HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
THURSDAY, January 17, 1867.The House met at 2 o'clock P. M., pursuant to adjournment.
The Journal of yesterday was read.
A Senate message announced the passage of a joint resolution of the Senate for the ratification of the pending amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
SPECIAL APPORTIONMENT COMMITTEES.
The SPEAKER announced the following: Committee of Eleven on Apportionment of Senators and Representatives - Messrs. Prather, Hopkins, Honneus, Corey, Foulke, Newcomb, McMurray, Filler, Wright, Shoaff and Douglass.
Committee of Eleven on Congressional Apportionment - Messrs. Peelle, Scammahorn, Honneus, Prather, Greene, Campbell, M'Lean, Miller, Ross, Woods and Bobo.
Mr. NEWCOMB submitted the following, which was adopted:
Resolved, By the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring,) that the two Houses of the General Assembly meet in joint convention in Hall of the House on to-morrow, Friday, January 18,1867, at 10 o'clock, A. M., for the purpose of electing a State Agent, a State Printer, a State Librarian, a Trustee of the Wabash & Erie Canal, two Directors for the Southern Prison, three Directors for the Northern Prison, and one Trustee each for the Hospital for the insane, and the Institutions for the education of the Blind and the Deaf and Dumb.
It was adopted, and ordered that the Clerk acquaint the Senate of its passage.
EMPLOYES OF THE HOUSE.
Mr. CRAIN, from a special committee on this subject, (obtaining leave,) submitted the following: MR.. SPEAKER: The committee to whom was referred the supervision of the employes of the House, beg leave to report that they have confirmed the following appointments made by the officers respectively:
- By Cyrus T. Nixon, Principal Clerk :
- For Reading Clerk, D W. Kurtz, of Blackford.
- For Enrolling Clerk, R. H. Newcomb, of Marion.
- For Enrolling Clerk, F. M. Runyun, of Clark.
- For Engrossing Clerk, J. F. Huton, of Porter.
- For Engrossing Clerk, M. L. Reed, of Henry.
- For File Clerk, J. F. Burns, of Hendricks.
- For Registry Clerk, N. M. Merwin, of Putnam.
- For Clerk's Page, Wright Hadley, of Marion.
- By P. A. B. Kennedy, Assistant Clerk :
- Robert O. Dormer, of Wayne.
- Germ Brown, of Steuben.
- Martin V. B. Cumerford, of Marion.
- John EuDaly, of Scott.
- Ira Broshears, of Spencer.
- By Captain John Campbell, Doorkeeper:
ASSISTANT DOORKEEPERS.
- 1st. Alonzo Prather, of Jennings.
- 2d. James W. Cookley, of Monroe.
- 3d. W. J. Manker, of Morgan.
FIREMEN.
- Samuel Davis, of Monroe.
- Calvin VV. Keeper, of White.
WATER-CARRIERS.
- Edward Johnson, of Owen.
- Wm. F. Hamilton, of Marion.
In Charge of Hats and Coats : F. C. McCoun, of Wabash.
Spittoon Cleaner: James Russell, of Marion. Privy Cleaner: Pat. Branan, Esq , of Marion.
Mail Carrier: Samuel Brown, of Johnson.
Post Office Department: T. Chipman, of Marion.
Folding Clerks; Joseph Dille, of Marion;
James M. Levein. of Marion; William Shuey, of Elkhart.
Announcing Messenger: F. C, Campbell, of Clark.
On motion by Mr. McLEAN, the report was concurred in.
POSTAGE STAMPS.
Mr. BAKER, from the special Committee thereon, (obtaining leave) returned Mr. McLean's joint resolution [H. R. 6] authorizing the State Librarian to draw $1,000 from the State Treasury for the purchase of post office stamps for the use of the General Assembly, recommending that it be laid on page: 54[View Page 54] the table, and reporting a bill in lieu, namely:
A bill authorising or directing the State Librarian to draw on the State Treasurer for $3,000 for the purchase of post office stamps for the use of members of both Houses of the General Assembly.
The report was concurred in, and the bill passed to the second reading.
Mr. HAMILTON submitted the following:
WHEREAS, The Committee on Stationery have failed to report in favor of allowing stamps and stationery to the elective officers of the House, or those performing the duties of said elective officers; therefore -
Resolved, That they he allowed the same amount of stationery and stamps as is allowed to members of this House.
It was laid on the table.
BOLTING BILL.
