THE BREVIER LEGISLATIVE REPORTS.
TENTH VOLUME.
INDIANA LEGISLATURE.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
TUESDAY, January 26, 1869.The House met at ten o'clock a. m.
The Speaker directed the Clerk to read the journal of Friday; which on the motion of Mr. CORY, was suspended till to-morrow. On his further motion the Prison Committee obtained leave of absence to visit the Prisons.
On the motion of Mr. DUNN, Mr. Mason obtained leave of absence till to-morrow.
After repeated callings of the roll to determine a quorum--
Mr. WILE submitted a paper declaring that the numerous charges preferred; of frauds committed in the management of prisons, called for a thorough investigation of the subject, and he offered the following preamble and resolution:
WHEREAS, The interests of the State in the management of affairs of the respective Prisons, North and South, demands a full and complete investigation of its workings; Therefore,
RESOLVED, That the Committee on Prisons be, and is hereby, empowered to send for persons and papers to enable them to get at the facts connected therewith.
It was adopted.
PETITIONS.
Were presented, read or described, and appropriately referred, as follows:
Mr. WILDMAN presented a petition for education of colored children.
Messrs. Cory, two; Jump, Stewart of Ohio, Breckinridge, Davidson, Taber, Gordon, Buskirk, Wilson, two; Odell, Shoaff, Ruddell, nine; Dittemore, Vater, McFadin, Barnett, Lamborn, Bates, Williams of Hamilton, Stewart of Rush, Field of Lagrange, Green, Wile, Vardeman, Hyatt, Johnson of Parke, Sleeth, Hutchins, Miller, Barrett, Britton, McDonald, McBride, and the Speaker, nine petitions on the subject of railroads, railroad extortions and consolidations.
Mr. Baker for legislation for the reformation of women.
Mr. Miner with reference to the appraisement of real estate.
REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES.
Mr. BOBO from the Committee on the Judiciary, returned Mr. Mitchell's Common Pleas bill [H. R. 3] with amendments.
On motion of Mr. DUNN, Messrs. Wilson and Welborn were added to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. GILHAM, in obedience to instructions, reported a bill from the Committee on Education fixing the salary of the Superintendent of Public Instruction at two thousand five hundred dollars per annum. Such salary to begin on the 15th of March, 1869, etc., which, was read as House bill No. 112.
It was referred to the Committee on Fees and Salaries.
Mr. VATER from the Committee on Education returned Mr. Osborn's School bill [H. R. 20] and Mr. Ratliff's School bill [H. R. 45] with amendments by way of substitutes for both.
Mr. OSBORN moved ineffectually that this report be made the special order for half past two o'clock this afternoon.
On his further motion, it was made the special order for to-morrow at half past two o'clock.
Mr. McGREGOR from the Committee on Fees and Salaries, returned Mr. Cave's gravel road bill [H. R. 110,] with amendments.
Mr. WILSON from the same Committee returned Mr. McDonald's bill [H. R. 83] page: 182[View Page 182] without amendment, recommending its passage.
CONSTRUCTION OF THE CONSTITUTION.
Mr. ZOLLARS, from the special committee to consider the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of the Greensburgh Turnpike Company against the State, that it is only necessary to set forth and print the revised or amended act, submitted a report recommending that the ruling of the Court in the above case be adopted as the practice of this House.
The report was concurred in.
DELAY IN THE MAILS.
Mr. McFADIN submitted the following:
WHEREAS, It is reduced to a moral certainty, and become a notorious fact, that most, if not all of the mail matter, papers, etc., sent by the members of this House, through the post office, fail to reach their destination in due time, sometimes being a week late, if received at all, showing gross negligence, on the part of the Post Office Department in this city, or other places; therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That a special committee of three be appointed by the Speaker on behalf of the House to investigate and correct the wrong, if possible, and report to this House.
In addition to the statement made by the gentleman to the effect that papers sent from the House were more than a week in some cases, in going a distance that a man can travel in a day--
Mr. SLEETH stated that papers he had mailed here, were more than a week in going but thirty-seven miles.
Messrs. NEFF and DITTEMORE added their experience also, which was of a like character with the above.
The resolution was adopted.
Whereupon--
The SPEAKER appointed Messrs. McFadin, Sleeth and Pierce of Vigo, to serve as said committee.
Mr. ZOLLARS submitted a resolution calling on the Judiciary Committee for his bill [H. R. 5] to amend the one hundred and third section of the Practice Act, relative to the argument of criminal cases without amendment, supposing that it was retained by the said committee for want of time for action. He offered a few considerations on the importance of his proposed modification in the order of the argument in criminal causes--providing that the counsel for the State shall close the argument, confining himself to a review of the new points made by the counsel for defense.
