HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
THURSDAY, February 28, 1867.The House met a 9 o'clock A.M.
On motion of Mr. RATLIFF, the reading of the journal of yesterday was dispensed with.
PETITIONS AND MEMORIALS.
The SPEAKER presented a communication which without reading, was referred to the Committee on County and Township Business.
Messrs. Baker, Van Valkenburgh, Honneus, Smith of Lagrange, Geisendorf, Sabin. Greer, Hungate, Hamilton, Foulke, Vawter, Wolfe, Watson, Chambers, Williams, Shuey, Stewart, Shields, Shoaff, and Mr. Long of Jackson , severally presented petitions for prohibition which (without reading) were referred to the Committee on Temperance.
Mr. EVANS presented the petition of Post No. 1, Grand Army of the Republic, for an Asylum for disabled soldiers, which was referred to the Committee on Military Affairs.
Mr. NEWC0MB presented papers in the claims of Patrick Brenan and another, which (without reading) were referred to the Committee on Claims.
Mr. FOULKE presented a paper on line fences, which was referred to the Committee on County and Township Business.
REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES.
Mr. NEWCOMB, from the Committee on Ways and Means, to whom was referred that portion of the Governor's message which relates to the revenues and finances ot the State, reported a bill [H. R. 334] for an act to legalize the action of the State Board of Equalization as to its sessions of 1864, and the duty of the Auditor of State in relation thereto. It was passed to the second reading.
He also reported the bill [H. R. 335] for an act to amend section 2 of the act to provide a treasury system for the State of Indiana, for the manner of receiving, holding and disbursing the public moneys of the State, and for the safe keeping of the public moneys. It was passed to the second reading.
STATE NORMAL SCHOOL.
Mr. HOPKINS, from the Committee on Ways and Means, returned Mr. McLean's Normal School bill [H. R. 15] with an amendment, striking out the words "common school fund for the year 1867," and inserting these in lieu: "any funds in the treasury not otherwise appropriated:" and when so amended, they recommend its passage.
Mr. McLEAN moved to take up the bill, that the amendment be concurred in, the bill ordered to the engrossment, and made the special order for to-morrow.
Mr. WOLFE opposed the motion - complaining of the action of the Committee on Education on his school bill.
Mr. McLEAN responded, correcting Mr. W.'s impressions with regard to this bill as well as his own.
Mr. WOLFE continued to animadvert on the action of the committee.
Mr. RATLIFF and Mr. GREER explained further the action of the committee, the latter opposing the bill.
Mr. WASON preferred that the amendment be concurred in, and these two bills discussed on their merits when they shall come up.
And then, under stress of the previous question, demanded by Mr. CHAMBERS, the amendment was concurred in, the bill ordered to the engrossment, and made the special order for to-morrow, at four o'clock P. M.
REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES
Mr. GRIGGS, from the Judiciary Committee, returned Mr. Snook's transference of actions bill [H. R 299,] recommending that it be indefinitely postponed. The report was concurred in.
Mr. HUGHES returned the high school amendment bill [S. 86,] recommending its passage.
Mr. ROSS returned the Plank Road bill [S. 54] recommending its passage.
Mr. HUGHES, as a member of the Judiciary page: 346[View Page 346] Committee, dissented from this report and desired to move its postponement.
The SPEAKER. The Chair understands that the motion can not now be entertained
Mr. SMITH, of Lagrange, from the Committee on the Judiciary, returned Mr. White's Bribery-Felony bill [H. R. 37] recommending its indefinite postponement. The report was concurred in.
Mr. SMITH, of Lagrange, returned Mr. Geisendorf's Rome City bill [H. R. 301] recommending its passage.
Mr. McFADIN, from the Committee on the Judiciary, returned Mr. Ross' Trespassing Animals bill [H. R. 304] recommending its passage.
Mr. GRIGGS, from the Committee en the Judiciary, returned Mr. Woods Supplemental Elections bill [H. R. 268] with an amendment recommending its passage.
Mr. DAGGY, from the Judiciary Committee, returned Mr. Peelle's innkeepers liability bill [H. R. 111] recommending its passage
Mr. DAGGY, from the Judiciary Committee, returned the county bonds legalization bill [S 152see page 154 of these Reports] recommending its passage.
