IN SENATE.
SATURDAY, March 2, 1867.The Senate met at 9 o'clock A. M.
Yesterday's minutes were not read.
CLAIMS FOR $57,238 15.
Mr. CRAVENS. I propose to make a motion in regard to a transaction of yesterday which I regret, as far as I am concerned, as I regret the necessity of feeling compelled to adopt the course I have to now. Yesterday in the afternoon, the Senate passed a bill for the payment of the claims of Morehead, Hall & Co. I now move that the Senate reconsider the vote by which that bill was passed. I do not want to do in justice to any body, and I prefer not to do injustice to myself nor to the State. The ground work of the motion I now make, is the fact that by the passage of this bill, in my judgement, the door is opened to the Treasury of the State that no power, perhaps, can ever close. There is another consideration; and that is that by the adoption of a precedent of this sort a much wider door will be opened to the Treasury and a much heavier responsibility forced upon the State than I think the Senate was ready to admit or appreciate. If the State of Indiana undertakes now to say that all of these creditors connected with that Wabash & Erie Canal are to have access to the Treasury to make up any deficit and losses they have sustained, I would like to know by what authority we can shut the door even to the present holders of that canal for losses or damages sustained by them.
There is another consideration: Some of the parties embraced in this bill have rather strange claims - they may be just; I am not here to say that they are not, considered in an abstract point of view; but, for instance, if they received at the hands of the State certain funds made receivable at par for taxes and for all debts to the State, if they say proper to sell them at a depreciated rate, the fault, perhaps, may be theirs. But aside from that, in the acts of 1846, in the 8th section of an act approved January 19, 1946, with reference to this canal. I find this, [Mr. C. reads] Here is a broad grant of that canal to the trustees, and by that grant everything belonging to the canal - all debts growing out of that canal - all go to t em. Then comes this provision: [Mr. C. reads.], Thus the State expressly states that all debts growing out of this improvement shall be a charge upon these lands or upon this canal. It may be said that the State can not shovel off responsibility in this way; but when these lands, the canal and other things passed into the hands of these trustees, the State says these claims shall follow them. If the State owed these claims they could not be shovelled off, but the purpose was that these men should pursue their remedy there first; and if nothing was left they might then come back if they had just claims.
Mr. CULLEN (interposing) That is what has been done. They pursued their case in the Tippeeanoe Court, and failed; and hence they come back to the State.
Mr. CRAVENS. I am not, sufficiently familiar with the history of these claims I only want to put myself right, and I think other Senators want to put themselves right on this question. If they have failed, why did they fail? They did not fail because the Trustees did not have the means for the payment of this debt, for the means are there yet. But I do not want to take up the time of the Senate in discussing the merits of this question. I only regret that I had not my wits about me yesterday, to recollect something of the history of these claims, as they were presented in 1855-57, for I was a member of this body at that time.
Mr. STEIN. I trust for the sake of the claim I represent in this bill, that the motion for a reconsideration will not prevail. It seems to be admitted that the claim is honest, when its integrity is not disputed. The claim I represent belongs to an old citizen of our country, a man whose character can not be doubted by any one who knows him.
Mr. CRAVENS, (interposing ) I understood that to be the fact in 1855-7that no exception could be taken as to the character of this gentleman.
Mr. STEIN. It will be a source of gratification in my own county to know that old legislators, liks the Senator from Jefferson, who have heretofore set upon these claims, volunteer their testimony upon the integrity and honor of these claimants. The record vindicates them, and the man who votes in behalf of these claims need not be afraid of facing his constituents - he can justify himself throughout. Similar claims have uniformly been defeated in page: 365[View Page 365] court, and now we appeal to the sense of justice of the State. I grant that we ought to use some circumspection, and not pass every claim that is placed before us, but, where abundant evidence is shown before two or three successive sessions, it is but right and just that the claim should be paid. Nor, do I see that we would open the door to a flood of bad claims, as the Senator intimates, and if it opens the door to just claims, the sooner we do that the better, for every day but adds to the interest, Let us be just to our citizens. If any have fair, just, honest and well-founded claims, let them not hesitate to come up to the General Assembly and ask that they be allowed. I do think that the bill now before us embodies claims that stand upon a true footing: they now stand allowed, and I see that no evil can be done in admitting these claims.
