THE BREVIER LEGISLATIVE REPORTS.
TENTH VOLUME.
INDIANA LEGISLATURE.
IN SENATE.
WEDNESDAY, February 24,1869.The Senate was called to order at nine o'clock, a. m., pursuant to adjournment, the Lieutenant Governor in the chair.
The Secretary's journal of yesterday's proceedings was read.
Mr. TURNER reported from the Committee on Finance, the bill making appropriation recommended by the Governor for the payment of balance of the purchase money--some eight or nine thousand dollars--on which the House of Refuge stands, recommending its passage.
As a matter of justice to the party interested, Mr. Turner asked for a suspension of the rules that the bill may be read the third time and passed now.
The motion was agreed to.
The bill was read again and finally passed the Senate by yeas 39, nays 2.
REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES.
By Mr. KINLEY, from the Committee on Education, returning House bill No. 62, to amend section one hundred and forty-seven of the Common School act, recommending its passage.
By Mr. SMITH, from the Committee on the Organization of Courts, returning Senate bill No. 242, creating the twenty-fifth Common Pleas District, recommending that it lie on the table.
By Mr. STEIN, from the same committee, returning House bill No. 111, reporting a substitute.
By Mr. SCOTT, from the special committee on the resolution concerning the distribution of the Adjutant General's report, recommended the distribution to employes of this General Assembly.
By Mr. HADLEY, from the special Committee on Fees and Salaries, returning Senate bill No. 160, fixing the salaries of county officers, recommending that it lie on the table.
By Mr. HANNA, from the same committee, returning Senate bill No. 217, regulating the fees of county officers, proposing a substitute therefor.
By Mr. CHURCH, from the Committee on Benevolent Institutions, returning Senate bill No 246, to amend sections four, thirteen and fifteen of the act creating the Soldiers' Home, with an amendment; recommending its passage.
By Mr. GRAY, from the Committee on Swamp Lands, returning Senate bill No. 270, to provide for the payment of certain claims for ditching out of the general swamp land fund; recommending its passage.
These reports were severally concurred in.
BILLS FOR ACTS
Were introduced, read the first time and referred to appropriate committees unless otherwise stated, as follows:
By Mr. HANNA, [S. 278] concerning contempt of courts by publication, etc.
By Mr. BRADLEY, [S. 279] constituting the Ninth Judicial Circuit.
By Mr. CRAVENS, [S. 280] to amend section one of the act regulating docket fees, approved June 4, 1861.
By Mr. HUGHES, [S. 281] providing for a suit as to the title of the State as Trustee in University Square, No. 25, in the city of Indianapolis, etc.
By Mr. HUGHES, [S. 282] defining and providing punishment for the crime of libel.
page: 489[View Page 489]By Mr. ARMSTRONG, [S. 283] to prevent the running at large of bulls, rams or bears.
By Mr. SHERROD, [S. 284] to provide for the erection and repair of any bridge across any stream forming the boundary line between two counties.
By Mr. WOLCOTT [S. 285] to amend section one of the act to incorporate the University o Notre Dame Du Lac, approved January, 1844.
It was passed to the second reading on motion of Mr. BELLAMY.
By Mr. HENDERSON, [S. 286] supplemental to an act incorporating the Franklin Insurance Company.
By Mr. ARMSTRONG, [S. 287] to amend section five of the act of December 19, 1865, to render uniform the assessment of personal property, etc.
By Mr. RICE, [S. 288] to amend sections twenty-five and twenty-eight of the act of June 7, 1852, dividing the State into counties, etc.
By Mr. CAVEN, [S. 289] establishing the Indiana State Industrial College [Agricultural.] The commissioners to locate it in some central location where donations to the amount one hundred and thirty thousand dollars are made, etc.
On motion, several bills were taken from the table and referred to appropriate committees.
Pending the introduction of bills, when Mr. Hughes offered his bill, S. 281, for a trial of title to University Square and moved for the suspension of the constitutional restriction that the bill may be advanced to its passage--
Mr. HANNA said: I object to this bill to believing it to be unconstitutional, under the provision that it no special law shall be passed to bring suit against the State. I move that the bill be rejected.
Mr. HUGHES. That is a very fine point. If the object was to sue the State it might be a good one. The object is to try the title to a particular piece of property which is claimed by the city of Indianapolis on the one hand, and by the Trustees of the State University on the other. The question to be determined is whether the University building is to be erected upon the square, or whether it shall be sold and the proceeds applied to the endowment of the State University. The State has no title to the square at all. But section two may be struck out, and that objection will be entirely removed. [He reads the bill.] If the Senator will listen to the bill he will find that his objection is entirely groundless.