Mr. DAGGY, from the Judiciary Committee, returned Mr Hopkins' Evansville charter amendment bill [H. R. 238] recommending its passage.
Mr. DAGGY, from the Judiciary Committee returned Mr. Bobo's master commissioner's bill [H R. 306] recommending its passage.
Mr. MILLER, from the Judiciary Committee, returned Mr. Ross' practice amendment bill [H. R. 292] with a motion that it be indefinitely postponed. It was so ordered.
Mr. WASON, from the Committee on Education, returned the school tax bill [S. 111] recommending its immediate passage.
Mr. LITSON, from the Committee on Military Affairs, returned Mr Wolfe's soldiers' relief fund bill, [H. R. 37] asking to be discharged from its further consideration. The report was concurred in.
Mr. WRIGHT, from the Committee on Claims, returned the memorial from citizens of Sullivan county, recommending that it be referred to the Committee on Ways and Means. The report was concurred in.
Mr. LONG, of Jackson, from the Claims Committee, returned the claim of E. G. Chinn, recommending its allowance, &c. The report was concurred in.
Mr. MARTIN, from the Committee on Fees and Salaries, returned Mr. Stewart's county treasurers' fees bill, [H. R. 314] recommending its passage.
Mr. SCAMMAHORN, from the Committee on Rights and Privileges, returned Mr. Wolfer's hog bill, [H. R. 298] recommending its indefinite postponement. It was so ordered.
Mr. SCAMMAHORN also returned Mr. Smith of Lagrange's divorce bill, [H. R. 325] recommending its passage.
Mr. BIRD, from the same committee, returned Mr. Wason's fur-bearing animals protection bill [H. R. 132,] recommending that it be laid on the table.
Mr. CRAIN, from the Committee on Railroads, returned Mr. Honneus' side-tracks railroad bill, [H. R. 146] with a motion that it be referred to the Judiciary Committee, with instructions to report on its constitutionality. It was so referred.
Mr. HARTMAN, from the Committee on Mileage, returned the resolution in regard to Sheriff's mileage, recommending that it be laid on the table. It was so ordered.
Mr. BRUCKER, from the Committee on Corporations, returned the steam packet company bill [S. 89] with an amendment, recommending its passage.
Mr. FOULKE, from the Committee on Federal Relations, returned Mr. Spencer's Morgan raid joint resolution, [H. R. 13] recommending its passage.
LINCOLN MONUMENT.
Mr. STEWART, from the special committee thereon, reported that the finances of the State were not in a condition to justify a State contribution to the National Lincoln Monument Association, and asked to be discharged, &c.
Mr. STEWART said the Committee vote the commendableness of the object, recommend it to private contributions, but asked to be discharged because the State fiuances will not justify a State contribution of the amount expected - $10,000.
Mr. HUGHES moved to recommit the subject, with instruction to report in favor of an appropriation of $10,000 for the National Lincoln monument.
Mr. SHUEY earnestly supported the motion. He could not go home to his constituents and look them in the face, with the consciousness of having voted against a proposition to contribute to this monument.
Mr. MATTHIS considered that these monuments should be left to private contributions.
Mr. THACHER proposed to add: "$6,000 toward a monument to the memory of General Anthony Wayne, in Fort Wayne, in Allen county."
Mr. LONG of Jackson proposed: "$10,000 to the Washington National Monument.
Mr. HUGHES said Mr. Matthis was mistaken in alleging that the erection of monuments were left to private contributors. There were numerous monuments in and about Washington paid for by the public money. Advocating his own motion at length, he closed with a motion to lay the amendments submitted by Mr. Thacher and Mr. Long of Jackson on the table; and thereon he demanded the previous question.
The SPEAKER said the Chair was doubtful about the amendments being in order, and subsequently announced that decision.
Mr. HUGHES withheld the demand for the previous question at the request of
Mr. LONG, of Jackson, who was heard in support of his amendment.
Mr. CHAMBERS proposed to add $500,000 for a national monument to the memory of every Union soldier that fell in the late civil war.
Mr. LONG appealed from the decision of the Chair.
After debate as to the question of order by Mr. HIGGINS, Mr. HUGHES and the SPEAKER -
Mr. CAMPBELL demanded the previous question, and there was a second, and the main question was ordered.
