THE BREVIER LEGISLATIVE REPORTS.
TENTH VOLUME.
INDIANA LEGISLATURE.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
MONDAY, February 22, 1869.The House met at two o'clock p. m., pursuant to adjournment.
Mr. WILDMAN presented the Lafayette and Indianapolis railroad claim for four hundred and ninety-six dollars which was referred without reading.
The SPEAKER directed a call of the House, and sixty-two members responded.
Mr. COFFROTH, because it was Washington's birth day, made an ineffectual motion that the House do now adjourn.
The call of the House proceeded.
Mr. WILLIAMS of Hamilton, under the claim of a question of privilege, submitted a a preamble and resolution for a special committee of three, to inquire and report on the practicability of heating the hall, otherwise than by the present contrivance to send up noxious "heated air from the lower rigions."
The SPEAKER said the resolution could not be entertained, pending a call of the House.
The Doorkeeper stoked up the fires and the stoves smoked.
Mr. COFFROTH said the stoves were smoking out of spite to us, for the reason that the House is in session on the 22d of February. He moved again to adjourn.
Mr. GORDON rose to a point of order. There is a rule of the House against smoking in the hall.
The yeas and nays on the adjournment were reported--yeas 23, nays 44.
Mr. UNDERWOOD appeared at the bar of the House in the custody of the Doorkeeper, and made excuse for absence.
On motion of Mr. NEFF, it was ordered that he be discharged from custody without penalty.
On motion of Mr. DAVIDSON, Mr. Williams of Hamilton's, resolution for a special committee to investigate the furnace below, was laid on the table.
THE CALENDAR.
The joint resolution [S. 7] for Congressional instructions for the repeal of the tenue of office law, was taken up in order on the third reading and finally passed the House--yeas 59, nays 8.
Mr. PIERCE of Porter, appeared at the bar in custody, and submitted excuse for absence.
He also was discharged without penalty.
Further proceedings under the call of the House was now dispensed with.
The bill [S. 142] to amend section five of the County Surveyor's act, was considered on the third reading.
On motion of Mr. PIERCE of Porter, the bill was referred to the Committee on County and Township Business, with instructions to amend the third section of the said Surveyors' act--to give the Surveyor falicity for collect his fees.)
The bill [S. 123] to amend section seventeen of the County Boards' act of June 17, 1852, in relation to county loans for county buildings and county debts, was taken up, and failed on the final reading in the House--yeas 49, nays 16--no quorum voting--
Whereupon--
Mr. DITTEMORE made an ineffectual motion to adjourn, and then, under a requirement of the rules
The SPEAKER directed another call of the House, which determed a quorumsixty-eight members.
The bill then failed in the House for want page: 460[View Page 460] of a constitutional majority--yeas 48, nays 20--as follows:
YEAS--Messrs. Addison, Barritt, Bates, Beatty, Beeler, Bowen, Breckinridge, Calvert, Carnahan, Cave, Chapman, Coffroth, Cory, Davidson, Dunn, Fairchild, Field of Lake, Field of Lagrange, Fuller, Furnas, Gilham, Gordon, Green, Higgins, Hutchings, Hutson, Johnson of Montgomery, Johnson of Parke, Kercheval, Logan, Long, McDonald, Millekan, Mock, Monroe, Pierce of Porter, Pierce of Vigo, Shoemaker, Skidmore, Stephenson, Stewart of Ohio, Sunman, Vardeman, Vater, Wildman, Williams of Hamilton, Zollars and Mr. Speaker--48.
NAYS--Messrs. Admire, Baker, Cox, Cunningham, Dittemore, Johnson of St. Joseph, McGregor, Miller, Miles, Mitchell, Montgomery, Neff, Odell, Sabin, Sleeth, Smith, Stewart of Rush, Underwood, Welborn and Zenor--20.
The joint resolution [S. 12] for instructions to reconsider the passage of an act of Congress for the adjustment of the claims of Mary Burress, of Marshall county, widow of Charles Burress deceased, was taken up and passed the final reading in the House--yeas 69, nays 0.
The bill [S. 94] teaching the consolidation of railroads, and declaring the effect of such consolidation, was taken up on the third reading (with the engrossed amendments of the House,) and it was passed the final reading yeas 59, nays 11with an amendment of title submitted by Mr. Coffroth.
On motion of Mr. PIERCE of Porter, the order of business was suspended to consider the concurrent resolution of the Senate just communicated, for a national salute this day; and the resolution was taken up.
On motion of Mr. FULLER, it was amended so as to change the time from twelve o'clock to six o'clock p. m.; and so it was adopted by the House.
Mr. BEELER moved that when the House adjours to-day, it shall be till nine o'clock tomorrow, and thenceforward daily at the same hour.
The order was adopted accordingly.
Mr. DITTEMORE moved ineffectually, that the House do now adjourn--yeas 22, nays 48.
WHO MAY NOT PRACTICE LAW.
The bill [S. 96] prohibiting Judges of the Supreme, Circuit and Common Pleas Courts, and Clerks of the Circuit Courts, Auditors, Treasurers, Sheriffs, and Recorders, and their deputies from practicing law in this State, was taken up on the third reading, with the engrossed amendment by Mr. Buskirk.
Mr. ZOLLARS hoped it would not go to the country that the House is legislating against the judges and officers of the higher courts, and in favor of the inferior courts of justice. If the proposition was not invidious but simply to keep the judiciary pure, then why not include the justices of the peace in this prohibition? He admitted that there is a law now on the statute books prohibiting Magistrates from practicing law, but it affixes no penalty for a violation of the provision. The penalty provided in this bill should apply as well to them as to Judges of higher courts and the county officers mentioned. Were the judges worse men than the justices of peace? He spoke generally against the passage of the bill--showing specially that to allow justices of the peace to practice law was to encourage litigation in the hands of shysters, and to encourage a class of common barristers. He insisted that the rejection last week of his amendment to include justices should be fatal to the bill. He moved to recommit the bill, with instructions to include justices of the peace.
Mr. COFFROTH raised the point of order that the House had once acted on the proposition
Mr. ZOLLARS said constables were included in this former proposition to amend.
Mr. COFFROTH then submitted no point.
On motion of Mr. ODELL, Mr. Zollars' motion was laid on the table--yeas 45, nays 22.
Mr. ZOLLARS then moved that the further consideration of the bill be indefinitely postponed.
On the motion of Mr. JOHNSON of Marshall, Mr. Zollars' motion was laid on the table-- yeas 52, nays 16.
Mr. WELBORN, whilst he believed the prohibition of the bill were well enough, and demanded by the interests of the people, he considered that the constitutional provision was against it--section 21, article 7. "Every person of good moral character, being a voter, shall be entitled to practice law," etc. He argued that it is not competent for the Legislature to lay any prohibitions of the kind provided in the bill.
Mr. COFFROTH replied that the question had been brought before the Supreme court, in a case arising under the law now in force, prohibiting magistrates from acting as attorneys, an the court sustained the law.
Mr. WELBORN said that his understanding was the court so decided on the ground that the public good required such protection. He still thought the decision unwarranted by the Constitution.
Mr. COFFROTH said he was not aware of the grounds on which the decision is based, but he simply knew that the Supreme Court had sustained the law, and that therefore it is competent for the Legislature to pass this bill.
The bill failed in the House--yeas 47, nays 23for want of a constitutional majority of 51.
Mr. COFFROTH desired that the House should pay proper respect to the anniversary, and moved to adjourn.
And then--
The House adjourned till nine o'clock a. m. to-morrow.
