AFTERNOON SESSION.
The SPEAKER announced the special order, viz: the consideration of the Senatorial and Representative apportionment bill [S 166see pages 218, 219 ,of these Reports] - the question being shall the bill as amended pass the House of Representatives?
Mr. ROSS, having the floor thereon, spoke in opposition to the bill. If he should be able to show gentlemen that the apportionments are wrong, he supposed they would be willing to correct them. He had not examined the bill till last night, and could not point out all its enormities. He referred first to the county of Fulton, with 2,533 voters(he was informed that they had 2,600.) But Fulton has not a representative because it requires 3,400 to send a representative. Then why give a representative to the Union county of Lake, which has only 2,420 voters? And he showed a wider departure from the ratio in favor of the Union counties of Pike and Vermillion. Each of these three Union counties, with less voters than Fulton, receiving a representative, while Fulton is excluded, must show that this apportionment is made not to do justice, but because gentlemen have the power. He referred more generally to the apportionment for Senatorial purposes. But that was so arranged that there shall be but fourteen Democrats in the Senate, while the Republican party shall have thirty-six Senators. He considered that when a conscientious man supports such a bill, he will find it a hard account to settle with his fair-minded constituents. He replied to Mr. Hughes' declaration that he is sorry his party can not do more, and to his assertion that his party would do right, because they have read the Constitution. But this party had supported the trials by military commissions. Who violated the Constitution?
Mr. HUGHES said it was a military question. The history of the country shows that while the Republicans gave the chance of a military trial for life, the Democrats down South strung up men without trial.
Mr. ROSS demurred to this responsibility attempted to be cast on the Democratic party.
Mr. HUGHES stated that Seward and Stanton first inaugurated these military trials.
Mr. ROSS. They were not Democrats.
Mr. BELFORD and Mr. O'NEIL interrupted. But
Mr. ROSS pursued his argument, al page: 292[View Page 292] leging this particular Republican disregard of the constitution. And thus they would cast away the cardinal rights of freemen which have chiefly distinguished our form of government, since its organization. He next referred to the rights reserved to the States and the people in the first amendments to the constitution of the United States, and the attempts lately made to strip the States of those rights by a centralizing system of legislation. But the fact that we have had a terrible civil war operates as an excuse to cover up the most startling enormities. He replied to the charge that Democrats have been in sympathy with the rebellion - traitors and rebels. There could be no graver charge made. Do gentlemen believe it? He could not think so. He referred to the cues and catch-words of the campaigns just before the war; the warnings of danger on the one hand: the reckless "let the Union slide," "it is not worth a rush without a little blood-letting," on the other; the cautiousness of the one party, and the recklessness of the other; and then when the war came, the equal readiness of both parties to suppress it - their equal bravery on the field, &c., charging the cause of the war upon the New Englandisms of the country. They were willing to put the Union to hazard. The Democrats never. From such considerations as these, which evince unfaltering loyalty on the part of the Democracy, he snowed the rashness of the declaration of Mr. Hughes yesterday, that he was sorry he could not do more towards the disfranchisement of the Democratic party, because they were traitors and rebels, and in sympathy with traitors and rebels. He conceded the identity of interests between the West and the South, and hoped to, see the day when they could unite and overthrow the protective tariff laws made to enrich New England. He referred to that great-government wrong of exempting over three billions of government bonds from taxation suffering numerous interruptions to show that Chief Justice Marshall gave the first decision alleging the law and the reason for such exemption; and to show that the United States bonds for the Mexican war were also exempt. Still he argued the injustice of the principle. It was a system of favoritism incompatable with free institutions. It was especially inconsistent with the fact that every cent of the property of the returned and maimed soldier is liable to taxation. But it was perfectly congruous with the principle that would apportion the State for representative purposes after the manner proposed in this bill.
Mr. McFADIN said it was wholly inexplicable to his mind how it is that the most pious and religious of our politicians have always shown themselves to be the most reckless and blood thirsty. He was prepared to show a dozen Republican advocates of secession to one Democratic; and that when war came these abolitionists sneaked out of it rnd sought for others to do the fighting. He showed that the same Republican rule that condemned those who opposed the administration of Abraham Lincoln as traitors to the Government would condemn the present Republican opposition to Andrew Johnson. He showed that the socalled Republican tendencies are to make the rich richer, so that they and their children may be exempt from the direct contact with the inferior race when they shall have brought about their promised negro equality. He alluded also to the inconsistency of the order to fire 36 guns to-morrow, when Republicans recognize but twenty-six States in this Union. He closed by reading secession extracts from received Republican authorities, and replying to the allegation of treason against the Knights of the Golden Circle, by a rapid reference to the Know Nothings, the Wideawakes, the Leagues and other secret political organizations of the Republicans, who were far more deeply steeped in infamy. Out upon the pious and hypocritical cant of such a Union party! The Democracy was the true Union party. The brightest lights of Republicanism were the last rays of their setting sun.