Mr. STEWART closed the debate on Mr. Hughes' motion, &c., justifying the action page: 347[View Page 347] of the committee, submitting considerations with which he would not be ashamed to face his constituent. The committee would, of course, be governed by the instructions of the House.
Mr. Long, of Jackson, now submitted his, appeal in writing, viz:
"The Chair decides that the motion to recommit the report with instructions to appropriate $10,000, can not be amended by a proposition to make an appropriation to the Washington National Monument, the monument to General Wayne, or to the soldiers of the late war."
The SPEAKER. The appeal does not, state the point. The decision of the Chair-is this: That as the committee is a special committee, it is not in the power of the House to appoint to them any other duty than that in the resolution under which the committee was raised.
Mr. LONG then withdrew his appeal for amendment.
The motion was then taken on Mr. Hughes' motion to recommit the report with instructions to report for an appropriation of $10,000, resulting yeas 48, nay 44 - as follows:
YEAS - Messrs. Belford, Bischof, Blanch, Bruker, Campbell, Crain, Daggy, Danaldson, Dunn, Erwin, Evans, Ferris, Geisendorf, Gordon, Greer. Griggs, Hartman, Hamiton, Hopkins, Hughes, Litson, Long of Kosciusko, Martin, McCarthy, McLean, McMurry, Miller, Moore, Newcomb, North, Peelle, Prather, Scammahorn, Shook, Shuey, Skidmore, Smith of Lagrange, Spencer, Stafford, Srewart, Thrasher, Thomas, Watson, Wilson, Wolfer. Woods, Wright, and Mr Speaker - 48.
NAYS - Messrs. Baker.Barritt, Bird, Black, Bobo, Cambers, Cory, Crowe, Douglass, Edmonson, Foulke, Fuller, Higgins, Hoineus, Hostetter,Hudson, Hungate, Inman, Long of Jackson, Lopp, Mason, Matthis, McClasky, McFadin, Morrison, Montgomery, Newland, O'Neil, RatliffRoss, Sabin, Shanks, Shields, Shoaff, Shull, Smith of Wabash, Stackhouse, Tebbs, Thacher, Van Valkenburgh, Wason, Williams, and Wolfe - 44.
So the motion was agreed to, and the report was recommitted.
PERSONAL EXPLANATION.
Mr. Ross said he was incorrectly reported in the Journal this morning upon a very important question before the House yesterday. He was reported as favoring the ''ten hour bill" (Mr. Brucker's). He should dislike very much to go home, and find the factory children of his constituents turned out into the streets.
DECATUR AND SHELBY.
Mr. MOORE obtained leave to introduce bill [H. R. 336] for an act to amend sections 16 and 72 of the act dividing the State into counties, defining their boundaries and defining their jurisdiction bordering on the Wabash and Ohio rivers. [It proposes to set off the town of St. Paul entirely to Decatur county.]
He moved that it be referred to the Committee on County and Township Business.Mr. THACHER moved to reject the bill. His people of Shelby county were opposed to it. He thought the law of 1861 for changing county lines was sufficient for the settlement of this question.
Mr. MOORE stated the effect of the bill, viz: to so change the lines, as to include the town of St. Paul in Decatur county. He would now change his motion, to refer it to a select committee of five members from the counties around.
Mr. THACHER then withdrew his motion to reject.
Mr. Moore's motion was then agreed to.
On motion of Mr. VAN VALKENBURGH it was
Resolved, That the Judiciary Committee be instructed to return the bill No. 233 to the House for its action.
ST. JOSEPH RIVER.
Mr. FERRIS obtained leave to introduce a joint resolution asking Congress to make a money appropriation tor the improvement of the navigation of the St. Joseph river. I; was referred to the Committee on Federal Relations.
O. &. M RAILROAD.
Mr. LONG, of Jackson, submitted the following:
Resolved, That the Committee on Railroads inquire whether or not the Ohio and Mississippi Railroad Company have complied with the provisions of their charter by paying into the Treasury the percentage on their income for the benefit of common schools, and whether by such neglect they have not forfeited ther charter.
Mr. MONTGOMERY proposed to amend by including the Terre Haute Railroad.
Mr. LONG accepted.
The resolution was adopted.
Mr. McLEAN, (by leave,) from the Education Committee, returned the City School-house Bonds bill [S. 214] recommending its passage.
On motion of Mr. PEELLE, the Special Committee's Public Printer bill [H. R. 331] was taken up and considered on the second reading.