On motion by Mr. CULLEN, a call of the Senate was had, and, when forty-four members answered to their names, further proceedings under the call were dispensed with.
Mr. CULLEN. I regret that it becomes my duty this morning to again occupy the attention of the Senate upon this question, I shall only speak to the objections raised by the Senator from Jefferson, not stopping to enumerate the arguments advanced yesterday, as to the justness of these claims for I believe there is not a Senator here who will stand up and say that the claims are not just and right and proper. The only question is whether or not the State is liable for the payment of these claims - for that is the point he made his speech upon. He contends that the transfer of the Wabash & Erie Canal to certain Trustees under an act of 1846 released the State from all liability as to these claims. If his position be correct in regard to this matter then as a matter of course this bill should not be passed, but it seems to me so plain a proposition no Senator can fail to see that this act of 1846 does not and cannot by legal intentment release the State from liabilities. What is it? It is an act transferring the interest of the State in the Wabash & Erie Canal to certain Trustees in 1846. Now these claims were made and this indebtedness incurred by the State when she alone was responsible for her own contracts: and the written contract between these parties and the State are before this Committee. The State has made herself liable by a contract, and now I put it as a question of law, can the State by the subsequent transfer of the Canal into the hands of trustees render herself less liable for a contract made prior to that time? Now here is the section of the law the Senator read: [Mr, C, reads.] I ask if the State can rid herself of liability for this indebtedness by a simple assignment of the canal? I call attention to another provision of this law on page 9: [Mr. C. reads.] The very section the Senator called our attention to shows that the State cannot shirk the liability she incurred by this act. But I do not wish to detain the Senate further. I have examined this question and am as well satisfied of the justness of these claims as I was before. So plain a legal proposition certainly cannot be misunderstood by the Senate.
The motion to reconsider was agreed to by yeas 23, nays 18 - as follows:
YEAS - Messrs. Armstrong, Bellamy, Bowman, Brown, Carson, Cravens, English, Gifford, Houghton, Howk, Huey, Hyatt, Johnson, Lewis, Milligan, Niles, Noyes, Reagan, Reynolds, Robinson, Terry, Ward and Mr. President (Cumback)- 23.
NAYS - Messrs. Barker, Bennett, Bonham, Church, Cullen, Hanna, Humphreys, Jaquess, Mason, Newlin, Oyler, Parrish. Richmond, Sherrod, Staggs, Stein, Turner and Wolcott - 18.
Pending the roll call -
Mr. CHURCH, when his name was called, was understood to say that all the evidence that has been produced goes to show that the State does owe these claims, and that being the case he certainly must vote against the motion to reconsider.
Mr. ROBINSON, when his name was called, was understood to say that he, voted for this bill yesterday but since then had examined into the question somewhat, and while he might be willing that these parties should recover the principal of their claims he was unwilling to allow them ove 5OOO for interest. He voted "aye."
The result was then announced as above.
The question recurring on the passage of the bill -
On motion by Mr. CULLEN another call of the Senate was had, and when 45 Senators answered to their names further proceedings thereunder were dispensed with.
Mr. CULLEN made an ineffectual motion to postpone the further consideration of the bill and make it the special order for this afternoon at 2 o'clock.
The bill was then rejected - yeas 17, nays 26 - as follows:
YEAS - Messrs. Barker, Bonham, Church, Cullen, Hanna, Jaquess, Mason, Newlin, Oyler, Parrish, Richmond, Sherrod, Staggs, Stein, Turner, and Wolcott - 16.