Mr. HANNA. I do not make this motion out of any disrespect to the Senator or because of any captious objection. [He reads from the statutes.]
Mr. HUGHES. Is not that section confined to cases where judgment may be brought against the State?
Mr. HANNA. No sir.
Mr. HUGHES. Is there any liability in this case?
Mr. HANNA. There is damages claimed.
Mr. HUGHES. Against the property?
Mr. HANNA. Against the property and the property belongs to the State. These four sections were selected here and the city of Indianapolis laid off by commissioners who had power to lay off streets and alleys. They laid it off, and I take it for granted they marked "University Square" upon this square No. 25. They marked "Court House Square" upon another, and "Market House Square" upon another. The Legislature afterwards affirmed the title to this Court House Square. It said that square shall forever be set apart for the purposes of a county seat and that a Court House should be located upon it. If there is an act of the Legislature giving square No. 25 to the State University I have never seen it. If there is then, why insist on making the State a party to this transaction and making the State responsible for fees and costs?
Mr. HOOPER. An act passed January 26, 1827, says "and square 25 is hereby set apart for a State University."
Mr. HANNA. My recollection is that the State University is an organization. If there has been a grant by the State--the title having passed beyond the State to the State University the State is not a necessary party to this suit; and there is all the more reason for rejecting this bill if there is no necessity for it. Or, if they have not authority under the act to sell it, let the Legislature give them the power and let them try the question of title as against any claiming a title to it. If this title vests in the University, let the University bring suit to test this question, without our interference at all. We are absolutely forbidden to do it by special act. I think it would be a waste of time to consider this thing now.
Mr. HUGHES. I hope the Senate will indulge me. I am taken by surprise by this objection. Here is a valuable piece of property conceded on all hands to belong to the cause of education. The question is whether it means "use" or "site." That is a legitimate question of law. I presented my side some days ago, and the Senator from Marion [Mr. Cavin] presented the other side yesterday. Every person must see that there is a question of law in this thing. For the purpose of removing from the other bills pending before the body this question of the University Square and having the title settled before it is sold, so it will bring its full value in preference to having it sold with a cloud upon its title, I page: 490[View Page 490] bring in a bill that the State consents that the different litigants shall try the title, and inasmuch as the State is Trustee, the State may be represented there by counsel. And conferring the jurisdiction upon the Marion Circuit Court is necessary. The Senator comes in with a constitutional objection, and in support of his objection he reads that the State shall not be sued except by general law for any liabilities or damages accruing after the adoption of the constitution. Nobody pretends that there are any liabilities or damages which can be recovered against the State in this matter. The Senator says that the planting of trees and shrubbery is a claim against the State. I say it is against the property, and against nothing else. The Senator overlooks the fact that any question as to damages arose before the Constitution went into effect, because the title was perfected and completed before the Constitution went into effect. Finally the Senator discloses his opposition and affirms that the title to this square by the city is good.
Mr. HANNA. The Senator misunderstood me. I stated that there was no special act investing the title in any other than the State of Indiana, but there was a special act setting apart the Court House Square to the county, and that title could not be divested out of the State.
Mr. HUGHES. That shows that the Senator's opinion is hardly formed for there is a latter act than that read by the Senator from Whitley, [Mr. Hooper] which says that wherever the word "University" is used it shall be considered to mean "State University." If the bill should be passed and the Court decides the second section unconstitutional it will be considered as striken out of the bill and the title will be tried and judgment rendered. The last section of the act is very important; it forbids persons running up bills against this property.
Mr. HANNA. Why do we call upon the Governor to take possession of this square if it is the property of the University?
Mr. HUGHES. Because the State is Trustee. The Senator from Marion, yesterday said, that no human foot had trod upon this ground for several years, except those engaged in taking care of it. Now the position of the University is, that the city has no more right than any Senator to take possession of that property. The city is silently acquiring the title by possession. It may be said the title don't run against the State in this way. It may run against the State University however. If there is anything in the bill that is not right I will consent to any bill that will put this thing into a court to decide who is the owner of this square. If I had any idea that debate would have sprung up at this time I would not have introduced the bill. I hope the Senate will vote down the motion to reject the bill.
Mr. CAVIN. I hope the Senator will not insist upon suspending the rules, for I have not had time to examine the bill.
Mr. HUGHES. I withdraw that motion.
The motion to reject was rejected.
The bill, [H.R. 64] was read by title only, and referred to a committee.
HOUSE AMENDMENTS TO SENATE BILLS.
The House amendments to the bill [S. 94] touching the consolidation of railroads were read.