The SPEAKER announced the Special Order for this hour, viz: the consideration of Mr. Hughes' Bolting bill, H. R. No. 42and the bill was read the third time by the Clerk - the question being, Shall the bill pass?
Mr. ROSS (being entitled to the floor) on rising made a motion to recommit the bill with instructions to strike out the second and third sections. He was opposed to bolting, and should stay in his seat till the end of the session:, hence, he was in savor of a proper penalty for the offense. As to the third section, there was no occasion for an emergency. Who will be the probable bolters now? Certainly not the Republican members, but Democratic members. Now he declared his knowledge that Democratic Members would not bolt; and he was unwilling to register so unjust a censure upon a great party. As to the second section, he showed that it was in conflict with the Constitution. It would put it in the power of a court to interfere with and perhaps obstruct legislation. He would have the act such as would operate properly. He then recited the first section and argued that the House could as well inflict the penalty as the Court.
Mr. CRAIN, believing that the bill ought to pass now, said that the people had seen the evil sought to be remedied by it for the last eight or ten years. The people would hold members here responsible for not voting for this bill. And further to avoid the evil, he said he would be in favor of so amending the State Constitution that a majority of the members shall constitute a quorum to do business. This was to accomplish something like the same purpose without the process of constitutional amendment. The bill was fair, its operation was equal, and he hoped there might never be just occasion for its enforcement. He never knew but one time when members were justifiable in bolting, and that was the revolutionary attempt here by the majority in 1863. Then he would have bolted, notwithstanding the penalty. But Democrats bolted here in 1861 on a mere military bill, a bill drafted by a Democrat - General Lew, Wallace. Democrats in both Houses had bolted on that. But this was not the only time. Democrats bolted in 1855 to prevent the election of a United States Senator, and at another time on account of the tendency of the Maine Liquor Law bill. It was time then for legal restriction to come in and stop this - to stop it alike with both parties. He did not believe the intimation that Democrats here were going to bolt this session. The propriety of the passage of the bill at once, and of the emergency clause, to which gentlemen objected, was in this, that we should not enact a legislative restraint which may not operate on ourselves. Manifestly we should be affected by it as well as future Legislatures, because the bill affected none but members of the Legislature. Answering incidental objections, he showed the reasonableness and necessity of a new apportionment for representation; and upon such a question he hoped there could not be raised any pretense for bolting. But if apportionment should be resisted by bolting he gave notice that apportionment bills would be enacted this session anyhow, even without a quorum - and those bills referred to the Governor and sanctioned by him, and be just as legal and binding as the present apportionments, which were ordered and made by Governor Wright. He continued for some time, urging prompt and earnest action upon the bill, on both sides of the House. With respect to the diversion of these penalties to the support of negro schools, in reply to a question by Mr. Thacher, he said he was in favor of taxing negroes for separate schools for negro children.
[A message from the Senate announced concurrence in Mr. Newcomb's resolution for the Joint Convention of the two Houses to-morrow for the election of State Agent, State Printer, &c.]
Mr. HUGHES said: Without any wish to cut off discussion, he intended to move to lay the motion of Mr. Ross to refer, on the table. He was relieved from answering Mr. Ross by the speech of Mr. Crain. Today we had an improvement on the temper of the debate yesterdays very dignified speech by the gentleman from Miami, who says he is in favor of the general principle of the bill. Bolting was revolutionary. But there were emergencies that might justify it - justify the sacrifice of money and even life for the good of the country - such as a time of rebellion and page: 55[View Page 55] civil war. He was not the Democratic party and rejoiced in the occasion which they improved at Philadelphia to swing around to loyalty by resolution. He proceeded to justify his remarks yesterday when he thought himself assailed referring to his past political course and to the treatment of his party friends. He resigned the Court of Claims judgeship after the Democratic scales had fallen from his eves. He further urged the emergency for the passage of the bill, and answered objections. He showed from the past that existing legislative penalties, as expulsion, &c , were insufficient for remedy of the evil. The present time, therefore, when no existing proposition is pending, was appropriate for the passage of the bill, which he had drafted at his desk without consulting anybody. He rehearsed its provisions, showing its equal and just application to both parties. It was said the House has the power of punishing members, and therefore the Court should not intervene. So the House may punish in a case of bribery, or of assault and battery - so also the Courts, after the expiration of the session. Gentlemen say nobody is going to bolt. He would ask the gentleman from Miami whether there had not been held a conference of Democrats where there was had under consideration a question as to the propriety of breaking up this Legislature.
Mr. ROSS. I will say, that there was some such question, but it was found that there were so many against it, it could not be done.