NAYS - Messrs. Armstrong, Ballamy, Bennett, Bowman, Brown, Carson, Cravens, English, Gifford, Houghton, Howk, Huey, Humphreys, Hyatt, Johnson, Lewis, Milligan, Niles, Noyes, Reagan, Reynolds, Rice, Robinson, Terry, Thompson, Ward, and Mr. President - 26.
Pending the roll call -
Mr OYLER said: He made it a rule of life whenever he could pay an honest debt, to do it, and he thought the State of Indiana should pay her honest debts. Whenever we rely upon the report of a Committee or the action of men whom we deputize page: 366[View Page 366]to examine a claim of this character, and they say the claim is a just one and fully substantiated, he had no disposition to vote against it.
Mr. RICE, when his name was called said: He thought the Committee had done what they deemed to be right. Yesterday he voted with some misgivings in favor of the bill, but since then he has heard things in reference to these claims that renders him still more in doubt with regard to the propriety of that vote; and he would now give the benefit of that doubt in favor of the State.
Mr. TURNER, when his name was called said: During the late canvass it was charged upon the members of the party with which he acted that they were repudiators, that they intended to repudiate the public debt and that they would do everything in their power to repudiate. He should vote for every honest debt and as there is evidence that this debt is due, though he may be deceived in regard to it. still according to the evidence he was compelled to vote in favor of it.
The vote was then announced as above.
Mr. NOYES moved to reconsider the vote just taken.
On motion of Mr. BELLAMY this motion to reconsider was laid on the table by yeas 28, nays 12.
Mr. STEIN then said that the claim of Morehead, Hall & Co. has been a sacred trust to the Tippecanoe county representatives in the State Legislature for many years - it has passed down from one to another, and we propose to keep it going. It will be here for fifty years or until perhaps we will verify the parable of the widow before the unjust judge who got justice on account of her importunities and nothing else.
PRESIDENTIAL APPOINTEES.
Mr. BONHAM. Some two or three weeks ago I introduced a joint resolution on the subject of the confirmation of appointments made by the President of the United States, which was referred to the Committee on Federal Relations. The Chairman of that Committee informs me that he never had the resolution, arid that there are no papers now in the hands of that Committee. I desire to make some inquiry in reference to that resolution.
The PRESIDENT. The record shows the reference of the resolution to the Committee and the Secretary says it is not upon the files and cannot be found. Can not the Senator draft a substitute.
Mr. BONHAM. It is quite possible.
REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES.
Mr. JAQUESS, from the Committee on Finance, returned his bill [S, 220] - title not read - recommending its passage.
Mr. NILES, from the Judiciary Committee, returned Mr. Cullen's bill [S. 189-see page 232] in relation to losses of the State by default of county officers, & c., recommending that it be striken out from the enacting clause and new matter substituted. It seemed to the committee that further provision should be made by which County Commissioners maybe indemnified against defalcation of their treasurers to the State; and the committee were of the opinion that, under the circumstances, Montgomery county ought to be released on condition that the State shall be indemnified against the claim for professional services; and in order to effect these purposes, it became necessary to propose two bills - the first is a substitute for the bill referred to the committee, after the enacting clause; and the other embraces the provision in regard to indemnity against losses by treasurers, which was also attached to the original bill. The committee think it essential to the safety and protection of the counties that the new bill should be passed. The new bill [S. 235] is entitled an act supplemental to An Act to provide for the valuation and the collection of taxes, & c., approved June 21, 1852; and the title of the bill S. 189 is changed so as to read: An act to relieve Montgomery county conditionally from the payment to the State of $38,441 69, & c. The bill S. 235 being read -
On motion by Mr. CULLEN, the constitutional restriction was dispensed with - yeas 40, nays 0 - and the bill S. 235 was read but once again and passed by yeas 38, nays 1.
Messrs. Howk, Gifford, Richmond (on account of sickness in his family) and Staggs obtained leave of absence till Monday; and Mr. Noyes for to-day-business matters requiring his attention.