Mr. DUNN, on behalf of the Committee, stated that the general disposition of its members was to remodel the criminal law so as to embrace the matter of the gentleman's bill.
Mr. ZOLLARS stated the present disadvantages on the part of the prosecution in all criminal actions, and the advantages on the part of the defense--undue and unjust advantages. What his bill proposed was simply that the State shall have the closing argument. It was confined to that point alone--a much needed matter in the legislation of the State.
Mr . RATLIFF raised the point of order against the resolution, that the House could not so instruct the committe.
The subject was passed over for the orders of the day.
Mr. STEWART of Ohio, moved ineffectually, that the orders of the day be suspended for the introduction of resolutions and bills.
Mr. DITTEMORE offered a resolution instructing the special committee on railroads to report progress on the 8th day of February, which, after some discussion, was rejected.
BASIS OF APPRAISEMENTS.
On motion of Mr. BUSKIRK, the House suspended the orders of the day for the consideration of the "gold basis" bill [H. R. 58], reported from the Committee on Ways and Means on the 18th of January, the question being on the final passage of the bill.
Mr. VATER took the floor in opposition to the bill. It was unjust to discriminate between real estate and personal property, as proposed in this bill, for the first year's assessment under it. The former, by the provisions of the bill, is to be assessed on a gold basis, and the latter on a currency basis until after the year 1869. Heal estate is to pay taxes according to its value in gold, and personal property according to its value in greenbacks, making a discrimination in favor of real estate to the extent of thirty-six cents on the dollar. He pronounced such legislation contrary to the spirit and letter of the Constitution, He then quoted section thirty-three, Article one, to the effect that no law shall be passed giving to any class special immunities, and the applicability he found in the fact that the bill discriminated in favor of the holders of personal property, the bankers, and stock jobbers. The inconvenience too, that would result to appraisers, from the diversity of judgments in regard to the principle to be observed in valuing lands on a gold basis, is another serious objection to the bill. Any one knows, said he, a house and lot would not bring its true value at public sale, if the bidders were notified beforehand that the payment must be made in gold, and this is occasioned by the scarcity of the gold commodity in this market. The gold having ceased to be a circulating medium has become a marketable commodity, the value of which is regulated by the bulls and bea^s of New York City, who run it up and down in the scale of value at will. We commence appraisements in January, and gold may be higher and lower before they are concluded. Then, again, it was dangerous to make legal distinctions between gold, page: 183[View Page 183] which is not the money of the country and what is by law declared to be the money of the money of the county. And yet gentlemen would have the mode of assessment so changed for the sake of uniformity, they allege--that gold shall be the basis. Why, to-day gold is, say thirty-three per cent, premium; to-morrow, by a combination of the bulls or bears, it may be thirty-six, and next day forty per cent. Why ask the appraisement of property on a gold basis, when of necessity the relative values of currency and gold are such, that the variations in the value of one, find a corresponding variation in the other? What can the object be, other than to make an individious distinction between the money of the country and coin? It can be no other than to cast discredit upon the circulating medium of the country. Would not the effect of such a law be to create the impression abroad that the State of Indiana, lacking confidence in the currency of the country, had determined to employ it no longer as a basis of value, and to leave it to its fate? While the debt of the country remains unpaid, and the greenback circulates as a legal tender, in token of the Government's intention to pay the debt, the value of the circulating medium will be to some degree at the mercy of the speculators, but as every change in its value will find a corresponding change in the price of gold, it makes no difference for the purposes of taxation as to the basis of assessment. There is but one theory that can find support and strength in the passage of a law abandoning the currency as a basis of appraisement for taxable purposes, and that is the theory of repudiation. If we would serve the enemies of the country, we cannot do it better than by thus abandoning the currency, which is no less than the sacred promises we have made to return the money our people lent the Government, to insure its perpetuity. He discussed the probability of the resumption of specie payments, holding that that event will probably be postponed till the national debt shall be paid.
Mr. BUSKIRK, of Monroe, said that he was not prepared to follow the gentleman who had just closed, in his elaborately prepared argument. He would, however, consume a little of the time of the House, in referring to two or three grievous errors into which the gentleman had fallen. He felt almost satisfied that after all the gentleman's research on the question of law, and his thought expended in framing an argument, there were many members in the House who understood the question now much better than he does.
