AFTERNOON SESSION.
The Senate was called to order at two o'clock by the President pro tem.
Mr. RICE offered a resolution, which was adopted, that when the Senate adjourn it adjourn to meet to-morrow at two o'clock p. m.
He did this in order to give the committees time to work.
Mr. GREEN desired to get at the bill [H. R. 8] concerning the appointment of appraisers' deputies, etc., which was passed the other day. He wanted to see it amended, but as it has received the signature of the Speaker of the House, he did not understand exactly how to retrace the legislative steps.
NATIONAL FINANCES.
Mr. WOLCOTT moved to reconsider the rote of this morning authorizing the appointment of a Joint Committee on National Finances.
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. WOLCOTT offered a concurrent resolution as follows:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Senate of the State of Indiana, (the House of Representatives concurring,) That a joint committee to consist of three Senators and five Representatives, be appointed to take into consideration joint resolutions five and six, as introduced and amended in the Senate, on the subject of national finances, and that the Senate committee report to the General Assembly such action as in the opinion of such committee the General Assembly should rake on the subjects so referred.
The resolution was adopted, and the PRESIDENT pro tem. appointed Messrs. Wolcott, Fisher and Johnston, of Montgomery, said Committee on the part of the Senate.
Mr. GRAY moved to take from the table the bill [S. 72] amending section eighteen of the law of descents, approved May 14, 1852.
The motion was agreed to.
On his further motion the bill was recommitted to the Judiciary Committee; Mr. Gray saying that the amendment proposed gives to the widow having no children by a previous marriage, the right to alienate real estate with the consent of her husband.
Mr. ANDREWS presented a petition, for protection against Railroad combinations, which was referred to the Committee on Corporations without reading.
A communication from the managers of the Soldier's Home inviting members to visit the Home next Saturday, was read.
On motion of Mr. KINLEY the invitation was accepted.
Leaves of absence were granted to Messrs.. Jaquess, Lee and Johnson, of Spencer, until Monday next.
REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES.
Mr. FISHER, from the Committee on Printing, to which was referred the resolution concerning the printing of one hundred copies of Quartermaster General Stone's reports, reported a recommendation that the Quartermaster General's report be printed in the documentary journal only.
Mr. FlSHER also made a report from the same committee recommending that two hundred copies of the report of the Trustees of the Wabash & Erie canal be printed for the use of the Senate.
Mr. JOHNSON, of Spencer, from the Committee on Rights and Privileges returned the bill [S. 75] to elevate the standard ot the medical profession, recommending its passage.
Mr. HUFFMAN, from the same same committee, returned the bill [S. 86] for the protec- of growing fruit trees, with a recommendation that it lie on the table.
These reports were severally concurred in.
Mr. RICE, by direction of the Committee on Corporations, offered a resolution, which was adopted, that the committee be allowed to employ a clerk.
BILLS FOR ACTS
Were introduced, read the first time and referred to appropriate committees, viz:
By Mr.CARSON [S. 116] to prohibit any County Commissioner from acting in any other capacity under or by virtue oi appointment of said Commissioners.
By Mr. JAQUESS [S. 117] to amend section five, of the common school law.
By Mr. RICE [S. 118] to amend the sixteenth section of the contested election law to correct a misprint.
By Mr. HOWK [S. 119] to fix the times for holding court in the Fourth Common Pleas District.
By Mr. KINLEY [S. 120] to provide for the government and discipline of the State prisons and the oversight of county jails. (It accords with the recommendations of the meeting on prison reform.) Referred to the Committee on Prisons, and two hundred copies ordered to be printed.
Mr. KINLEY presented a communication from Charles Coffin, accepting the invitation to address the Legislature, and naming the 29th of this month as the time.
page: 178[View Page 178]Mr. STEIN, by leave, reported from the Committee on Rights and Privileges the bill [S. 15] for repeal of the fish law, recommending that it lie on the table. The report was concurred in; but subsequently this vote was reconsidered, and the report was withdrawn. The Committee had agreed to recommend its passage, and the report was wrongly made out.
SENATE BILLS ON THE SECOND READING.
Mr. Caven's bill [S. 24] amending section seventy eight of the Practice Act, was read the second time. The Committee amendment was agreed to, and the bill ordered engrossed for the third reading.
Mr. Caven's bill [S. 25] concerning witnesses and their examination in criminal actions, was read the second time and passed to the third reading.
Mr. Turner's bill [S. 29] amending section seventy of the act for the election of justices of the peace, etc., was read the second time and passed the third reading.
SALARIES OF JUDGES.
Mr. Scott's bill, [S. 45] allowing to Supreme Judges a salary of four thousand dollars, Circuit and Criminal three thousand dollars and Common Pleas two thousand dollars, being read the second time--
Mr. CARSON moved to recommit the bill with instructions to strike out the first two gums, leaving the two salaries as they now are three thousand and two thousand dollars. Under the present state of financial affairs the people are not able to increase the salaries and this is not a time to increase the burdens of the people. The amount of delinquent taxes last year ran up to about two million dollars.