Mr. BONHAM offered the following:
Resolved, That when the Senate adiourn it adjourn to meet on Monday next at 21/2 o'clock.
It was rejected by yeas 15, nays 25.
Mr. CULLEN presented a petition from colored citizens, which, without reading, was referred to the Committee on Rights and Privileges.
Mr. SHERROD offered the following:
Resolved, That a Committee of three be appointed and requested to examine and ascertain why the documents mailed by Senators fail to reach their destination, and report the result of their investigations to the Senate.
Mr. S. said he had received various letters from constituents to whom be had sent various documents, complaining that none had been received; and he would like to ascertain whether the fault is in the Post Office Department, or with the attaches of the Senate.
The resolution ,was adopted, and the PRESIDENT appointed Messrs. Sherrod, Mason and Jaquess said committee.
Mr. CASON, from the Judiciary Committee, returned his bill [S. 91] to assert control over railroad corporations, fixing the rate of freight, rules and by laws for the government of roads, &c., recommending its passage.
On motion by Mr. CASON the bill was read the second time and ordered engrossed.
BILLS ON THE FINAL READING.
Mr. BENNETT said. All bills on the first and second readings can be attended page: 367[View Page 367] to and all reports received this afternoon and Monday morning when we have no quorum here; while all bills that can not be passed soon need not be passed at all, for they can not get through the House. He moved to pass informally over the order of business and take up bills on the third reading and pass them either up or down without talking about them.
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. 0YLER's bill [129] amending section 359 of the general practice act by providing that no issue shall be set for trial till the third day of the term, being read the third time -
Mr. OYLER explained his bill.
The bill was passed by yeas 34, nays 3.
Mr. NILES moved a reconsideration of the vote; after the vote was taken he examined the bill and thought it would only cause embarrassment, by sometimes leaving a court without business on the second day of the term.
The motion was rejected.
Mr.Stein's bill [S. 131] to amend section 784 of the practice act, by striking out the amount of damages, being read the third time -
Mr. STEIN explained his bill.
The bill was passed by yeas 26, nays 10.
Mr. Kinley's bill [S. 140] to authorize insurance companies to reinsure their risks and close up their business, being read the third time.
Mr. CULLEN explained it.
The bill was passed by yeas 32, nays 4.
DRUNKARDS.
Mr. Milligan's bill [S. 141] defining the crime of drunkenness, (see page 135) which failed to pass for want of a constitutional majority last Wednesday, and again yesterday, coming up -
Mr. SHERROD moved to indefinitely postpone the bill.
Mr. BELLAMY moved, ineffectual yeas 18, nays 18 - to lay this motion on the table.
The motion to indefinitely postpone the bill was rejected by yeas 19 nays 19.
On motion by Mr. ROBINSON, it was laid on the table.
THE LAW OF DIVORCE.
Mr. Church's bill [S. 147] amending the divorce law (see pages 153, 191 and 231) coming up, it was considered as engrossed, and read the third time.
Mr. RICE moved to recommit the bill, with instructions to strike out every cause of divorce except the cause of adultery.
Mr. CULLEN moved to indefinitely postpone the whole matter.
Mr. RICE spoke feelingly of this most sacred relation of the human family, and showed conclusively that his proposed amendment was based upon the solid foundations of the higher laws of Christianity. He would place the marriage relation upon grounds superior to that occupied by the transaction for a bushel of potatoes. The moral sentiment of the churches should be backed up by legislation, and he appealed to Senators not to treat this subject in a light or trivial manner.
Mr. BENNETT would vote for the motion to postpone because the divorce laws have been tampered with every session for years past; they are now in a pretty good shape; it would be injustice to confine the law to the cause suggested, and he desired to get at the more important business of the session.
Mr. CHURCH believed the people are in favor of the changes proposed by this bill, and proceeded to recite its provisions. He objected to the recommitment, because there would be too much opposition to such a law - it could not be passed.