Mr. MONTGOMERY proposed to amend so as to include the furnishing of stationery for the General Assembly.
Mr NEWCOMB said we have statute devolving that duty on the State Librarian. On his motion the amendment was laid on the table.
Mr. HOSTETER proposed to amend by inserting appropriately this: "the public printer shall deposit a copy of each document printed by him with the State Librarian."
Mr. PEELLE said he had endeavored to put into the bill all proper guards: but he offered no special objection to the amendment.
page: 348[View Page 348]The amendment was adopted - affirmaive 34, negative not reported.
The bill as amended, was then ordered to the engrossment.
AGRICULTURAL COLLEGE,
The SPEAKER announced the special order, viz: the consideration of the several propositions with reference to the State Agricultural College, viz: Mr. Campbell's, Mr. Hughes' and Mr. Miller's.
Mr. BAKER moved that the whole subject of the Agricultural College be indefinitely postponed.
Mr. CAMPBELL being entitled to the floor, said he found the House further from agreement as to the location of this College than at the opening of the session. He would oppose the motion just made, but for important bills pending, to which he referred particularly. He should there fore support, the motion: whereupon he demanded the previous question, demanding also the yeas and nays.
There was a second to the previous question, and the main question was ordered.
Mr. HUGHES, having introduced one of these bills, took the floor under the rule to close debate. Since there was no marked disposition to locate the college at Bloomington, he could not be expected zealously to oppose the pending motion, but he would still insist on this Legislature making the location. He understood that the motion of the gentleman from Knox [Mr. Baker] was the result of a determination in a caucus of Democratic member. [A voice: "That's a mistake."] Now, if, the majority here permitted themselves to be so divided as that their action may be controlled by the minority here, it will be pretty good evidence to the people, that they had better trust the legislation of the State altogether to the minority. He was in favor of a location of the State Agricultural College by a vote of this General Assembly in joint convention.
Mr. CAMPBELL showed that the time has been extended, so that we are yet in no danger of losing the grant of Congress by limitation. The gentleman from Monroe has not yet got so far from the threshhold of the Democratic party, but that he knows better what they do in caucus than Democrats themselves. If this motion to postpone had not been made by the gentleman from Knox [Mr. Baker], he should make it himself. He rehearsed the provisions of his bill, which showed that he was not prejudiced against Bloomington. He confessed that he would be willing, if it would avail, to ask Congress to permit the diversion of this grant so that it might be applied to the common school fund. He regarded this proposition for an agricultural college as a grand humbug.
Mr. MILLER did not think there was any question before the General Assembly of more importance than this. But now we find gentlemen, after accepting the grant, on account of dissentions about location, willing to let the grant go by default, or divert it to the common schools. He would prefer the location of this college at the Tippecanoe Battle Ground, but he wanted a location, and thought we have as much time now to do it as we shall ever find.
Mr. NEW COMB asked where is the hurry for the location, so long as the scrip is not sold, and we have no money to go on with.
Mr. MILLER said if the location were made at the Battle Ground, he would guarantee the sale of all the scrip at 70 cents. He reasoned in favor of the location by the present General Assembly. He felt assured that the Democratic party have the great cause of education too much at heart to justify procrastination on account of any pleadings yet submitted.
Mr. ROSS obtained leave to explain his vote, but yielded to objectors insisting upon the enforcement of the rules.
The vote was then taken and resulted yeas 51, nays 38 - as follows:
YEAS - Messrs. Baker, Barritt, Bird, Black, Bubo, Brucker, Campbell, Chambers, Crowe, Daggy, Danaldson, Douglass, Edmonson, Foulke, Fuller, Green, Hartman, Hopkins, Hooneus, Hosteter, Hudson, Inman, Long, of Kosciusko, Lopp, McCarthy, McClasky, McFadin, McMurray, Newland, North, Ross, Sabin, Scammahorn, Shanks, Shook, Shoaff, Shull, Smith of Lagrange, Stackhouse, Stewart, Thrasher, Van Valkenburgh, Vawte , Wason, Williams. Wilson, Wolfe, Wolflin, Wright and Mr. Speaker - 51.