Mr. BOBO could not pass the opportunity without entering his solemn protest against this bill. He proposed to glance at some of its enormities, which might help some gentlemen to what they do not know, and it would not detract anything' from what gentlemen do know. He referred to the fact that a floating representative was given to Morgan and Johnson counties upon an excess of only 342 votes - 2,736 less than the number required for a representative. He showed that the bill was so framed that 150,000 Republican votes would secure two thirds of the members of this House, when in the State there are cast a total vote of 340,000. He denounced any political principle that would justify such an apportionment act as this. He alleged that the existing apportionment was more than equal on the Republican side. It gave them nearly two-thirds of this House, when in the total vote of the State they have only, about 12,000 majority. He alleged that no man can justify a bill that gives a Republican representative for 300 voters, and a Democratic representative for 5,000. He moved that the bill be recommitted with the following instructions:
Amend the 3d section by striking out "Jay and Blackford one," "Wells and Adams one," and "Morgan and Johnson one," and inserting, "Jay one, Wells and Blackford one, and the county of Adams one."
page: 293[View Page 293]Mr. NEWCOMB, having moved the previous question, which was seconded, by the House, took the floor and closed the debate. He replied first to Mr. Ross' declaration that the bill will give but 14 Democratic Senators. He referred to several districts where very slight political changes would make the Democratic strength in the Senate nearly equal to the Republican. He referred to the districts composed in part of the counties of Posey, Gibson, Warrick, Spencer and Perry, Ohio and Switzerland, Monroe, Montgomery, and St Joseph and Marshall - all forming close districts. Any party that carries the State by 9,000 or 10,000 majority, would, under this bill, have a majority in the General Assembly. He never knew any party that carried the State by 3,000 majority that did not have a majority in the Legislature. He then took a similar view of the apportionment for representative purposes, scanning numerous doubtful counties, showing that if his Democratic friends carry the State at all they will have a majority in the General Assembly. He confessed that he was agreeably surprised that there were so few salient points in the bill; for even he himself, if he were drafting it, would make changes in some particulars. It was not an easy matter for a caucus of either party to get up an apportionment bill. He replied to the specific objections of Mr. Ross and Mr. Bobo. He showed the liberality of its representative apportionment for Jefferson county. She has a voting strength nearly sufficient to entitle her to two representatives; and the bill gives her but one, and a float with Clarke and Scott, whence will probably be returned a Democrat. He reviewed the bill at length,asserting its general fairness and liberality, comparing it most favorably in some points with an apportionment bill introduced here this session by a Democrat. He then replied to the general speeches on the other side.
Mr. HUGHES interposed to submit the history of military arrests, originating with Mr. Secretary Seward, and carried on by Mr. Secretary Stanton. Since the war there have been but two millitary commissions that for the trial of the murderers of Mr. Lincoln and that which tried Wirz - both these commissions were ordered by Andrew Johnson. Stanton, Seward and Johnson were the originators of these commissions, and now they are taken to the bosom of the Democratic party. They stand up here pledged to the Philadelphia Convention, and the Administration of Andrew Johnson. Such were the men here making political capital against the Union party, on account of the enormity of the acts of military commissions.
Mr. NEWCOMB resumed, replying at length to the objection against the exemption of Government 'bonds from taxation. Did gentlemen reflect that the United States Government does not lay its hand for taxation on the farmers of the country? He went back to Judge Marshall's decision against the taxation of Government bonds; to the more than $20,000,000the more than $40,000,000 Mexican war debt issued by Democrats. If the gentleman would tell him how much he would make by issuing his notes and taxing himself upon them, he would see what the Government would make by taxing its own, bonds. And if this power to tax United States bonds were allowed to the States, it would take away the power of the General Government to raise money in war: it would give the States power (as Judge Marshall said) to tax the General Government out of existence. He closed with a response to the allegation of Mr. McFadin that we were voting away the people's money at a ruinous rate, by a reminder of that gentleman's zeal for the passage of the Legislative Apportionment bill from the Senate, which, whilst it led him to refuse an amendment for the needful expenses of the asylums here, would have allowed him to put into it his bottles of mucilage.
Mr. Bobo's proprosition to recommit the bill, with instructions to amend, was rejected - yeas 31, nays 57.
The vote on the passage of the bill resulted - yeas 59, nays 32 - as follows:
YEAS - Messrs. Belford, Bischof, Blanch, Brucker, Campbell, Chambers, Crain, Daggy, Danaldson, Dunn, Erwin, Evans, Ferris, Foulka, Funk, Geisendorff, Gordon, Greer, Griggs, Hartman, Hamilton, Higgins, Hopkins, Hudson, Hughes, Long of Kosciusko, Martin, Mason, McCarthy, McClasky, McLean, McMurray, Miller, Moore, Newcomb, North, Peelle, Prather, Ratliff, Rosser, Sabin, Scammahorn, Shook, Shuey, Skidmore, Smith of Lagrange, Smith of Wabash, Spencer, Stafford, Stewart, Thrasher, Thomas, Wason, Wilson, VVolfer, Wolflin, Woods, Wright, and Mr. Speaker - 59.
NAYS - Messrs. Baker, Bird, Black, Bobo, Corey, Crowe, Edmondson, Fuller, Hays, Honneus, Hostetter, Hungate, Inman, Kiser, Lopp, Matthis, McFadin, Morrison, Montgomery, O'Neil, Ross, Shanks, Shields, Shoaff, Shull, Stackhouse, Tebbs, Thacher, Vawter, Williams, White and Wolfe - 32.