Mr. CARSON favored recommitment with the instructions proposed. He never could see the justice of the principle granting divorce on any other ground.
Mr. TURNER expressed approval of the remarks made by the Senator from Allen [Mr. Carson], and the Senator from Parke [Mr. Rice]; and he would go still further if proof of the cause were made against both parties, he would still refuse a writ of divorcement.
The motion to indefinitely postpone was rejected - yeas 18, nays 22.
The motion to recommit with instructions was also rejected - yeas 17, nays 20.
The Senate took a recess till 2 o'clock.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
The pending bill S. 147 was read the third time, and informally passed over.On motion by Mr. OYLER (as there was no quorum present), the Senate proceeded with the orders of the day.
THE ADJUTANT GENERAL'S OFFICE.
Mr. PARRISH, from the Committee on Military Affairs, to which was referred a concurrent resolution looking to the winding up of the business in the Adjutant General's Office, reported that the committee have examined the pending business, and for reasons more fully set forth in the joint committee's report, they are of opinion that the office should be continued as at present organized; and they recommend that the concurrent resolution lie on the table.
Mr. MILLIGAN hoped that the Senate would not concur in the report. The Adjutant General's office has cost us a good deal. The appropriation for last year was between seventeen thousand and eighteen thousand dollars, besides postage, stationery, &c., and the year before, this office cost the State near thirty thousand dollars. Previous to the war, it cost but $25 a year.
page: 368[View Page 368]We do not propose to adopt the suggestion of this officer, to go on and issue a couple more volumes of his Report, which had already cost the State so much. One year's time is certainly sufficient to close up the business of that office, and he earnestly hoped the concurrent resolution would be adopted.
Mr. CULLEN hoped the Senate would concur. The Adjutant General says that there is as much business to be done now as heretofore; and as the reports we have ordered are not yet printed, it would be doing injustice to shut up the -office so soon. It ought to be wound up carefully, and in the proper manner.
Mr. PARRISH feared we are all too apt to forget the conflict of the last few years in which Indiana sent some 200,000 men to the field, and that the history of every one of those men becomes as much a matter of record as a judgment in the proceedings of a court of record. The business of that office should be closed up and made complete or else we lose all the labor and money already expended. If any Senator will go into the office and examine the correspondence by widows and heirs to ascertain their rights and get record evidence of soldiers' services, he will find an argument in favor of the continuance of this office. It is proposed that the Adjutant General shall not only perform the duties now assigned him by law, but in addition shall perform the duties of Paymaster and Quartermaster of the State; and that he shall finish up his report of deceased soldiers making a list of at least 17,000 names. The services of this officer have been invaluable to the State. Then there are honest and just claims for money expended by the State to the amount of over $2,000,000, over $1,000,000 of which has been suspended by red tape at the War Department, and that must be settled, and no man can do it so well as the Adjutant General, who is familiar with it. In 1868 it will be advisable to cut down the force in that office 'to one or two clerks if possible, but this resolution goes too far. One clerk could hardly file the papers that come in through the mail, and will continue to come tor three or four years yet.
Mr. CRAVENS did not want to do anything hastily, but this concurrent resolution ought not to be so summarialy disposed of. We have a report here sent by the Governor from the senior Major General of the Indiana militia in which he informs us that the military force of the State consists of a Lieutenant General, two or three Major Generals, a Quartermaster General and some other General, but no privates; and as far as the present and prospective business of the office of the - Adjutant General is concerned under that state of facts there can not be much use for it hereafter. The experience of the State as to the cost of that officer's reports ought to admonish us to be cautious. That office has cost a considerable amount of money, the Adjutant General has a good salary, to which he made no objection;but the office should be reduced to a peace footing as soon as possible, and the time allowed by the resolution is perhaps abundantly sufficient. He hoped some action would be had by both Houses this session looking to an early reduction of ttiis office to a peace footing.
