivered on or before the 15th day of November in each year, instead of October.]
By Mr. MILLER, [H. R. 297] in relation to docket fees. [It proposes, also to repeal sections 3, 4 and 5 of the act of 1859.] It was referred to the Committee on Fees and Salaries.
By Mr. WOLFER, [H. R. 298] to make it a misdemeanor to allow hogs to run at large in certain cases. [Unless the nose be "ringed.''] It was referred to the Committee on Rights and Privileges.
By Mr. SHOOK, [H. R. 299] to amend section 77 of the practice act (amended in 1855.) [Concerning the tranference of actions.] It was referred to the Judiciary Committee.
By Mr. HOPKINS, [H. R. 300] to amend the amended section 1 of the act fixing the times of holding the Courts of Common Pleas in the several counties of the State, &c. [Counties of Vanderburgh, Warrick, Posey, and Gibson.] It was referred to the Committee on the Organization of Courts.
By Mr. GEISENDORFF, (founded on the petition of James D. Glover and others,) [H. R. 301] donating certain real estate in the village of Rome City, in the county of Noble, to said city. [An outlot on the north of two acres for the site of a building to be used as a graded school and seminary of learning.] It was referred to the Judiciary Committee.
page: 246[View Page 246]By Mr. HAMILTON, |H. R. 302] to amend an act providing for the opening, vacating and changing of highways, and to increase the fees of the viewers and reviewers. [To two dollars a day.] It was referred to the Committee on Rights and Privileges.
By Mr. RATLIFF, [H. R. 303] to amend section 706 of the General Practice Act, [respecting Corporations.] It was referred to the Judiciary Committee.
By Mr. CRAIN, [H. R. 3041 to amend section 3 of the Act Regulating Weights and Measures. [If proposes to add these words : And 70 pounds of lime, slacked or unslacked, shall be taken for a bushel".] It was passed to the second reading
By Mr. McLEAN, [H. R. 305] for the suppression of lotteries, gift distributions, and other gambling schemes, &c [Penalty, not, less than $5, nor more than $1,000.] It was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
On motion of Mr. SCHAMMAHORN, it was
Resolved, That the Doorkeeper be requested to rescind the contract for daily newspapers for the use of this House, to take effect on Saturday February 16th, unless the morning papers can be delivered at 8 o'clock A. M. and the evening papers at 4 o'clock P. M.
The SPEAKER announced the following members of the joint Committee on the part of the House, ordered yesterday, namely: Messrs. Stewart, Higgins, and Stackhouse.
NEGRO SCHOOLS.
On motion of Mr. WILSON, it was
Resolved, That the Committee on Education be, and they are hereby instructed to report a bill so amending the school law, that the colored population of the State shall be taxed the same as the white, and receive their proportionate shares of the school funds in order to the establishment of separate schools for the colored children.
TEACHERS' INSTITUTES.
Mr. STEWART submitted a resolution directing the Committee on Education to inquire into the propriety and expediency of establishing a number of Teachers' Institutes, for the qualification of teachers, to be conducted in convenient places, and houses already constructed, of appropriating to each of said Institutes a sum not to exceed $1,000 a year - not to be allowed until such Institute shall have been opened and operating at least 2 months; and of declaring that when these Institutes shall have been organized, the same shall be substituted for the State Normal School authorized by the act of 1855. He said the resolution contemplated one of these Institutes to each Congressional District; and he thought the interests of the State in the education of teachers would be much better subserved in this way than by the proposed State Normal School. He thought it better to put the money and energy of the State directly into the schools themselves, than into the buildings - the externals of brick and mortar. If you go to the world renowned Universities of Germany, you do not find so much attention paid to the architectural structures; but these institutions consist of the energy and success of their teachers, He thought WP might be at fault in this matter: and that we might very much economize and subserve the highest interests of the State by establishing such institutions as contemplated in that paper.
The resolution was adopted.
MORGAN RAID BILL.
On motion of Mr. PRATHER, his Morgan Raid bill, No. 14. was taken up; his amendment to Mr. Speaker Branhams amendment was withdrawn, and then the bill, with the pending instructions, were referred to the Committee on Education.
THE LATE STATE PRINTER.
On the motion of Mr. MILLER, the Senate's concurrent resolution for the appointment of a joint committee on the alleged frauds on the part of the late State Printer was taken up. He said this was not intended as a reflection on the House committee to investigate the office of the late State Printer. Nor was it resulting from charges preferred by the House committee. But it was simply to inquire whether any further legislation is necessary on the subject to protect the State.