Mr. HUGHES. The gentleman done a service to the House. It has then been under advisement. But it is abandoned. Now I urge my motion to lay the gentleman's motion to recommit the bill on the table. He withheld it for -
Mr. BAKER. He was opposed to the emergency. He was unwilling that the imputation of a disposition to bolt should be cast upon Democratic members.
Mr. HUGHES, interrupting. Has there not been a meeting held, at which an arrangement was proposed to break up this Legislature, if the minority could not control certain measures?
Mr. BAKER. I know of no such agreement or arrangement. But I do know, and the gentleman from Monroe ought to know, that the party with which he acted formerly, would not submit to an unconstitutional overriding of the right.
Mr. BELFORD interrupted to inquire specially as to the action in caucus.
Mr BAKER. If the gentleman will come into our caucuses properly avouched, he may find out what is done. But he would answer that, when the time shall come that the majority here will pick out from the files their own bills concocted for party purposes, and leave ours to lie over amongst the unfinished business of the session, they will see some Democrats taking up their hats, and saying Good-bye, gentlemen.
Mr. HUGHES. By what process did Jeff Davis and his friends take leave of Congress?
Mr. BAKER. The gentleman himself was more familiar with that matter than he. Laughter.] He referred to Mr. H.'s former political associations and to the old principles of statesmanship which he himself had received from the gentleman from Monroe: and he honored him still for their announcement in that gentleman's speeches. He submitted a special demurrer to the pending bills for State and Congressional representative purposes. He would be one of the last to set down here and even by his presence here consent to their passage. As to this bill, if the emergency clause were out, it would hardly be met with a negative vote.
Mr. Hughes' motion to lay Mr. Ross' motion on the table was now decided by yeas 62, nays 36, as follows:
YEAS - Messrs. Bedford, Bischof, Blanch, Brucker, Campbell, Chambers, Corey, Crain, Daggy, Donaldson, 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, Peele, 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 - 62.
NAYS - Messrs. Baker, Barritt, Bird, Black, Bobo, Crowe, Douglass, Edmonson, Fuller, Greene, Hays, Honneus, Hostetter, Hungate, Inman, Kiser, Long of Jackson, Lopp, Matthis, McFadden, Morrison, Montgomery, O'Neil, Ross, Shanks, Shields, Shoeff, Shull, Stackhouse, Tebbs, Thatcher, Van Valkenburg, Vawter, Williams, White and Wolf - 36.
So the motion to recommit was laid on the table.
The question recurring on the third and last reading of the bill -
Mr. KIZER said if the previous question was to be sprung on this bill, he would hold the floor for any gentleman who wanted to speak. He denounced the proposition as an unconstitutional bill - a bill of censure. It looked like an act by a party desiring to dictate thought and action to others - to be brains for other men - and modestly calling it a case of emergency! He animadverted freely upon the provisions of the bill, and the incidents of this debate.
Mr. BELFORD. Was not the gentleman from Allen set forth in caucus as leader of Democrats in the House?
Mr. KIZER. Sir, I grubbed out the trail that brought you to this country. [Laughter.] They imported the gentleman as a page: 56[View Page 56] white man, but they have since made him black inside, and a kind of viper copperhead color outside. [Laughter ] He continued to answer the question in this vein, till the gentleman declared "satisfaction," and the Chair interposed for order. He then submitted objections to the bill, and the difficulties in the way of its enforcement - animadverting at length on the assumed-emergency for its passage.
Mr. VAWTER moved to adjourn, demanding the yeas and nays. But there was no second of ten members.
Mr. SPENCER. The evil that men do lives after them, and the good is interred with their bones. Such he believed was the case with the Democratic party, and the course and character of this debate illustrated the justice of its application. He urged considerations favoring the emergency for the passage of the bill.
Mr. HUGHES demanded the previous question, and there was a second.
The SPEAKER. The question is on the passage of the bill.
Mr. HUGHES closed the debate under the rule of the House. He referred to the consultation of Democratic members to break up the Legislature by resignation or bolting, if the Legislature did not suit them, by way of answer to the gentleman from Knox [Mr. Baker] This was the doctrine of secession - naked and pure. He declined to yield to interruption by Mr. Kizer. Whereupon on that he did not say yesterday, that Mr. Kizer had been selected as Democratic leader in caucus, but that Mr. Kizer was his leader.
Mr. H. then proceeded to reply to the gentleman from Knox [Mr. Baker,] to remarks personal to himself, which had been echoed by the applause of the House. And he deprecated the fashion of resorting to personalties in debate as considerations against public measures.