Mr. ROBINSON, as a member of the committee, was not aware that the resolution was before the Committee on Military Affairs, and of course did not know how many members of the committee concurred in the report. As long as the Adjutant General's office is maintained upon a war footing there will be no less business before that office than now, but as soon as it is reduced to a peace footing, and the people having an interest in these matters come to know that there are no longer clerks employed to give information free of charge, it will be obtained elsewhere. He was distinctly opposed to appropriating several thousand dollars for the purpose of running that office. The State has already expended enough money in that particular branch. He saw no necessity now that the war is over, for keeping up an office that costs the State so much.
Mr. BARKER, being also a member of the committee, did not know such a resolution was in existence - did not know that a meeting was called; and could not concur in the report.
Mr. PARRISH, in justice to himself, would say that this report was not laid before; the committee in a formal meeting, but he had spoken to Senators in reference to the resolution, and had authority from them to make his report. He had not treated his fellow members with discourtesy, for he had called their attention to it on the floor of the Senate.
Mr. CULLEN, as the joint committee report ordered to be Printed will give Senators an understanding of this subject, moved to lay this subject on the table till that report comes in.
The motion was agreed to.
NEW PROPOSITIONS.
Mr. CARSON introduced a bill [S. 236] for an act fixing the times of holding courts in the 10th Judicial Circuit, changing the length of terms, and prescribing that in other respects existing regulations shall apply thereto. It was referred to the Committee on the Organization of Courts.
Mr. CARSON introduced a bill [S.237] for an act creating the 19th, 20th, and 21st Judicial Circuits [Fort Wayne, Lafayette and Richmond Criminal Courts] and to provide for the election page: 369[View Page 369] of Judges and Prosecuting Attorneys thereof and providing compensation therefor, declaring their jurisdiction and providing for transfer of actions thereto. It was referred to the Committee on the Organization of Courts.
Mr. OYLER introduced a bill [S. 238] to repeal an act to provide for the sale of certain lands belonging to the counties of Jasper and Newton, &c., approved December 12, 1865; and for relieving John P. Dunn, formerly Auditor of State. It was referred to the Judiciary Committee.
Mr. BONHAM introduced a bill [S. 239] for an act to amend the title of an act making general appropriations for the year 1866, repealing certain sections of the act therein named and declaring an emergency. It was referred to the Judiciary Committee.
Mr. TAGGART introduced a bill [S. 249] for an act fixing the time of holding the Circuit Court in the first Judicial Circuit, and repealing all laws in conflict therewith. It was referred to Committee on Organization of Courts.
Mr. WOLCOTT presented the remonstrance of several hundred citizens of Warren county against the proposition to change the boundary line between Warren and Fountain counties.
Mr. ROBINSON presented a petition on the subject of temperance which, without reading, was referred to the Committee on Temperance.
REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES.
Mr CRAVENS, from the Committee on Corporations, returned the bill [H. R. 145] for incorporation of towns, &c., recommending its passage.
Mr. HANNA, from the same committee, returned the bill [S. 229]title not read recommending its passage,
Mr. PARRISH, from the Committee on Military Affairs, returned Mr. Reynolds' bill [S. 233] appropriating $6.132 28 to the Antietam, and $4-622 83 to the Gettysburg cemeteries, recommending its passage.
Mr. PARRISH hoped the Legislature would not adjourn without making approbations for the State's dead, and moved that, the bill be read the second time now.
The motion was agreed to and the bill was ordered to the engrossment.
Mr. OYLER, from the Committee on Organization of Courts, returned his bill [S. 82] for districting the State in accordance with bills 80 and 81, recommending that it lie on the table. The report was concurred in.
Mr. LEWIS, from the Committee on County and Township Business, returned Mr. Johnson's bill [S. 204] increasing County Treasurers fees recommending that it lie on the table. The report was concurred in.