NAYS - Messrs Belford, Bischof, Blanch, Crain, Dunn, Erwin, Evans, Ferris, Funk, Geisendorff, Gordon, Greer, Griggs, Hamilton, Hughes, Litson, Long of Jackson, Martin, Mason, Matthis, McLean, Miller, Moore, Morrison, Montgomery, Prather, Ratliff, Shuey, Skidmore, Smith of Wabash, Spencer, Stafford, Thatcher, Thomas, Watson, White, Wolfer and Woods - 38.
So the subject was indefinitely postponed.
Mr. MONTGOMERY moved to reconsider this vote.
Mr. CAMPBELL moved to lay the motion to reconsider on the table.
The lattter motion was agreed to.
The House then took a recess till two o'clock.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
Mr. LOPP (by leave) introduced a joint resolution [H. R. 24] instructing our Senators and requesting our Representatives in Congress to secure the passage of a law authorizing the State of Indiana to advance the Agricultural College endowment fund to the credit of the common school fund of the State. It was passed to the second reading.
page: 349[View Page 349]The investigation Committee obtained leave of absence for this day.
Mr. BIRD (by leave) introduced a joint resolution [H R. 25] instructing our Congressmen to secure the passage of a law setting apart a certain portion of the territory of the United States to the African race, and that all the colored population of the country be colonized there. It was passed to the second reading.
Mr. BELFORD (by leave) from the Committee on the Judiciary, returned Mr. Van Valkenburgh's railroad freight bill [H. R. 223] with an amendment, recommending its passage.
NEW PUBLIC BUILDING.
On motion of Mr. CRAIN, his public building north of the State House bill [H. R. 286] (appropriating $40,000 for said building) was taken up and considered on the second reading -
Mr. CRAIN moved to amend by striking out the words "north of the State House;" so that it will read "on any ground belonging to the State."
The amendment was adopted.
Mr. CRAIN, Mr. FOULKE and Mr. VAWTER favored the question of building for the accommodation of the Supreme Court and the State offices.
Mr. SHUEY proposed to amend by inserting appropriately this: "To cost not exceeding $50.000."
It was adopted.
Mr. GEISENDORF was in favor of building, and renting the Gallup building ing in the mean time, as provided in the bill. He gave the history of opposition to renting - submitting considerations against continuing the lease of the McOuat building - to further enrich its "Copperhead' proprietor.
Mr. McFADIN followed on the same side, - giving way while he held the floor to a diversion for repartee with the gentleman from Noble, [Mr. Geisendorf] which was arrested by the Chair.
Mr. RATLIFF was in favor of renting till a more favorable time for building.
Mr. PRATHER referred to the pending appropriations for the Normal school building, and considered that we were undertaking too much. He understood that the State was not bound to keep the McOuat building any longer that suited her convenience: about which he said he did not care whether the building were owned by the "copperhead" or the "bluehead."
Mr. VAWTER stated that the McOuat lease could be seen on application.
Mr. PRATHER. Then there is no need of leasing. He indicated a demand for th previous question.
Mr. ROSS deprecated the indifference manifested toward the Supreme Court of the State, which was compelled to set by sufferance of the proprietors, in the old State bank building. He was satisfied that the Gallup building would not accomodate both the State offices and the Supreme Court. It was the opinion of the Supreme Court Judges and others with whom he had spoken, that $40,000 would put up a sufficient building and complete it by next September.
Mr. CRAIN moved to suspend the constitutional restriction so as to allow the bill to be read the third time now.
Mr. BELFORD demanded the previous question, and there was a record and the main question was ordered.
The rule of the House and constitutional restriction being suspended - 82 to 6 - the bill was considered as engrossed and passed the final reading in the House of Representatives - 69 to 16 - with an amendment of title moved by Mr. STEWART as follows:"An act for the erection of a suitable building for the use of the Supreme Court and the State offices ; for borrowing money from the sinking fund therefor; making certain regulations for the law library, and authorizing the Supreme Court to rent rooms for their accommodation till said building shall be completed."
HON. HENRY WALKER.
Mr. GREEN reminded the House that some days ago he offered a resolution, which was adopted, tendering the use of this Hall to the Hon. Henry Walker for a lecture tonight. The execution of that order has been prevented by an order for night sessions Tuesdays, Thursdays and Fridays. The gentleman (Mr. Walker) has gone to his room with the impression that he is to lecture here to morrow night - his friends here forgetting the order for a night session for Friday. He moved to rescind that part of the order for night sessions.