He was one of the few who do not highly value that sort of political sagacity, that finds in every measure that meets with the favor of the opposite party "a nigger in the wood pile,"or that was continually discovering in the friendliness of political opponents to certain measures, sure indications of something like gunpowder plots for blowing up the country generally. The bill, he said, does not contemplate any injustice in the way of special immunities to any class of property holders, nor will the effect of its provisions prove to be unequal. This bill merely provides for the appraisement of real estate according to its gold value. The taxes on this appraisement are not assessed until 1869, and the bill provides that after 1869 the appraisement of personal property shall also be made on the gold basis, so that the first taxes collected from real estate on the gold appraisement, will come exactly at the same time that taxes are collected on the personal property assessed on the same basis. As to the fluctuations in gold, the gentleman forgets that gold is the standard of value that no conditions can change. A gold dollar is worth the same to-day that it was yesterday, that it ever was worth, or that it will be worth to-morrow. Its value does not change as do values of wheat and corn, and such commodities that are governed altogether by the law of supply and demand. The cry about political capital to be manufactured to our hurt, out of the passage of a bill abandoning the currency basis is all imaginary. They say that taxes will be higher on the dollar. So they may; but will not the number of dollars upon which taxes are paid be materially less, with the property appraised on the gold basis? If there were really anything in the objection made to the bill, on account of the injustice done the personal property owners for a year, I might answer that by saying that to appraise on greenback basis will do the holder of real estate injustice. And in this way: It is certainly the object of the National Legislature to bring about, as speedily as possible, a return to specie payment. If Governor Morton's plan is adopted we might look for such a consummation, we are told, within three years. In that case would the land owners not be suffering a great injustice from the appraisement on a currency basis? Remember this appraisement stands for five years, and in case of a return to specie payment, the land owners would be paying taxes upon the land appraised on a currency basis, and the personal property holders on property appraised on a gold basis.
Mr. WILSON said the position of the gentleman from Monroe seems to be that everybody's argument, except his own, is fallacious. We are all apt to think most of our own views, however and we should be charitable. I have thought, and now think, the bill open to many objections: One is that there can be no good attained by requiring an appraisement of property according to its value in gold, while, for page: 184[View Page 184] all practical purposes, gold does not represent the value of property in this country. Gold, as a peculiar commodity, does not affect land values as it does the value of goods. Its sphere seems to be independent of the relations existing between the currency and the general business of the country outside of speculating circles. A house and lot worth to-day one thousand five hundred dollars in currency, is worth no less to-morrow, because greenbacks are worth to-morrow in the speculating circles of New York, two cents less on the dollar, and gold two cents more. It is only for the purposes of speculation that gold values are so variable. Real estate or manufactures are not affected to-day by the gold variations. The solid legitimate business of the country is done on a greenback basis, for that currency represents the honor and integrity of the country. While it continues to hold the confidence of the people, and that will be while the people remain determined to uphold the country's honor, it will continue to be the basis for all trade, and the representative of substantial worth. If he were to look only to his own interest, he might vote for this bill, because real estate was assessed for taxation but once in five years; and real estate is not now assessed at half its value, and this description of property is constantly increasing in value.
Mr. SHOAFF asked if a man has one thousand dollars in gold, will it be assessed at its value in greenbacks?
Mr. WILSON answered that the Assessors would have no such right; because gold and greenbacks are both legal money--the latter a legal tender. It were much better to allow this question to rest just where it now is, in the courts and business of the country.
Mr. DITTEMORE demanded the previous question, which he waived for a motion to adjourn.
The SPEAKER formally announced the signature of Mr. Long's Deputy Appraisers bill [H. R. 8.]
And the House took a recess till half past two o'clock p. m.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
THE GOLD BASIS BILL.
The SPEAKER resumed at two and a half o'clock p. m., and announced the consideration of the unfinished business, viz: The Ways and Means gold basis appraisement bill [H. R. 58.]
Mr. JOHNSON of Parke, remarked that he was in no condition of health to discuss the bill as he would like, but he could not allow the question to pass, without uttering his protest against it. He addressed the House against the bill, assuming that it made inequality in the assessments of real and personal property for the year 1869.
Mr. BUSKIRK explained that though the bill prescribed the gold basis for personal property not till 1870, the appraisement of real estate for 1869 did not go into effect till next year.
Mr. COFFROTH also excepted his line of argument.
Mr. JOHNSON still maintained that the assessments for the year 1869 go on the duplicate this fall. This left the millions of personal property, embracing, perhaps, one-third of all the property in the State, taxed this year thirty-five per cent, higher than the realty of the State. He alleged the injustice of the argument of the friends of the bill to tax on a specie basis, which they never expected to reach.
Mr. COFFROTH. They would reach that by appreciating greenbacks.
