IN SENATE.
MONDAY, February 18, 1867.The Senate met at 2 1/2 o'clock P. M., pursuant to adjournment.
On motion by Mr. BONHAM, the reading of the minutes of Friday's proceedings was dispensed with.
PERSONAL.
Mr. JOHNSON. I have arisen to a question of privilege. In last Saturday's Journal, I am incorrectly reported in some remarks which I made while endeavoring to explain my position on the temperance bill. In that paper I am represented as saying that I should vote against the law although I believed my constituents in favor of such a law. I am reported as follows:
Mr. JOHNSON, in explanation of his vote was understood to say: I am led to believe that my people are in favor of such a law, although I myself would dislike to see it pass. I therefore vote "no."
Senators who heard me will bear witness that I used no such language on that occasion. I then said in substance that my own feelings were favorable to such a law, but the people whom I have the honor to represent thought differently. They had in both their party platforms reasoned that further legislation on that subject was unnecessary.
And I ask the further indulgence of the Senate to set myself aright on this much vexed question. Since the assembling of this Legislature I have seen or heard nothing from my constituents that induces me to believe they have changed their minds. From other parts of the State we have been flooded with temperance petitions, but from my constituents no such petitions have been received.
Mr. HANNA (interrupting). Do we understand that the Senator acts altogether upon petitions?
Mr. JOHNSON. Not particularly; but if I were convinced the people were induced to favor any particular measure -
Mr. HANNA (in his seat). We would like an honest, frank declaration of his views.
Mr. JOHNSON. Down there, in my opinion, no such question is being agitated. However, we have our party differences; one party accuses the other of being in too much sympathy with the rebels, and the other party in turn accuses it of being in too much sympathy with the American citizen of African descent. But prior to the election both parties put a whiskey plank in their party platforms. I call on my radical page: 258[View Page 258] friends to consider well before they force upon this State a prohibitory liquor law. For twenty five years in my district we have been struggling manfully against the combined host of Democracy. This year, for the first time since my earliest recollection, we were able to beat them, and that, too, on a whisky platform, [laughter,] and now behold my own party friends are trying to take the platform from under my feet. Some years ago I would not have voted for any man who would have suffered himself to run on such a platform, but the defeats of almost a score of years has taught me better things. [Renewed laughter.] Sir, I am now in the same situation that the rebels ought to be: I accept the situation and advise others to do the same thing.
I felt called upon to make this statement owing to the fact that I had been misrepresented; but while I am up I beg leave to say that I am now and have ever been a sincere friend of the temperance cause. With me it has been the long cherished principle of my schoolboy days. In me it is the inculcation of a father's wisdom and the more subduing influence of a mother's love. The early surroundings of my boyhood days, and the promptings of my youthful heart told me to shun the intoxicating bowl: and permit me further to add that the calm and deliberate reflection of riper years tell me I was right then, and I am right still, in practice, if not in my vote on the temperance bill.
I have said this much, and for fear some friend who does not know me (from m vote on the temperance bill) will think am in sympathy with the Democratic party, to all such I beg leave to say further that such is not the case. Although I have been raised in a strong Democratic county I never voted for a Democrat in good standing in his party in my life. And I further declare that until the Democratic party has changed its base, and in my judgment become loyal to the government in which we live, I never will.
Mr. VAWTER stated that he had been kept from his place last week by sickness, and he was now hardly able to be here in his seat. He asked to be excused for non-attendance the past few days.
It was so ordered by consent.
Mr. RICE presented a temperance petition, which was referred to the Committee on Temperance.
Mr. JACQUESS presented a similar petition, with 92 signatures, which took the same course.
Mr. TERRY presented a petition from members of the bar in Fulton county, praying for the extension of the terms of their Common Pleas Courts two weeks; which was referred to the Committee on Organization, of Courts.
Mr. BELLAMY moved to suspend the order of business and take up Mr. Kinley's school bill [S. 114] for the reason that members of the House are anxiously waiting to see what the Senate has to offer in the shape of a school bill, before attempting to perfect one themselves.
The motion was rejected.
REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES.
Mr. TAGGART, from the Committee on Temperance, returned Mr. Kinley's liquor traffic bill [S. 121]described on page 111 of the BREVIER LEGISLATIVE REPORTS - recommending that it lie on the table, as its provisions, substantially, are embraced in Mr. Wolcott's bill [S. 46].
The report was concurred in.
Mr. RICE, from the Judiciary Committee, returned Mr. Sherrod's judges and county officers practice prohibiting amendmect bill [S. 130,] recommending that it lie on the table.