Mr. CRAVENS moved to concur in the House amendments with a substitute for sections six and seven, which work too great a hardship on railroad companies; and also an amendment to the House section eight, by striking out the word "principal" before the words "office within this State."
Mr. SCOTT moved the reference of the bill and amendments to the Judiciary Committee.
Mr. HUGHES offered instructions to amend so as this act shall not affect consolidations of railroads previously made, unless they accept its provisions.
Mr. STEIN moved for a change of reference to the Committee on Canals and Internal Improvements.
This motion was agreed to.
The instructions proposed by Mr. Hughes were declared out of order, as proposing to amend the bill itself.
THE COMMON SCHOOL SYSTEM.
The bill, [S. 244] to amend the Common School law, approved March 6, 1865, and adding supplemental sections thereto, coming up in regular order, it was read a second time.
Mr. JAQUESS and Mr. BRADLEY offerred amendments which were adopted.
And then--
The Senate took a recess till two o'clock, p. m.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
The Lieutenant Governor resumed the chair at two o'clock, p. m.
Mr. KINLEY demanded a call of the Senate.
It being order and taken but twenty-seven Senators answered to their names.
When a quorum had appeared--
On motion, further proceeding under the call was dispensed with.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR an- page: 491[View Page 491] nounced the business pending, at the time of recess for dinner.
Mr. BELLAMY moved to amend section two by providing that the Township Trustee shall enter on his duties on the Monday after the first Monday of June of each year.
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. KINLEY offered a substitute for section nineteen providing that a publication shall be made in the educational journals of the State of a list of the text books used etc., every four years, etc.
Mr. BELLAMY and Mr. GRAY opposed the adoption of this substitute.
Mr. JOHNSTON of Montgomery, moved to strike out section nineteen.
Mr. HUGHES moved to indefinitely postpone the bill and amendments.
The motion was rejected on a division--affirmative 8, negative 16.
Mr. HUGHES opposed legislating, as though human nature was corrupt from the foundation stone to the turret. A system of education that compromises a provision--as section nineteen does--that each of the ninety-two counties in this State may have different spelling books, different grammars and different geographies, stamps its author as unfit for the task. And this is done to prevent some book seller corrupting the State Board of Education, or the State Superintendent. He believed the text-books should be uniform throughout the State but did not believe in going upon the presumption that if left to the State Board of Education, or even the Superintendent of Public Instruction, there would be danger of swindling.
Mr. BELLAMY favored the section in the bill as tending to keep up a healthy competition in the publication of school books, and stated that, as everybody knew, there is no sort of uniformity existing now, even in the schools themselves.
Mr. GRAY spoke of the inducements offered to obtain the consent of Trustees to the introduction of certain school books. He knew of a book publishing agent who had furnished a Township Trustee with what was called a library in order to get a change in the text books of that Township. He considered this nineteenth section as a decided improvement on the present law, and opposed the pending motion.
Mr. HUGHES moved to amend the substitute by providing that the text books shall be uniform, and chosen in pursuance of instructions for the Superintendent of Public Instruction.
The motion to strike out section nineteen was agreed to.
Mr. HUGHES again contended for uniformity of text books throughout the State.
Mr. SCOTT saw some things in the views of the Senator which he commended, but wanted to have something to say himself as to what text books should be used.
Mr. RICE spoke in favor of Mr. Kinley's amendment. A recommendation from the Superintendent of Public Instruction would be proper, but it should not be made compulsory.
The amendment of Mr. Hughes was rejected.
Mr. BELLAMY moved to amend the substitute by placing the selection of text books in the hands of the teachers, trustees and directors of the townships.
This amendment was rejected.
Mr. HUGHES moved to strike out of the substitute the words "school journals" and inserting in lieu, "Sentinel and Journal"
On the motion by Mr. RICE the substitute was amended so that the Superintendent of Public Instruction is authorized to send a list of text books to each School Examiner.
Mr. ROBINSON of Decatur, opposed this substitute, as well as any other looking to a compulsory system in order to obtain uniformity. He way in favor of leaving it to the people of the district.
Mr. KINLEY was of the same way of thinking to a considerable extent, but believed his substitute asked for nothing more, as it was merely a recommendation.
The substitute was rejected by yeas 15, nays 23.
Mr. JOHNSTON of Montgomery, moved to strike out section five, which amends section twelve of the old law.
Mr. BELLAMY defended the section, stating that it was in accordance with the recommendations of the Suerintendent of Public Instruction, in his report. It still permits Trustees to levy the amount of tax actually required but increases the limit.
Mr. GREEN opposed this motion.
The motion to strike out was agreed to.
Mr. HUGHES moved to amend rection six by inserting the word "white" before the word "children."