Mr. CASON from the Judiciary Committee returned the bill [H. R. 240] to provide for the inspection of coal and petroleum oils, recommending its passage with an amendment.
Mr. WOLCOTT from the select Committee thereon, returned the papers [over 1,000 remonstrators and 623 petitioners] concerning the boundary line between Warren and Fountain counties, recommending their reference to a new Committee, the present Committee being composed of Senators,particularly interested.
On motion by Mr. STEIN it was -
Resolved, That the State Librarian be instructed to purchase one copy of Wilson's Digest of Parliamentary Law for the use of the President of the Senate, one copy for each Senator and one copy for each of the elective officers of the Senate.
Mr. CHURCH offered a resolution, which was adopted, directing the Librarian to furnish each Senator and elective officer with nine dollars worth of postage stamps and stationery in addition to the amounts heretofore furnished.
WORK FOR COMMITTEES.
The following described House bills were read the first time and referred to approrpriate committees:
The State normal school appropriation bill [H. R. 15]; the juy fee bill [ H. R. 21]; the infant labor bill [ H. R. 81]; [H. R. 81]; the amendment of pleadings bill [H. R. 133] ; the mechanics' lien bill [H. R. 191]; the marriage license bill [H. R. 193]; the writs of execution bill [H. R. 207] ; the hydraulic companies' land bill [H. R. 211]; the clerks book index bill [H. R. 219]; the freight transportation bill [H. R. 223]; the tenant ten days' notice bill [H. R. 225] ; the widows' and orphan's asylum bill [H. R. 262]; the tax payment bills [H. R. 275, 276,277, 343] ; the State offices building bill [H. R. 286]; the military officers' indemnity bill [H. R. 316]; and joint resolutions [H. R. 10] for the relief of David T. Stevenson, and [H. R. 16] vacating a highway on the east side the Deaf and Dumb Asylum.
The Kosciusko Circuit Court bill [H. R. 337] was passed to the second reading.
Pending the reading of the bills -
Mr. CRAVENS offered the following:
Resolved, That the Committee on Finance be authorized to insert the usual section in the specific appropriation bill, as follows :
SEC. - That A. E. & W. H. Drapier be allowed for the number of copies of the BREVIER LEGISLATIVE REPORTS, furnished every session since 1857, the same price paid per page for the last several volumes.
It was adopted by consent.
When the series of bills [H. R. 275, 276, 277 and 343] putting off the time for payment of taxes from the third Monday in March till the third Monday in April were read -
Mr. SHERROD moved to refer them to a select committee of three, with instructions to fix the 10th of May as the time.
Mr. CRAVENS suggested that this change was suggested by members from the Southern part of the State, where considerable attention is paid to the tobacco trade, and that article is not generally ready for market till the time indicated in the bills.
Mr. HANNA presented a letter, which he desired should accompany the bills by way of memorial.
Mr. JOHNSON had received numerous letters upon this subject setting forth that this legislation is necessary to enable the people in his section to pay their taxes, as tobacco is the principal staple. If this change is made, it will certainly greatly facilitate the payment of taxes in that part of the State. He was anxious to see these bills pass, because he knew the change was absolutely required by his constituency.
On motion by Mr. WOLCOTT, the instructions were amended by instructing the committee to inquire into the effect the proposed change would have upon the ability of the State to pay its interest.
page: 370[View Page 370]The motion to refer, as amended, was agreed to; and the PRESIDENT made the committee to consist of Messrs. Sherrod, Johnson and Wolcott.
On motion by Mr. OYLER, it was -
Resolved, That when the Senate adjourn it adjourn to meet on Monday next at 2 o'clock.
A message from the House of Representatives asking the Senate to concur in a clerical amendment to the Cemetery bill, [H. R. 99,] which passed both Houses in an imperfect form and was returned to the House by the Governor for correction, was taken up and the amendment concurred in.
The Senate then adjourned till Monday, 2 P. M.