The report was concurred in.
Mr. RICE also returned from the same Committee, Mr. Bonham's bill [S. 137] authorizing suits to be brought wherever action may be found; recommending that it do lie on the table.
The report was concurred in.Mr STEIN, from the Judiciary Committee reported back Mr. Bonham's bill [S 106] allowing arguments on trial to be opened and closed by the Prosecuting Attorney; recommending that it lie on the table.
The report was concurred in.
Mr. VAWTER, from the Judiciary Committee, returned Mr. Craven's bill [S. 150] amending the promissory note law of May 17, 1852, [described on page 154,] with a recommendation that it lie on the table.
The report was concurred in.
Mr. VAWTER also returned Mr. Houghton's bill [S. 194] amending section 76 of the decedents estate act of June 17, 1852, recommending that it lie on the table.
The report was concurred in.
Mr. Reagan's bill [S. 85] increasing Justices, Constables, jurors and witnesses fees was reported back from the Judiciary Committee, with a recommendation that it lie on the table.
The report was concurred in.
Mr. MASON, from the Judiciary Committee, returned Mr. Noyes' bill [S. 72] repealing the act of June 4, 1861, for the redemption of real property, recommending that it lie on the table.
The report was agreed to.
Mr. STEIN, from the Judiciary Committee, returned the bill [H. R. 4] allowing mileage to Coroners, recommending its passage.
page: 259[View Page 259]Mr. STEIN also returned from the same committee his bill [S. 35] amending sections 19 and 20 of the act of June 20, 1852, defining felonies; recommending its passage.
Mr. STEIN, from the same committee, returned Mr. Turner's bill [S. 151] concerning suits on hands of guardians removing from the State, recommending its passage.
Mr. MASON, from the Judiciary Committee, reported back Mr. Niles' bill [S. 185] authorizing Judges to appoint receivers in vacation, recommending its passage.
Mr. MASON also returned from the same committee Mr. Robinson's bill [S. 152] legalizing certain county bounty bonds; recommending its passage.
Mr. MASON also returned from the same committee the bill [H. R. 17] legalizing conveyances of land by wives of persons of unsound mind, recommending its passage.
Mr. STEIN, from the Judiciary Committee, reported back Mr. Bellamy's bill [S 192] increasing the fees of County Surveyors with a recommendation that it lie on the table.
Mr. BELLAMY hoped that this report would not be concurred in. The bill proposed to increase the fees of County Surveyors about twenty-five per cent, and such a law was very much desired by his constituency. Other Senators knew of the necessity of increasing these fees in order to secure the services of competent gentlemen in the surveyors' offices. The fees were now too low; that is a generally admitted fact, and he insisted that the bill should receive favorable consideration at this session of the General Assembly.
The report was concurred in.
PROPOSED SALE OF STATE LANDS.
Mr. BONHAM introduced a bill [S. 200,] for an act to legalize the action of Thomas B. McCarty, Auditor of State, in settling and saving to the State of Indiana $2,262 08, occasioned by the defalcation of the treasurer of Pulaski county, on account of the swamp land fund, and authorizing him to dispose of certain lands acquired thereby for the benefit of the State. [440 acres of land.] It was read the first time and referred to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. JAQUESS introduced a bill [S. 201,] for an act authorizing the sale of a tract of land in the city of Evansville, the title whereof is vested in the State of Indiana, and providing for a conveyance from the State to the purchaser thereof. [The land to be sold at public sale by a commissioner to be appointed by the Governor.] It was read the first time and referred to a special committee, viz: Messrs. Jaquess, Hanna and Stein.
Mr. HANNA introduced a bill [S. 202,] for an act for the relief of Lucius H. Scott,John Law, William H, Law and Jacob A. Reitz. [Having reference to the same piece of land referred to in the above bill, S. 201, and which land is claimed-by these parties.] It was read the first time and referred to the same committee.
FULTON COMMON PLEAS.
Mr. TERRY introduced a bill [S. 203,] for an act extending the time for holding the common pleas court in the county of Fulton, and repealing all laws inconsistent herewith. It was read the first time and referred to a special committee, viz: Messrs. Terry, Parrish and Vawter.
COUNTY TREASURERS' FEES.