Under the pressure of the previous question, the vote was then taken on the passage of the bill, resulting, yeas 64, nays 32, as follows:
Yeas - Messrs. Belford, Bischof, Blanch, Brucker, Campbell, Carter, Chambers, Crain, Daggy, Donaldson, Dunn, Erwin. Evans, Ferris, Foulke, Funk, Geisendorff, Gordon, Greer, Griggs, Bartman, Hamilton, Higgins, Hopkins, Hudson, Hughes, Litson, Long, of Kosciusko, Martin, Mason, McCarthy, McClasky, McLean, McMurray, Miller, Moore Newcomb, O'Neil, North, Peelle, Prather, Ratliff, Rosser, Sabin, Scammahorn, Shook, Shuey, Skidmore, Smith, of Lagrange, Smith, of Wabash, Spencer, Stackhouse, Stafford, Stewart, Thrasher, Thomas, Wason, Watson, Williams, Wilson, Wolfer, Wolflin, Woods,and Mr. Speaker - 64.
Nays - Messrs. Baker, Barritt, Black, Bobo, Corey, Crowe, Douglass, Edmonson. Fuller, Green, Hays, Honneus, Hostetter, Hungate, Inman, Kiser, Long, of Jackson, Lopp, Matthis, McFadden, Morrison, Montgomery, Ross,Shanks, Shields, Shull, Tebbs, Thacher, Van Valkenburgh, Vawter, White and Wolfe - 32.
Pending the call, the following explanations were entertained under the rule:
Mr. HOSTETTER would have been in favor of the bill but for the emergency clause. As it is, he was compelled to vote "No."
Mr. MATTHIS stated yesterday that he was in favor of the first section. The provisions of the bill were such that the guilty parties could not be reached - the men who go as leaders into a conspiracy and advise and urge men to bolt. He would have been glad to see the bill referred for amendment in this particular.
Mr. McFADDEN had always been opposed to resigning or bolting for the purpose of obstructing legislation. If it were not for the emergency clause many Democrats would have voted for the bill. The time and the manner in which the bill had been presented so as to cast censure upon the Democratic party here as though they would obstruct legislation, compelled him to vote '"No."
Mr. MORRISON. The reason for his opposition was this: The bill portended that the majority of the House intended some unfair legislation, and so they take this method of censuring the minority. He said further, that he did not propose to resign or leave his place to avoid any vote of the session.
Mr. O'NEIL had some reasons for voting against the bill; but constitutionally he was opposed to bolting - a Democrat holding the cardinal principle of unswerving fidelity to the constitution and laws. He voted "aye."
Mr. SHULL would not oppose the bill if the emergency clause were out. He voted "no."
Mr. STACKHOUSE did not come here with his own consent, but he stood here a free man - a citizen of the United States and a representative of the people of Orange county, and he expected to be held responsible for his acts. His people were always opposed to bolting. It had been practiced by both parties, but for himself he came here to stand for his people and whenever called upon to vote he expected to do so. He was not controlled by any power but the Constitution, which he supposed he had taken an oath 100 times to support, and he meant to keep that oath. He had a large interest in the welfare of he people of the State of Indiana. He would not obstruct legislation on a question of apportionment raised here by party that had worked themselves into majority under an apportionment made by the Democratic party. He would become no party to break a quorum on that account. He meant to cooperate with his page: 57[View Page 57] fellow members and act as he might have light upon every question affecting the well being of the people of the State. He voted "aye."
Mr. WILLIAMS had thought the penalty too great; but he believed the bill in its general provisions was right. He could wish that the emergency clause was out and that the passage of the bill could have been delayed longer; but as he did not expect to bolt and was in fact pledged not to do so; upon the passage of the bill he would vote "aye."
Mr. WOLFE did not believe this measure ought to have been introduced at this time. It cast a censure upon the minority here, and he could not vote to censure either himself or his friends consistently. He had desired to see a bill something like this pass, but under this censure as it now stands he would vote "no."
So the bill was passed with an amendment of title, striking out "Legislature" and inserting "General Assembly" in lieu.
THE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
On motion by Mr. HIGGINS, the House took up the joint resolution of the Senate [No. 1] for ratifying the proposed amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
The proposition having been read the first time -
On the further motion of Mr. H. it was referred to the Special Committee on Constitutional Amendments.
The House then [at 5 o'clock] adjourned till to-morrow morning 9 o'clock.