Mr. PEELLE said that the committee of which he was chairman were making progress; and he hoped the Speaker would appoint, under this resolution, an entire new committee.
Mr. ROSS preferred to lay it on the table.
Mr. BELFORD was opposed to this committee The House has now a committee engaged in this investigation. He also would vote to lay the resolution no the table.
Mr. SHUEY said he was no champion of party or men here. But he never remembered the case of one House refusing to the other the courtesy to appoint a joint committee. He understood that the House committee were not acting; and the same was true of a special Senate committee on this matter.
Mr. BELFORD intended no discourtesy toward the Senate. But now about the time when the House committee is ready to report, he looked upon this as an attempt to prevent investigation. He was entirely satisfied with the competency of the House committee. If there has been fraud, there should be punishment; but he was persuaded there was none.
Mr. NEWCOMB was indifferent about this question. But he thought it wrong to establish investigations where there was no charge He understood that the House committee had been holding secret meetings, from which the late State Printer was excluded, and that they were sending outside for testimony against him.
page: 247[View Page 247]Mr. PEELLE denied that the committee had excluded the late State Printer. The meetings of the committee had been at the Auditor's office.
Mr. ROSSER said the late State Printer had been summoned by the committee this morning.
On motion of Mr. ROSS the concurrent resolution was laid on the table.
UNIVERSITY SQUARE.
The SPEAKER announced the consideration of the reports of the majority and minority of the Committee on Education with reference to the University Square in city of Indianapolis. The minority bill, No. 258, which is not printed with the report, provides that the Auditor and Secretary of State, in conjunction with George A. Buskirk, of Monroe county, be a commission to sell the University Square - the proceeds to be applied to the establishment of an Agricultural Department in the Indiana University.
The bill being read by the Clerk the second time -
Mr. McLEAN said the question involved was purely legal - not a question of prejudice against Indianapolis. He was satisfied that this University Square (block 25) was intended by the State for a State University. The majority report set out with the assertion as a fact that this property was dedicated for a site for a university. He asserted that the language of the law is that this property is dedicated "to the use"of a State University. He read from the majority report to show that it starts out on a false premise. University Square (No. 25.) was not laid out at the time of the laying out of the State House Square, and Market - and Court House Squares - not till six years after - till the year 1827. He read from the act of January 26, 1827, to show that square No 25 was set apart for the use of a State University. Hence the majority report was outside of the record. The majority report was also at fault as to the fact that the law authorized the plat of the University Square to be filed in the Recorder's office of Marion county. It was authorized to be filed in the office of the Secretary of State. He based the State's title on the act of 1827, ratified by the act of 1852. So it was with the square No 22 for the use of the Hospital for the Insane. What has become now of block No 22? It has been sold, under the act of 1846, and the proceeds applied to the Hospital for the Insane - the city of Indianapolis never objecting. So it was with the University lands donated to the State by Congress (in the counties of Monroe and Gibson) "for the use of a State University." They were sold and the proceeds constitute the University fund. The act of 1852 declares that the proceeds of all University lands, and donations of land with the word ''University" in the grant, shall constitute the University fund. He referred also to the fact that the city of Indianapolis never took any act of possession of the property. Its present improval was the result of private subscriptions of adjoining property holders.
Mr. NEWCOMB said the city appropriated $7,50 to make up $2,500 for its improvement.
Mr. McLEAN continued: It was never contemplated that the State of Indiana should have two Universities. The Indiana State University was located forever at Bloomington, and so falls the assumption that University Square was designed as a site, etc.
He closed by citing the act of 1850 for the sale of one acre of said University Square - one-fourth part of it - for the benefit of the Indiana Medical College. And the city of Indianapolis offered no remonstrance.
Mr. CAMPBELL. The question was on the bill reported by the minority of the Committee on Education. It was a sort of enabling act to authorize the Indiana University to sell this "square." But it seemed to him that the owner did not want the State's authority to sell.
Mr. HUGHES. If you hold land in trust for use, who is to sell, the trustee or the cestui que trust? The reason why we want an act is to quiet the title; and so help the sale.