The motion was agreed to
On motion of Mr. BELFORD, his Insurance bill [H. R. 59] was taken from the table and placed in the Clerk's files.
On motion of Mr. WOLFLIN, his City Incorporations Repeal bill [H. R. 212] was taken from the table and placed in the Clerk's files.
THE CALENDAR.
Mr. Wilson's Conventional (10 per cent.) Interest bill, [H. R. 141] which failed heretofore for want of a majority of all the members of the House of Representatives, was now again put to vote, resulting 42 to 45: so the bill was rejected.
Mr. Spencer's Bridge Fund bill [H. R. 229,] which heretofore failed failed for lack of fifty-one votes, was now again submitted to the vote, resulting 30 to 52: so the bill was rejected.
COURTS IN SHELBY AND DECATUR.
Mr. Montgomery's Fourth Judicial Circuit bill, [H. R. 278] to amend so that the page: 350[View Page 350] courts in Shelby and Decatur may be held three weeks instead of two - coming up on the third reading, it was finally passed the House of Representatives - 81 to 1.
THE PROTECTION BILL.
The SPEAKER announced the Special Order, viz: Mr. Hughes' bill to protect and indemnify officers and soldiers of the United States and of the State of Indiana for acts in the military service, and in enforcing the laws and preserving the peace.
Mr. CORY took the floor in a written speech against the bill. Parties and politics should be forgotten, and only the Constitution should be regarded as binding in the consideration of such a proposition as this. Protection for all lawful acts should be given; but this bill goes to the extent of protecting soldiers for all acts, lawful or unlawful. He had been told - not that soldiers, but that members of the Indiana Legion had need of this bill; and such perhaps was the case with the author of this bill; and it was announced here that it is to be put through by Republican votes. Why was it not demanded by soldiers at the front? Because they simply did their duty. They have no need of protection under any section of this bill. They did not profess loyalty merely. They acted loyalty, by reporting themselves for duty, and remaining by the flag till the last Confederate band was dispersed. They suffer no compunctions of conscience. The variety of cases covered by the bill, and the amount of money appropriated by it indicated that there were numerous instances of violations of law under the pretense of loyalty which needed this protection. Three thousand dollars was what is now paid to six prosecuting attorneys of this State, and this is for the defense of a class of individuals, while all other classes of persons charged with crime are left to their own resources for defense. [Here, on motion of Mr. BOBO, he was allowed to continue beyond the 10 minutes.] Mr. C. then proceeded to examine the legal question as it affects this bill. It was manifestly ex post facto in its operation. It also limits the amount of damages, and admits of bail, in violation of the constitution. He then animadverted on the adoption here of the law maxim, that "in time of war the law is silent," showing, also, that war did not come into this State, and alleging that these acts sought to be protected were done by evil disposed persons. He would let the law take its course. Let us return to the old landmarks. Let justice be done though the heavens fall. Let us cleave to the constitution as the shipwrecked mariner cleaves to the last plank.
Mr. BAKER next took the floor in a prepared speech - showing that the first section is nugatory. Was it in the power of this Legislature to limit the amount of damages to be fixed in the District Court of the United States? Then he alleged that this attempt to measure damages for past actions was an infraction of vested rights, as well as of the State Constitution. The 5th section proceeds upon the assumption that all the plaintiffs in the cases it contemplates belong to a certain parry in this country whose members are all in sympathy with the rebellion. He animadverted at some length upon the pharisaical claims set up here to loyalty by what is called the Radical party in this country. This assumption of loyalty did not belong to them. This bill was not for the protection of soldiers at the front, but for the protection of stay-at-home cut throats. [Here,by consent of the House, Mr. B. was allowed to proceed beyond the 10 minutes limitation.] He poke of the danger of adopting the principle of making that legal which is not legal. He argued from the constitution, that it is not in the power of the Legislature to certify cases to the U. States courts Under the Constitution of the United States these cases could not be summarily disposed of to the injury and destruction of the rights of parties. The time might come when this scheme would come home to plague its inventors.