Mr. BELLAMY. This question was discussed in the Committee. The Senator from Daviess [Mr. Turner] said that in Republican counties they could construe it to mean white and colored, and in Democratic counties white only.
Mr. TURNER. Will the Senator state furthermore what was said upon this subject? It is my privilege to have the whole come out.
Mr. BELLAMY. I do not remember any additional conversation on the subject.
Mr. TURNER. I will say, as I am speaking to a question of privilege, that it was a little bit of badinage as I understood it in the Committee room. I knew that the Committee would defeat me and I stated that the page: 492[View Page 492] constitution and laws expressly made use of the word "white" and I thought it unceccessary to insert the word "white," here. The expression was made on the other side that it would suit some counties. I assented and said this further thing, that it would be the means driving out of Democratic counties all the negro clildren and they would go where they would be recognized and enumerated.
Mr. HUGHES. Mr. President: This amendment is not offered by a Democrat, sir. I am endeavoring to conform this bill to what I understand to be the Constitution of the State as it now stands. Whenever it is changed I want to see the educational system changed with it. There is an inferiority placed upon that class of people by the Constitution, and while it remains I am not willing to adopt legislation ignoring the distinction which exists in the Constitution. That is all. As to the abstract question I leave that for others to discuss or decide. My purpose in this proposition is to conform to the law and the Constitution. I do not suppose it was ever the intention of the Constitution to exclude any class of citizens from the right to exercise the elective franchise and then admit them to the public schools. What contracts may have been made between the chairman of the Committee on Education and the leaders of the Democratic party on this floor in the Committee room upon this subject, I do not know. I am not admitted to the secrets of any of the leading Committees of this body, and especially the Committee on Education. But if I were I believe I would observe the parliamentary law which prohibits there being divulged in the Senate. But we learn something every day.
Mr. KINLEY. I am glad the Senator from Monroe [Mr. Hughes] desires to frame this law in conformity with the Constitution of the State. I think the Constitution is on the other side of the question. It says in section one article VIII the General Assembly shall "provide by law for a General and uniform system of Common Schools, wherein tuition shall be without charge, and equally open to all." What does it mean by "all?" All the people? Then of course, the negroes are included. Does it mean all the citizens? I remember in a decision on the XIIIth article which turned on the point whether a negro is a citizen or not, that decision recognized the negro as a citizen. Turning again to section twenty-three of the Bill of Rights the Constitution says:
SEC. 23, The General Assembly shail not grant to any citizen or class of citizens, priviliges or immunities which, upon the same terms, shall not equally belong to all citizens.
Now if you insert the word "white," you do confer privileges on a class of citizens which does not belong to all citizens. It seems tome the very Constitution which the Senator desires to conform to, commands us to furnish education to the children of all the people--to the children of all the citizens of the State.
When the Constitution speaks of voting it says, that only the white shall vote, but on the subject of education it is different. I recollect this subject of Education in the Constitutional Convention, was under charge of Robert Dale Owen, who has inlarged views of education, and I believe the word "white" was purposely left out.
Mr. STEIN. Mr. President: All this particular time I feel myself somewhat interested. Why is this demand made upon the Senate Indiana to-day? The controlling majority in the Senate of Indiana represents the Republican party. Let those who are here as representatives of that party take heed how they vote upon this question. Let those who have been identified with the principles of humanity, christianity, reformation and progress, see that this obnoxious word is kept out, and that education be placed upon the broad basis upon which it should be placed by the observance of general principles. Why should any just man seek to discrimsnate as between color when the question of education comes up.
Mr. HUGHES. I would ask the Senator if he is going to attack the Constitution of the State of Indiana?
Mr. STEIN. If the constitution of Indiana has made a discrimination so far as the question of education is concerned, I would attack the Constitution of Indiana, nor would I rest till the Constitution were overthrown and purged from such a dogma. But I do not recognize that the Constitution has any such clause bearing upon this question of education. I for one am for giving the ballot into the hands of the poor negro as well as the poor white man. [Applause from the Republican benches.] But here is a cause more sacred than that;the enlightning of the human mind, and we propose to exclude him because he happens to have a black skin? I propose to enter my protest against any such doctrine as that.
Mr. BELLAMY moved to amend by making the enumeration of white and colored children on separate lists.
Mr. HANNA. I desire to read from the report of the Superintendent of Public Instruction to show that the acts of that party, which the Senator refers to as the party of Christian principles, (I would move to amend by striking out "christian" and inserting "rascally") are not consonant with the views of the men representing the party here. We know there are men but a little above the brute creation in the south who are driven in droves to the ballot box and voted as they are told; yet I hold with the Superintendent of Public In- page: 493[View Page 493] struction, when he says that no free government can exist which is not established upon intellegence. How do the acts of this party compare with what they profess when they give the ballot to men a little above the brute creation.