Mr. CAMPBELL resumed. He considered that the Courts can afford ample remedy for any difficulties about this It was very unsafe for members of the General Assembly here to set themselves up as judges of title to a property worth $200,000 or $300,000. Did this Indiana University ask for an enabling act to sell the University lands in Monroe and Gibson counties?
Mr. HUGHES. Yes, sir. This is nearly a copy of that. And the Legislature has already declared that this square is for the Indiana University.
Mr. CAMPBELL said if the bill was to pass he would propose to amend it by adding this section:
"SECTION. There shall be paid to the Treasurer of State out of the proceeds of said Square a sum equal to the amount of bonds issued to the Board of Trustees of the Vincennes University, pursuant to an act entitled an act to adjust the Gibson Seminary township claim, and providing for the payment of the judgment of the Vincennes University against the State by issuing bonds therefor, approved February 13, 1865; which sum shall be applied exclusively to the redemption of such bonds."
He rehearsed the history of that township of land in Gibson county in dispute between the Indiana University and the Vincennes page: 248[View Page 248] University. The Vincennes University succeeded in the legal contest. And the State University procured from Congress another township. The fact was, this Bloomington institution has a romantic history. He read from the Act of the General Assembly, of February 13, 1855, authorizing the issuance of $66,000 in State bonds, to the Vincennes University. He understood that these bonds were issued as a compromise of a disputed claim between these two Universities. He made this proposition to amend, while he was opposed to the bill, and would leave the question wholly to the courts.
Mr. HUGHES. This was not a contest between sections - nor a political question nor a proposition to punish anybody. He stated the question at length. He pledged himself to dissipate any influence which the reference to the act of 1855 for the bonds to the Vincennes University may have had on the minds of gentlemen. He complained of the attack, and the manner of it, upon the Indiana University, because it has not been located, and has not grown up and flourished under the shadow of the State Capital. He made eulogistic references to the teachers and alumni of the Indiana University. He referred to the success of that Institution, under difficulties by which she has been deprived of two townships ot land by the technicalities of law. And deprecated the dog-in-the manger policy of Indianapolis with respect to that Institution whenever any cherishing motion has been made for her. This was just as much a State Institution as any of the public Institutions here, and it was supported on the same principle. He also referred to the fact that Indianapolis did not object to the sale of a portion of this "Square" for the use of the Medical College. The Indiana University was creditable amongst all the schools of the country. It commanded the first talent of the country by the offer of its Presidency and Professorships, and her graduates were distinguished and honored everywhere - which was a sufficient answer to the allegation of the Indianapolis Journal and the gentleman from Hendricks, (Mr. Campbell) that she was "a runt with a romantic history." Very soon after he came here, he became satisfied that the State University would receive no favors from the Legislature. But still she expected justice - expected her rights. He characterized this majority report as an attempt by this city to seize upon this squares - acred to the education of the young men of the State - and make it a public park for the pleasure of its people. And when the State University comes and asks for a faithful carrying out of a high trust of the State, shall it be yielded to the selfish grasp of a city already burdened - with public favors? If the city of Indianapolis will have this square for a park, this is a bill for that purpose. Let them buy it and appropriate it as they should. He referred deprecatingly to the attempt to set up a claim to this square by taking possession of it, by fencing it, laying it out in walks, sowing grass and planting trees, at an expense of $750 to the Common Council. He rehearsed the Indiana University's title to this square through its amended charter of 1852. It was the solemn declaration of the Legislature of that year, that this property belonged to the State University. If this Legislature would do with this square as it did with regard to the townships in the counties of Gibson and Monroe, we are satisfied. When the State University ww robbed of its endowment, the State came forward, returned the endowment to the State Institution, and paid the Vincennes claims with her own bonds. Before he had concluded -
The House took a recess till 2 o'clock P. M.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
Mr. Shuey obtained leave of absence till Tuesday on account of sickness.
Mr. McFADIN moved an order, ineffectually, that when the House adjourns to-day, it shall be till Monday 2 o'clock.
On the motion of Mr. MOORE, the House took up his bill [H. R. 272] to create the 22d District of Common Pleas out of the counties of Rush, Decatur and Ripley; and it was passed to the engrossment.
UNIVERSITY SQUARE.
The House returned to the consideration of the two reports from the Committee on Education with reference to "University square," &c., and the minority bill, No. 258, for the sale thereof by a commission consisting of the Auditor and Treasurer of State, the late State Agent and George A. Buskirk - the proceeds to be applied to the establishment of an agricultural department in the Indiana University - the question being on the adoption of Mr. Campbell's amendment.