Mr. KINLEY moved to amend the instructions by increasing the salaries of Common Pleas Judges to two thousand dollars--not effecting the others.
Mr. CARSON accepted the amendment, as a substitute for his motion.
Mr. STEIN spoke in behalf of the now poorly paid Judges. From the first he favored the bill. Of all public servants the judiciary are the most meritorious, poorest paid, hardest working, and least complaining while they are the most helpless of any. They are hard working, and occupy a position where ability is required. There was not a lawyer within the sound of his voice who would not say the present pay is inadequate. We are quite willing to squander money in the administrative department, where the requirements are not great, but in the judicial, where extensive and long experience at the bar is demanded, we make an exceedingly parsimonious display. They are inadequately paid for their services; and it is not the desire of the people that their judges should be turned off in this way--they are willing to be taxed in order to have a good judiciary. We now propose to elevate the independence of the judiciary--a thing BO very essential to the office. No lawyer of any standing or practice is justified in retiring from the bar upon the present salary. He was for elevating the independence--he would not say the standard of requirements--for he was disposed to be liberal with this most meritorious class.
Mr. GRAY moved to amend the instructions by making the salary of the Supreme Judges three thousand five hundred, of the Circuit Judges two thousand five hundred, of the Common Pleas Judges two thousand. There should not be more than five hundred dollars difference between the Circuit and Common Pleas Judges, for reasons which he gave. The former do not have to pay from their own salaries judges who occupy the bench when they are sick or absent, but the latter do.
Mr. STEIN said it was generally known that a meeting of the judges of the State was held here at about the time of the opening of the Legislature, and that the amounts proposed in the bill were agreed upon at that time. They are not a rapacious nor grasping class of men, and he thought their request was entitled to respect.
Mr. GRAY said he had understood that such a meeting was held, but that no common Pleas Judges were present, and that they did not regard the salaries proposed as equitable.
Mr. HANNA thought the bill should not have gone to the Judiciary Committee in the first place, but to the Committee on the Organization of Courts. He knew that the salaries had been too low in the past. He thought it should go to the committee without instructions, and if that committee would recommend an increase he would cheerfully vote for it.
Mr. SCOTT hoped the request of Mr. Hanna might be granted. He thought it should go to them untrammeled. He suggested, also, that a proposition was pending to increase the docket fees so that they will pay the entire amount of the increase proposed in salaries, and the committee should consider that fact in this connection.
Mr. KINLEY would, with the consent of the Senator from Allen, [Mr. Carson,] withdraw his motion.
Mr. CARSON consented, and the bill was referred to the Committee on the Organization of Courts without instructions.
BILLS ORDERED ENGROSSED.
Mr. Denbo's bill [S. 51] amending section nine, and repealing part of section sixteen of the act approved May 20, 1852, concerning page: 179[View Page 179] the partition of lands, etc., was read the second time and passed to the third reading.
Mr. Scott's bill [S. 55] creating the twenty-third Judicial Circuit, etc., establishing a Criminal Court in the county of Vigo, was read the second time and passed to the third reading.
Mr. Case's bill [S. 56] amending sections one hundred and thirty-three and one hundred and thirty-four of the'act of June 17, 1852, concerning decedents' estates, was read the second time, with a committee amendment thereto. The amendment was agreed to and the bill passed to the third reading.
JURORS FEES.
Mr. Denuo's bill [S. 58] amending section sixteen of the officers fee act, approved March 2,1855, refering to jurors fees, was read the second time, with a committee amendment thereto.
Mr. FISHER thought the bill was about doubling the fees of jurors, and that was too much of an increase. He moved to strike out two dollars and a half, and insert two dollars per diem.
Mr. GREEN opposed the amendment. Two dollars and a half was not too much. The low price paid to jurors has created a class of professional jurors, who hang around every Court house.
Mr. CARSON. The present rate allowed jurors is one dollar and a quarter a day, and a pretty considerable sum is paid in some counties, even at that rate. He considered it a fair compensation, but the increase proposed in the bill was too much. He spoke in favor of retrenchment, as the people were taxed enough under the present law.
Mr. WOLCOTT moved to amend the amendment by making the per diem one dollar and a half. The increase of pay might also increase the class of professional jurors.
This amendment to the amendment was rejected, by yeas 0, nays 41.
The amendment was then agreed to.
On motion of Mr. CARSON, the constitutional restriction was dispenses with--ayes 42, nays 0--the bill was read the third time, an emergency clause was added by consent, and the bill was finally passed the Senate by ayes 41, nays 0.
Mr. Caven's bill [S. 69] regulating changes of venue, attendance of witnesses in criminal case?, etc., was read the second time.
On motion of Mr. CAVEN, it was recommitted to the Judiciary Committee, that it might considered together with another bill embodying the same provisions.