So the bill passed the House of Representatives.
Mr. McFADIN moved that when the House adjourns to-day, it shall be till tomorrow at 2 o'clock.
Mr. MONTGOMERY proposed to amend by saying that when the House shall adjourn to-morrow at 12 o'clock, it shall be till Monday at 2 o'clock.
These motions were rejected.
A message from the Governor was now received, transmitting the biennial report of Major General Mansfield, on the condition of the Indiana militia.
page: 294[View Page 294]Mr HUGHES asked and obtained leave to introduce a bill [H. R. 116] for an act to protect and indemnify officers and soldiers of the United States, and officers and soldiers of the Indiana Legion, for acts done in the military service of the United States and in the military service of the State of Indiana, and in enforcing the laws and preserving the peace of the country.
The bill having been read -
Mr. HUGHES said he would have introduced this bill some time ago, but he was waiting for the determination of a case that has been pending in the Supreme Court. It was a matter of pressing importance. Officers and soldiers lately in the service of the United States were being sued every day, and deserters who have been denied the right to vote under the act of Congress were constantly bringing suits against the judges of elections, and were recovering heavy damages.
Mr ROSS (interrupting.) It is not in order to discuss the bill at this stage.
Mr. HUGHES. Then all I have to say is on this motion: that three hundred copies of the bill be printed and made the special order for Wednesday.
Mr. BAKER proposed to amend the motion to print by a motion that the bill be referred to the Judiciary Committee with instructions to inquire into its constitutionality.
Mr. HUGHES opposed tho modification. There is not time, etc.
Mr. BAKER said that indictments had already been found in his county, and the facts have been made public, showing the perpetration of one of the most unprovoked murders in the country, under the order of a person who was in the military service. Now, if it is merciful and just to pass an act here for the relief of such cases, let us see also if it is constitutional. He thought the Judiciary committee, representing the legal fraternity of the State, would not jeopardise their reputation by recommending the passage of such a bill.
Mr B.'s motion was rejected by yeas 33, nays 56.
Mr. Hughes' motion was then adopted yeas 53, nays 31.
Mr. Danaldson obtained leave of absence till Wednesday.
Mr. WILLIAMS corrected an error in these reports yesterday. He did not say that his son lost his life on a Southern battlefield, but that he shed his blood on more than one battlefield, &c.
STATE PRISON NORTH.
Mr. Millers' Northern Prison Kirkpatrick lease bill [H R. 126] coming up on the second reading -
Mr. SHUEY proposed to amend by striking out all that part which authorizes said lessee to appoint the warden of said prison, and other prison officers.
Mr. HIGGINS moved that the bill and proposed amendment be referred to the Committee on the State Prison North; which he sustained by sundry considerations.
Mr. MILLER insisted that it would be better to settle one or two questions first in the House. He wanted to know, first whether the House would lease the prison at all. Then he urged that it was too late to refer this bill without this decision of the House. He moved to lay Mr. Higgins' motion on the table, but withdrew it for debate.
Mr. PEELLE said he had introduced a similar bill, which was in the hands of the Committee and he considered that all these bills should go to the same Committee. He intimated that the present warden of the Northern Prison is a party in this lease though not named in the bill; and grave charges were standing against him. He proposed to amend by inserting the names of Epperson and Silvers as lessees.
Mr. BELFORD wanted to know how the Chairman stands on the question of leasing the prison.
Mr. HIGGINS said he was in favor of leasing, provided proper men were lessees and the interests of the Slate can be protected.
Mr. BELFORD understood that the gentleman was opposed to the parties named in this bill. He denied that Colonel Wood, the present Warden of the Northern Prison, is a party in this lease. It was not material to him who the lessees are. .He was in favor of leasing the prison on account of its expensiveness [$10,000 a year;] and because be believed there has been extravagance, pecualtion and fraud in the past. Then if we are going to lease this prison, it is important t.h at we should take prompt action; that the House should pass upon the amendments to be offered, and that there should be final action as soon as possible.
Mr. SPENCER believed that that prison ''ring" were more corrupt than the convicts inside. The passage of that bill would retain this "ring'' in the management of the prison.
Mr. BELFORD said if this bill were passed everything will be under the advice and charge of the Directors we elected the other day.
Mr. SPENCER would be in favor of leasing, if it would advance the interests of the State without inhumanity to the prisoners.
After further debate by Mr. WEIGHT, Mr, STAFFORD opposed leasing.
Mr. CRAIN insisted that the present is the time for action. The prison management has not been, and is not now satisfactory. It was the duty of the House to can- page: 295[View Page 295] vass and decide who are the proper persons to be accepted as lessees. The reason that the State loses money in the management of the prison is because the State has to rent to too many different parties. Time must be given in the lease, for men can not come in with their machinery, unless they may have time to operate profitably. The necessary provisions to protect the prisoners can be applied by the House, at once, to this or any other bill The prison should he made self sustaining - taking care in the bill to cut off the extras.
The House adjourned.