Mr. JOHNSON introduced a bill [S. 204] for an act to amend section 104 of an act entitled An Act to amend sections 78, 79, 94, 95, 104, 142 and 143, of an act entitled An Act to provide for the valuation and assessment of the real and personal property, and the collection of taxes in the State of Indiana, for the election of township assessors and prescribing the duties of assessors, appraisers of real property, county auditors and treasurers, and of the Treasurer and Auditor of State, approved June 21, 1852; and to repeal an act entitled An Act to amend the 143d section of an act entitled An Act to provide for the valuation and assessment of the real and personal property and the collection of taxes in the State of Indiana, for the election of township assessors, and prescribing the duties of assessors and appraisers of real property, county treasurers and auditors, and of the Treasurer and Auditor of State, approved June 21, 1852, approved March 4, 1859, approved May 31, 1861. [Increasing county treasures fees from five per cent, to ten per cent, and constables fees and mileage to the residence of the delinquent taxpayers, to be collected from the tax payer.] It was read the first time and referred to the Committee on County and Township Business.
WRITS OF EXECUTION.
Mr. RICE introduced a bill [S. 205] for an act to amend section 132 of the General Practice Act, approved June 18, 1852, [by adding the following: "Provided, That in all cases the defendant, or some one on his behalf, shall have the right to first execute his undertaking with sufficient surety to be approved by the sheriff, payable to the plaintiff that he will deliver to him the property in suit if delivery be adjudged by the court, and that he will pay all such sums of money as may be recovered against him by the plaintiff in the action for any cause whatever; and that the provisions of this act shall extend to all cases now pending where the property has not been seized by the sheriff; and that said undertaking shall page: 260[View Page 260] be executed by the defendant within twenty-four hours after demand made by the sheriff for such surety; provided, such demand shall not be made on the Sabbath day, nor within twenty-four hours next before the coming of the Sabbath."] It was read the first time and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
A NEW COMMON PLEAS DISTRICT.
Mr. STEIN introduced a bill [S. 206] for an act creating the Twenty-second Common Pleas District, and making provision therefor, and repealing all conflicting laws. It was read the first time and referred to a select committee, viz.: Messrs. Stein, Wolcott, Armstrong, Newlin, Rice and Milligan.
STATE OFFICERS'REPORTS.
Mr. WOLCOTT introduced a bill [S. 207] for an act requiring certain officers of the State to make reports, and providing for the publication thereof. [To be made "at least thirty days before each regular session of the General Assembly, to the Governor of this State, who is hereby authorized to cause publication to be made of three hundred copies, in one volume; "to be laid before the General Assembly immediately upon the commencement of the session."] It was read the first time and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
PRIVATE BENEVOLENT ENTERPRISES.
The bill [H. R. 54] authorizing private benevolent institutions, and establishing them as perpetuities, coming up in regular order, it was read the first time.
Mr. HANNA said he desired to beg the indulgence of the Senate for the first time during the session, in pressing bill forward out of their order, and hoped he would be favored on all sides, as the pending bill is one of the gravest importance to the people of Terre Haute. Though a measure of general bearings in its character, and in no wise objectionable in the public interest anywhere, it is intended especially to aid the progress of a great public enterprise in the city of Terre Haute. That city had a distinguished citizen, whose name was intimately identified with public enterprise in this State, a gentleman of large wealth and commensurate public spirit, who desired to found two munificient institutions, one for the benefit of orphans, and the other for female education upon a plan similar to the one adopted at Mt. Holyoke. It was understood that he desired to appropriate the vast sum of $300,000 for these two splendid enterprises. Mr. H. hoped, therefore, the Senate would agree to pass the bill through today, that all fears of its fate might be put out of the way.
He moved to suspend the constitutional restriction, in order that the bill may be read the second time now.
A constitutional provision requiring the yeas and nays they were ordered to be taken. After a few minutes delay -
Mr. HANNA said: He was sorry to be informed that there was not a quorum here. He was exceedingly anxious to see this bill passed to-day, and as he was so deeply interested in this question,-he asked indulgence while he demanded a call of the Senate.
The roll was called, and thirty-one members answered to their names.
In a short time two other members appeared in the chamber.
Mr. HANNA, being much obliged to the Senate for the indulgence already shown him, moved to dispense with further proceedings under the call, with the hope that this bill will be taken up when a quorum shall appear.
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. RICHMOND suggesting that several Senators have come in since the call: moved to take up bills on the second reading.
The PRESIDENT had not seen any Senator come in since the call. The record shows there is no quorum present and it is not competent to do any business until thirty-four members appear. If the Senator has any confidence in his suggestion he can demand another call.
Mr. RICHMOND demanded a call of the Senate.
It was ordered and thirty-three members were reported as present and answering to their names.
Mr. RICHMOND moved that the absentees be sent for.
The motion was agreed to.
After waiting some time in vain for the absent members to appear -
On motion the Senate adjourned.