Mr. Wolcott's bill [S. 64] concerning title to cemeteries, was read the second time and passed to the third reading.
Mr. Humphrey's bill [S. 67] amending section five of the township business act of February 18, 1859, was read the second time and passed to the third reading.
HORSE THIEF DETECTIVES.
Mr. Beardsley's bill [S. 68] amending section one of the act for the formation of Horse Thief Detective Associations, approved March 9, 1862, being read the second time--
Mr. HUGHES moved to indefinitely postpone the bill. Such bills are a violation of the fundamental principles of government the incorporation of companies to execute the laws. We might as well incorporate companies to hold courts or perfect titles. Sometimes such organizations become bands of regulators. The Governor in his message speaks pretty strongly of the organization in Jackson county. He did not know that he would go quite so far himself, as where the authorities fail to do their duty, the people will themselves execute the law. The same principle would incorporate a company to hang the Reno's. As a logical consequence of such bills, the Jackson county folks should be incorporated. He did not deny that municipal government fails in many instances to meet the ends of justice, but rather than pass such bills, let us strengthen the governments. The Jackson County affair is a living testimony of the inefficiency of government, and the uprising of that principle which impels the people to take care of themselves where the government fails to give the protection necessary. He did not deny that the government fails in many instances to answer the ends of justice. But let us strengthen it rather than go outside for assistance. He did not have anything to say concerning the actions of any of the men composing these organizations, but he believed that the same principle carried out would lead to just such things as that seen in Jackson county. It is wrong to incorporate companies to execute the laws.
Mr. CAVEN explained that this bill did not involve the question of incorporating such companies, but only provided that the maximum number of members might be two hundred instead of one hundred. It does not involve the principle of the matter.
Mr. HUGHES said he understood that very well, but he did not intend to vote to extend the evil. He spoke at some length, tracing out the regular steps which would lead such organizations to extreme measures, while insisting that the principle of the whole thing was wrong.
Mr. CARSON remarked that the law does not propose to enforce the law, but merely to aid in the detection of thieves.
Mr. HOOPER explained that the simple object of the bill was to double the number of members now allowed these associations. This proposition came from men who were possess page: 180[View Page 180] ed of the best motives. They were farmers who knew how difficult it was to detect this class of thieves. He did not see how the principle was involved in a mere proposition to increase the number of members of a company. The object was merely in order that the expenses might be lighter upon those who have to pay them, and he could see no objection to the passage of this bill.
Mr. HUGHES insisted that he opposed the bill only on principle. The channel through which justice is to be executed is a beaten path known to every man. It is asserted and lieved by many that one half or more of our currency is printed by the Government on genuine plates, yet there are counterfeits, and is there any company incorporated to find out who makes the counterfeits? Why should we have corporations outside of the laws of the land to detect any perpetrators of crime? These organizations generally run into organized violence--regulators, etc. Does their corporate capacity give them any more rights than a private citizen? Why organize a power unknown to the law to execute the law? It is but an acknowledgement that the machinery of law and government is deficient. When we can lay our hands on these statutes we ought to repeal them all. He could not countenance such organizations, any more than similar ones for the detection of murderers and counterfeiters.
Mr. CARSON did not have such strong objections to the law as the Senator from Monroe (Mr. Hughes), although he admitted that the law was not sufficiently guarded. If confined to offering rewards and other simple provisions of that nature, he would not object.
Mr. HOOPER was of the opinion that the principles of class of laws was not really the question now before the Senate. If the law is wrong, there ought to be a proposition made for its repeal; but experience did not so show it to be. The law probably ought to be guarded better than it is.
Mr. STEIN said that whether the bill went up or down, he should have no opportunity to vote his exact sentiments. He was opposed to the organization of companies to execute the law and expressed his dissent to the proposition before the Senate. He opposed the entire principle underlying this line of legislation. An outrage can not be perpetrated in the name, and under the pretense of law; and these associations are likely to carry their privileges to an excess. He instanced a case in Benton county, where some of the members of such an organization suspected a man of making way with another who was missing, went to his house, dragged him out, and hung him up to compel him to confess. After torturing him for sometime, he did confess, in order to save his life, and was sent to jail, but the missing man turned up alive and well, and the suspected man was entirely innocent. He should vote for indefinite postponement of this bill, and for the repeal of all such laws as fast as opportunity offers.
The motion to indefinitely postpone the bill was agreed to.
Mr. Green's bill [S. 69] amending section four hundred and fifty-five of the general practice act of June 18, 1852, (concerning properly sold on execution) was read the second time.
On motion by Mr. STEIN the bill was recommitted.
On motion by Mr. CAVEN, his bill [S. 28] amending Section twenty-seven of the will act of May 31, 1852, was taken from the table and recommitted to the Judiciary Committee.
And then--
The Senate adjourned, by virtue of a resolution, till two o'clock p. m. to-morrow.