Mr. HUGHES resumed his remarks, After what the State has done for the indemnity of the State University on account of the result of the land suit by the Vincennes University, it would come now with a bad grace from the State to allow the property which it holds in trust for that institution to pass unjustly to the city of Indianapolis. After an allusion to the State's munificence towards the city of Indianapolis, and particularly towards the Indianapolis Journal newspaper establishment, he returned to the question, which the Speaker decided to be on the bill, No. page: 249[View Page 249] 258, reported by the minority of the Committee on Education, and the amendment offered by Mr. Campbell. He proceeded: While the Common School Fund of the State has increased to be the largest of any Sate in the Union, the State University was still needing the fostering care of the people. He still believed, however, that Indiana would yet have a University equal to that of the State of Michigan. He then referred to the opposition to this bill, and the opposition to the location of the State Agricultural College at Bloomington, inaugurated here, especially outside of the House, as a blow that it was thought it would personally injure him. This was a mistake for his competitor [the Hon. S. H. Buskirk] was the special champion of the location of the Agricultural College there - he was not. He said, also, that in his striking at him, the blow fell equally upon his constituents - upon the Senator from that district, his friend from the Brown, [Mr. Taggart,] and also upon his late competitor and friend, [Mr. Buskirk,] who was here as a special agent in this matter, and he hoped that he would yet be sent home with flying colors. So far as the interests of education are concerned in the determination of this question, they were not represented before this Committee on Education. Whilst the interests of the property holders around that University Square, who had long been covetously regarding it, were so thoroughly represented by their attorneys before this Committee, that like some very good judges he knew of, a majority of the Committee decided in favor of the side represented, and they even adopted this majority report of eight pages prepared to their hands by those officious attorneys. This majority report was notoriously disingenuous; because they say it is expected sometime to locate a State University there; whereas the real object was to make it a public park. It was so stated at a public meeting here but a short time ago. But, why should not a great city buy its public park, instead of wresting it from the Indiana University - robbing the cause of public education to make a city pleasure ground! The language of the law was, that this square shall be for the use of the University. Does "use" mean site? Who will say that the word "use" requires that this piece of land shall be used as a site for a building? It was a subterfuge to bolster a bad cause. It was a principle in law that a dedication of property to a corporation before the corporation has being, vests in the corporation the moment it comes into existence. But Indianapolis never before set up a claim to this square. He expected himself to open an office here in a few days; he expected to come here and live amongst these gentlemen. But that would make no change in his views as to the bestowment of the State's munificence towards the State's institutions. He read an extract from a letter from the Hon. Daniel Read, President of the Missouri University, in regard to the Congressional Agricultural College Endowment, giving his opinion that it should be added the Indiana University Fund, and that would be hardly sufficient, and that the State University should be renovated, and conformed to the University model of the State of Michigan. It was unwise to give large sums to institutions for the deaf, dumb and blind, and give nothing to the State University. He would have the University made something to be proud of - the crowning glory of our common schools - instead of remaining a subject of scoffing and sneers in the General Assembly. When he had concluded -
Mr. WOLFE proposed to amend the amendment by inserting in the proper place these words: "Said bonds shall not be thrust into the market for at least two years."
Mr. HUGHES desired the gentleman to fix a limit of value under which the land shall not be sold.
Mr. WOLFE looked at this question not as these lawyers, but as a citizen of the State at large.
Mr. BELFORD moved that the bill and amendments be referred to the Judiciary Committee.
Mr. HOPKINS proposed these words: "University Square shall not be sold for less than $100,000."
Mr. CAMPBELL rose to reply to Mr. Hughes. That gentleman was first on this floor to appeal to local prejudices, attacking the city authorities in the matter of claims for improving the streets opposite the State's grounds. Allusions to his political aspirations were entirely gratuitous. He did not regard this as a political question. He regarded the word "use," in the phrase, "for the use of the University," to mean "site." As to the legal question of title, he referred that to the judicial tribunals.
Mr. McFADIN desired to regard only the question of title. He regarded the General Assembly as the proper tribunal to settle this question. No doubt this question would have come up here just as it now comes, if the gentleman from Monroe had not been sent up here as a Representative. There are the 16th sections donated by Congress for the use of Common Schools - does it follow that these grounds must be all converted into sites for school houses? The citizens of Logansport lost their claim to Spencer Square, because they left it without occupaiton and improvement; and so the courts would decide the claim of page: 250[View Page 250] Indianapolis to this University Square. He was in favor of the bill reported by the minority of the committee. He would not have the University fund divided out. He would make Indiana University the pride the State.