Mr. JOHNSON continued, asserting the injustice of taxing on a fluctuating basis. If greenbacks will pay a debt, dollar for dollar, let us tax on that basis. But he opposed the bill chiefly because it taxes personal property higher for the first year. He would have all appraisements in lawful currency at its value at the time the appraisements are made.
Mr. SHOAFF suggested the present inequality--taxing one thousand dollars in gold the same as one thousand three hundred and sixty dollars in property that would be required to buy it.
Mr. JOHNSON answered the objection and continued. He urged also the objection that real estate is appraised but once in five years, while the personal property is taxed every year on a fluctuating basis. He moved to postpone the consideration and recommit the bill.
The SPEAKER ruled that the motion was out of order, the bill having been engrossed and read three times. It can not be recommitted with instructions, except by a two-thirds vote.
Mr. OSBORN considered the danger of hurrying this proposition without due consideration. What good was proposed by this hill? It was not to reduce taxes, nor to make greater uniformity in taxation.
Mr. BUSKIRK said he was informed that there was diversity as to the basis of taxation-- in some counties upon a gold, and in some a currency basis.
Mr. OSBORN then spoke to the difficulty of fixing the value of property in gold. With gold, for the past years, the country has had but little to do. But Congress says-- property--incomes shall be given in at its value in lawful money. Now, if the General Assembly say in gold, where was the equality?
Mr. BUSKIRK suggested that resumption of specie payment would make inequality page: 185[View Page 185] against merchants and bankers before the end of live years-- as the law now stands.
Mr. OSBORN answered and continued. It was an equality in the standard of all appraisements, which he desired. He deprecated the bill chiefly because it was a stab at the lawful currency of the country. Let it not be said in Wall street that greenbacks are not the stable currency for the basis of taxation. Then, if we derive no good from this bill, why vote for it? He looked at the folly of making greenbacks equal to gold by making more of them. And, after all, legislation could not govern the judgments of men in appraisements. Such were the prejudices now existing on the financial question, that it would hardly be possible to have appraisers elected, whose views on a subject of this kind would exactly coincide. There were those whose prejudices against the currency were such that they would not hesitate to lay themselves liable by giving hi their valuations on a gold basis despite the law, and we have had many such men under indictment for just such practices. He was aware that there were those who advocated the pernicious doctrine that greenbacks were not money, and should not be recognized as such, but he hoped it was not the object of gentlemen to get to a gold basis, that such gentlemen might value their property on the same basis with others. While the Government is endeavoring to so reconcile interests, and assimulate the values of the currency and gold, he thought it a poor time for the Legislature of Indiana to put itself on the record as an obstacle to such a desirable state of things. It should be remembered in considering the bill, that to the plank in the Democratic platform, which pronounced in favor of this currency, by declaring that greenbacks, which were good enough for the soldier are good enough for the bondholder, many members of that party owe their seats in this House to-day. If this is true, and none will gainsay it, does not this fact prove that the hearts of the people are all with the currency, and that they look upon their best interests as being inseparable from this paper medium? Most certainly, what then is the propriety or justice of a law that abandons this popular basis with which the people are well pleased, and thus casting discredit upon the national currency, as though there is danger that it would soon cease to ba a representation of value? If it be true that the greenback paid the soldier is good enough for the bondholder, why is not the greenback a good enough basis of appraisement for the property of the country? This currency, gentlemen, is indissolubly linked with the fate of this country. With it stands or with it falls the country. Greenbacks that are good enough to buy lands and houses and the necessaries of life with, are good enough as a basis for the valuation of that property. Those gentlemen who look to financial schemes proposed as the great panacea for the country's ills, and that promise a speedy return to specie payment, from which is to arise inequalities in taxation, owing to the duration of this appraisement, are like those people who look for the bag of gold at the end of the rainbow. These schemes may prove futile. Governor Morton may find that he was wrong. Let the Legislature of Indiana pass this bill, and you will find the national currency go down tomorrow on Wall street. And why, because the government is less able to redeem its notes than it was the day before? No, but because of the encouragement you give by that vote in the interests of repudiation.
Mr. COFFROTH, to answer Mr. Johnson of Parke's objection against real estate on gold, and personal on currency this year, proposed to amend the bill by recommitting with instructions to strike out the words "made after the year 1869," as to real property.
Mr. WILDMAN. It will be remembered that this bill followed upon his resolution for an equal basis. And, as the bill was objectionable, because it proposed inequality, he proposed to recommit it, with instructions to strike out "gold" and insert "currency" in lieu.