Mr. GORDON sketched the provisions of the bill giving the right of a removal for trial to the United States Courts. Why could not justice be done as well in the United States Courts? The reason for this was that in certain counties justice can not be done to the soldiers in these cases. Have not soldiers a right to go into courts where they may obtain justice? In answer, to Mr. Bobo, he said the protection of the bill applies as well to officers as soldiers. He has knowledge of instances where soldiers have been indicted [VOICES: "Home Guards." "For arresting deserters."] Yes, they are indicted for arresting deserters. He could not see the wrongs alleged to be inflicted by this bill. He admitted the gallantry of Democrats in the field. But we there not Democratic resolutions of the highest authority with that party, declaring that the war is a failure? When he had concluded, he demanded the previous question, and there was a second, and the main question was ordered.
Mr. HUGHES closed under the rules. The debate, as usual, had wandered from the merits of the question. He had received numerous letters for the legislation proposed in this bill. He referred to several cases - to a case in the county of Knox where parties are indicted for murder in a case where a deserter was killed. By this page: 351[View Page 351] bill such parties are admitted to bail. Again, General Wilder was here but yesterday, going to Illinois to take testimony in a case in which he is indicted for taking rebel mules. He was counsel now in suits - involving over a million of dollars brought by pardoned rebels for cotton taken in the rebellion war. In reply to a question, he answered that he was retained on the side of the Government. Pending the war he advised hanging rebel-helpers without trial; but since the war he was foremost to advise the President to let them go. They were powerless now for harm. They might go forth with impurity. But it was too soon yet,whilst we remember the hardships of the persecuted soldiers,to make the pleadings he has heard here against this bill. [Here, by consent of the House, Mr. H was relieved from the ten minutes restriction.] In reply to a question by Mr. White, he rehearsed some of the events of a famous Democratic convention which assembled here when their pistols were recovered in a railroad car from the retiring members of the convention by a single policeman, except those that were cast into Pogue's Run. He supposed that every man who lost a pistol on that occasion would have cause of action against which it was the purpose of this bill to protect the defendants. Replying to other questions he defended his own military record. And then returning to the bill, he alleged that it is right, reasoning at length and giving numerous examples and illustrations. He answered the argument that war was not in the State of Indiana, nor occasion for military arrests. He did not object to pardons and purifications as to those lately in rebellion; and he would, with similar feeling, insist on protection and indemnity for the country's defenders.
Mr. BLACK (by leave) stated the objection, that the bill casts a reflection on our State courts, as though they would not do justice. It was also a bad precedent that would end badly. He referred to the fact where a party of home guards shot a Dunkard preacher. The bill was dangerous, because it gave protection and indemnity to past unlawful actions.
The question was then taken on the final passage of the bill resulting - yeas 58, nays 34 - as follows:
YEAS - Messrs. Bischof, Blanch, Brucker, Campbell, Crain, Daggy, Dunn, Erwin, Evans, Ferris, Foulke, Funk, Geisendorff. Gordon, Greer, Griggs, Hartman. Hamilton, Higgins, Hopkins, Hudson, Hughes, Litson, 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, Watson, Wilson, Wolfer, Wolflin, Woods, Wright and Mr. Speaker - 58.
NAYS - Baker, Barritt, Bird, Black, Bobo, Corey, Crowe, Douglass, Edmonson, Fuller, Green, Honneus, Hostetter, Hungate, Inman, Long of Jackson, Lopp, McFadin, Morrison, Montgomery, Newland, O'Neil, Ross, Shanks, Shields, Shull, Stackhouse, Tebbs, Thacher, Van Valkenburgh, Vawter, Williams, White and Wolfe - 34.
So the bill passed the House of Representatives.
Mr. MONTGOMERY proposed to amend the title, so that it shall read as follows:
"A bill to protect and indemnify officers and soldiers of the United States, and of the Indiana Legion, for acts done without authority of law while in the military service of the United States, and of the State of Indiana; and appropriating the sum of $3,000 out of the State Treasury to pay for conducting the defense of parties prosecuted for the violation of the laws of their country."
It was rejected - 28 to 58.
On motion of Mr. HUGHES, the title was amended by adding the following words:
"And providing for defenses in actions for libel and slander in certain cases, and appropriating money to be expended by the Governor in certain suits."
The House then took a recess till seven o'clock P. M.
NIGHT SESSION.
On motion of Mr. BELFORD, the manufacturing and machine shops bill [S. 47] was taken up, read the first time, and referred to theCommittee on Corporations.
SCHOOLS OF THE CHURCH.