Mr. COREY referred to the charge made by Mr. McLean, that the majority report misstated facts. He defended the report. It was sustained by the record. But then that gentleman said himself, that in 1827 this square was designated as "University Square." He referred to the play upon words in the acts of the Legislature, There was a slight difference between the wording with regard to the square No. 22 and square No. 25. With reference to the latter, the word "use" is not employed. The square upon which this building stands was designated as "State House Square;" so "Market Square," "Court House Square," &c. If the State could take these grounds and sell them and apply the proceeds to other purposes, how can we now take hold of University Square, for such a purpose? The majority report, not that this square No. 25 belongs to Indianapolis or Bloomington, but to the State, which holds the right to occupy it by a university. He deprecated all attempts to lug these questions into party politics. He stated that attorneys were before the committee, but Bloomington was first represented by a paper prepared by Ex-Governor Dunning. But the committee stood for the rights of the State as against the claims of Indianapolis or the Indiana University. Either the very fact that the bill is here, went to show that gentlemen are not entirely sincere in the claim to this property which they set up as undoubted by the State University: About as sincere, probably, as was the State University when, not very long ago, she withdrew her action for possession of - this "University Square." And the fact that - the State has allowed Indiana University to languish was proof to his mind, that the State itself is not satisfied as to the University's title. We will build up our State University, but not in defiance of law. If this square was given for a certain interest, we will not give it an unjust diversion. The Bloomington Institution was merely a college - good as far as it goes - a university only in name. But he looked forward to the time when the State of Indiana would build up on University Square a university in fact as well as in name. He recited the language of the act of 1852 relied on by the minority for title to this square, It speaks of lands located in the counties of Monroe and Gibson, but nothing about lands in Marion county. That was proof to his mind that the act does not contemplate University Square, And as for the donations there mentioned, he supposed that it contemplated such only as might be made in the then future. There was an undue feeling caused here against the city of Indianapolis; and although he lived nearly as far from this city as any gentleman in this House, yet he would do nothing to detract from the interests and prosperity of our great central city.
Mr. NEWCOMB regarded this bill as a scheme to build up a rival institution to the State Agricultural College. The most of the discussion in favor of this bill has been but captious talk against the city of Indianapolis. What had this city done that no question of appropriation - even to pay for labor on the streets opposite the State's grounds - can come up, but the people here must be abused like a gang of pickpockets. He glanced at the taxes paid by the people of Indianapolis; for State purposes $75,000, for school purposes $61,000: for the State debt sinking fund $71,000, &c.-the city of Indianapolis paid between the sixteenth and the seventeenth part of the entire State revenue. He gave a further statement of figures showing the extent of business here. He passed the share of abuse received by the Indianapolis Journal with the remark that he was editor of that paper when he was at home, but not while he served in the Legislature. Talking about a lobby influence on this question from Indianapolis, he alleged as a fact that they were the very professors of lobbying in Monroe county, and could teach any other portion of the State - as the Speaker of this - House knew very well. He could tell the gentleman that this square was not desirable for a park. It was not large euough. When Indianapolis wanted a park, she would be able to command the means get it. He supposed this square would remain as it is - a walk for nurses and children - till it should be occupied for the purpose to which it was originally devoted. He spoke of the sum of the Congressional endowment of the Indiana University-72 sections of lands, $66,000 in bonds, ate another grant of 15,000 acres. He then quoted from the act of 1827 to show that the State can not sell this Square No. 25-taking the view given by Mr. Corey. The act vacates the alleys on this square of four acres, showing thus that it was intended for a University - not for the use of the University. He said that the Legislature made a mistake when it gave the Congressional township grant in Gibson county to the Indiana University, and the Supreme Court took it away and gave it to the Vincennes institution, involving a State debt ef $66,00. Gentlemen should be careful, therefore, how they make a greater mistake in regard to page: 251[View Page 251] property of greater value than the Gibson township.
Without concluding, Mr. N. gave way for a motion to adjourn.
Mr. Martin obtained leave of absence till Monday.
On motion of Mr. HUGHES, Mr. Newland was added to the Committee on Railroads.
The House then adjourned.