Mr. COFFPOTH made the point that the sense of this House has been already taken against this identical proposition.
Mr. VATER held that "currency" and "greenbacks" do not mean the same for this point of order.
The SPEAKER held that the point was well taken as against both propositions.
Mr. BUSKIRK desired that this question be now settled.
The SPEAKER then entertained Mr. Coffroth's amendment.
Mr. GORDON, because there was little more than a quorum, proposed to postpone and make the bill and proposed amendments the special order for day after to-morrow at half-past two o'clock.
Mr. Coffroth's motion was rejected--50 to 29--two-thirds not voting in the affirmative.
Mr. COFFROTH. Since the House refused to amend, he hoped the friends of the bill would adhere to the question on its passage now, and reject the motion to postpone. The Senate could supply the needed amendments.
The motion to postpone was rejected--affirmative 36; negative 42.
Mr. COFFROTH demanded the previous question, and there was a second, and the main question ordered.
The bill was then rejected--yeas 42, nays 43--as follows:
page: 186[View Page 186]YEAS--Messrs. Addison, Admire, Baker, Bates, Bobo, Britton, Buskirk, Calvert, Carnahan, Coffroth, Cotton, Cox, Dittemore, Fuller,Furnas,Green, Hatchings, Hyatt, Johnston of Montgomery, Lawler, Logan, McBride, McDonald, McFadin, McGregor, Miller, Miles, Mock Montgomery, Neff, Odell, Palmer, Pierce of Vigo, Shoaff, Shoemaker, Smith, Stewart of Rush, Tebbs, Welborn, Wile, Zenor and Zollars-- 42.
NAYS--Messrs. Barnett, Beeler, Bowen, Chittenden, Davidson, Davis, Dunn, Fairchild, Field of Lake, Field of Lagrange, Gilham, Gordon, Hall, Hamilton, Higbee, Higgins, Johnson of Parke, Johnson of St. Joseph, Jump, Millikin, Miner, Mitchell, Os-born, Overmyer, Peele, Pierce of Porter, Ratliff, Sabin, Skidmore, Sleeth, Stephenson, Stewart of Ohio, Sunman, Tabor, Underwood, Vardeman, Va-ter, Wildman, Williams of Hamilton, Williams of St. Joseph, Williams of Union, Wilson and Mr. Speaker--43
Mr. MITCHELL, explaining his vote said: It recurred so him that it can make no difference whether the property of the State is appraised on a gold or greenback basis, for the reason that the State requires only so much money to carry on its institutions. He regarded this now as a political question--a direct thrust at the currency, attempted by the Democracy in the interest of the odious doctrine of repudiation.
Mr. PIERCE of Vigo, explaining, referred to what he believed an unconstitutional feature in the bill, but voted for it in the belief that the Senate would correct that.
Mr. RATLIFF, explaining his vote, struck a balance between what is lost to the State by the increasing value of real estate for five years, and the disadvantage to the holders of personal property which is assessed every year, and preferred the law as it is, and, especially since it is generally believed that gold and greenbacks will come to the same standard. The real estate being appraised once in five years, and personal property once in each year, the increase in the value of real estate is not taken into the account for taxation; and should this bill become a law, and the property assessed accordingly, this increase of value will not be reached; but should the assessment be made on a greenback basis, and should greenbacks and gold merge to the same standard, as is anticipated, the increase of real estate in value, will be partially balanced on the greenback basis. The assessment of real estate being on a greenback basis, and at a higher rate compared with gold, will be partially compensated for by the enhanced value which cannot be directly reached for taxation. Believing the value of gold, in greenbacks, will decrease as faith in the government increases, I therefore shall record my vote against this bill.
Mr. STEWART of Rush, explaining, would not shrink from the support of the bill, because of the sheer justice of the proposition. He voted aye, because he believed it to be the object of the party in power to make the luxuries of life pay the burdens of taxation, and to exempt, so far as possible, the landed interests.
Mr. UNDERWOOD voted no, and said that he looked upon the bill as unfriendly to the best interests of the country in discrediting the curreucy.
So the bill was rejected.
The SPEAKER laid before the House a communication from the trustees of the Soldiers' Home at Knightstown, inviting members to visit that institution next Saturday.
The invitation was formally accepted.
On motion of Mr. OYERMYER, leave of absence was granted to the Committee on Organization of Courts.
ORDERS OF THE DAY.
The Senate concurrent resolution for a joint committee of seven--four on the part of the House--to consider the expediency of a new Gubernatorial mansion, coming up--
The vote thereon discovered no quorum present, on motion--
The House adjourned till to-morrow morning at ten o'clock