On motion of Mr. NEWLAND, the High School supplemental bill [S. 86] (with the favorable recommendation of the Judiciary Committee), was taken up, read the second time, and ordered to the third reading.
AGRICULTURAL COLLEGE.
Mr. MILLER submitted a concurrent resolution for a joint session of the two Houses to-morrow [Friday] morning at 10 o'clock, for the purpose of balloting for the location of the State Agricultural College.
Mr. McFADIN made the point of order that a matter that has been indefinitely postponed can not be taken up in this way.
The SPEAKER was inclined to sustain the point,Mr. MILLER reasoned against it.
Mr. PRATHER understood that there is an Agricultural College proposition in the Senate that might be acceptable to the gentleman from Tippecanoe.
Mr. MILLER was proceeding to urge that an effort be yet made to locate: When -
The SPEAKER interrupted, to say that the Chair preferred to hold the point for decision in the morning.
INNKEEPERS' LIABILITY.
On motion of Mr. PEELLE, his Innkeepers' Liability bill [H. R. 111] was taken up and ordered to the engrossment.
On motion of Mr. PEELLE, the House page: 352[View Page 352] took up the concurrent resolution for simultaneous election of Trustees for the Benevolent Institutions of the State to morrow , at 10 o'clock; and it was concurred in.
Mr CROWE moved to take up the consideration of the Morgan Raid bill [H. R. 214,] but withdrew the motion on a demand for the yeas and nays.
THE CALENDAR.
Mr. McMurray's Agricultural Reports Appropriation bill [$3,000 a year for two years] [H R. 248] coming up -
Mr. NEWCOMB, to test the sense of the House on the bill, (he was himself in favor of it,) would move to refer the bill, &c., to the Committee on Ways and Means, with instructions to report an appropriation of $6,000 for the Agricultural Reports for 1867 and 1868.
Mr. SHOAFF proposed to add an appropriation of $500 to aid in the publication of the transactions of the Indiana Horticultural Society.
Mr. CAMPBELL and Mr. SHUEY supported the amendment.
The division vote on the amendment resulted - affirmative 39, negative not reported. No quorum voting.
A call of the House determined 68 members present.
Mr. Shoaff's amendment was then agreed to.
The question being on Mr. Newcomb's motion -
Mr ROSS spoke at length in opposition to the proposed appropriations. The burdens of the war were still heavy, and the taxes were hardly supportable. When he saw a poor maimed returned soldier saving a pig here and a calf there to pay taxes, he was unwilling to put hands into his pocket after the last pittance he may have reserved to buy tobacco with.
Mr. NEWCOMB withdrew the motion, because it was leading to debate.
Mr. CAMPBELL renewed it, offering sundry considerations in its favor.
Mr. McFADIN also supported the motion, alleging this appropriation as the best investment that can be made of the public money.
Mr. RATLIFF followed on the sameside.
Mr. TEBBS demanded the previous question, and there was a second, and the main question was ordered.
The motion to refer with instructions was then agreed to - yeas 43, nays 35.
THE CALENDAR.
Mr. Hamilton's Conspiracy-Felony bil [H. R. 105] coming up on the second reading, with the Judiciary Committee amendments heretofore reported -
The amendments were adopted, and the bill was then ordered to the engrossment.
Mr. CHAMBERS and Mr. BELFORD obtained leave and recorded their votes in the affirmative on the passage of Mr. Hughes' Protection bill No 319.
Mr. Donaldson's Dog Law Amendment bill [H. R. 140] (to tax dogs a dollar apiece) coming up, with the committee amendments -
The amendments were concurred in.
Mr. WOLFE deprecated this legislation for farmers, and moved to lay the bill as amended on the table, demanding the yeas and nays.
Mr. DAGGY said the bill reserved the tax and distributed it pro rata amongst those who have lost sheep by dogs.
The motion was rejected - yeas 30, nays 47.
The bill was then ordered to the engrossment.
Mr. ROSS made an effectual motion to adjourn, indicating that the presence of certain members was needed in cancus.
Mr. Lopp's soldiers poll tax exemption bill [H R. 215] coming up, it was ordered to engrossment.
Mr. Foulke's city wards bill [H. R. 222] coming up, it was ordered to the engrossment.
Mr. ROSS again moved an adjournment, demanding the yeas and nays.
Whereupon -
The House adjourned.