Mr. H. reads from the report of the Superintendent of Public Instruction as follows:
I need not here dwell on the importance of "Intellectual, Scientific and Agricultural Improvement." On these rest our power and greatness as a State. When each man is a sovereign, and is responsible for the proper exercise of franchise in the selection of representative legislators, and executors of law, both civil and religious liberty are in jeopard when his mind has not been prepared by culture thought and general intelligence, for the proper exercise of this trust. Men must understand their rights to defend and preserve them.
This is an assertion of a principle by the Superintendent of Public Instruction of this State, and it is in direct contravention of the acts of this great Christian party that the Senator from Tippecanoe [Mr. Stein] talks about.
Mr. STEIN (interposing.) Did not the Senator from Sullivan [Mr. Hanna] vote "aye" upon the resolution of the Senator from Wayne, declaring that all men and women created equal and all governments dederived their just powers from the consent of the governed?
Mr. HANNA. That was written by men who held hundreds of slaves. The government was carried on for years by them and they never for a moment thought of giving the ballot to their slaves. But now we have got to know more than the fathers of the Revolution;--we have new light and new morals;--but I want to read more from this report, for there are some wise things here.
Mr. H. reads as follows:
We cannot avoid the grave consideration that there is a large colored population in the State who have heretofore submitted patiently to the ordeal of adverse public sentiment and the force of our statutes, in being denied participation in the benefits of our Public School Funds, while at the same time no bar can be discovered to their natural and constitutional right to them. By the grants of Congress, whence mainly we derive these funds, no exclusion is made. They were evidently designed for the citizens of the State without regard to color.
By the way, the word "citizen," has received a new construction--it means simply "loyal," since we have had light and knowledge.
Whatever additions our States may have made, they are still known as one 'Common School Fund.' But whatever distinctions may have been made in the rights and privileges of citizens by our laws, they have been set aside by the emendations of our National Constitution and the "Civil Rights Bill."
Now I would warn the Senator from Monroe [Mr. Hughes] who stands on the verge of one party and almost toppling over into another that he is in danger of being fined some thousand dollars and imprisonment under that kind of a law which was introduced and passed by the Christian party the Senator from Tippecanoe talks about.
All citizens are now equal before the law. Colored citizens while hitherto deprived of their natural and constitutional rights, have been subject to the special school tax for Township purposes in common with white citizens, and have thus paid their proportion of expenses for building school houses for white children. After being denied all privilege to the School Funds and thus taxed, they have been under the necessity of levying on themselves an additional tax to build their own school houses, and for the entire cost of their tuition. The historian will find this a dark chapter in our history.
That came from Sumner; it was not an original idea with Bro. Hobbs and he ought to mark that in italics.
Whatever elements of ignorance and incompetency the population of a State may contain, is so much that may damage its prosperity and safety.
But here is a bright idea I never found before:
The Son of God, when he clothed Himself in flesh took neither the Caucassian or African type, but a medium between them--the Mongolian.
Now where does he find that idea? I never saw it before. [Laughter.] That is Brother Hobbs idea. He got that off for the purpose of showing that the negro is as good as a white man. He makes out that the Son of God was between them a mulatto!--a mulatto!! [Renewed laughter.]
I am in favor of the amendment of the Senator from Monroe [Mr. Hughes] and opposed to the amendment of the Senator from Switzerland [Mr. Bellamy.] I don't want white children to be listed with colored children, and go into the same schools with them. I don't want them to come into my family. I don't want social equality established in this country between the whites and the blacks. We stand side by side with Washington, Jefferson, Madison and all that array of heroes who established this Government and the Constitution of United State, and I am willing to stand there.
Mr. CHURCH. Do I understand that the Democratic party as a whole stand now by the side of Washington?
Mr. HANNA. I don't know how they stand with a hole--they don't stand with the Senator from Porter who always makes it a rule when ladies are in the room to show his pretty face. [Laughter.]
Mr. BELLAMY. By the adoption of my amendment a future legislature will know where these children are and how many there are. It will cost nothing to show how many of them there are and where they are to be found, so that future legislatures can legislate intelligently on the subject.
Mr. RICE. If this quuestion stands as it is, will the white and black children be enumerated, and will both parties be entitled to the privileges of the Schools?
Mr. BELLAMY. My understanding is that they will not.
page: 494[View Page 494]Mr. RICE. These is a nigger in the wood pile there. [Laughter.] If it is the effect of this bill to put white and black children together in the schools of this State, I am willing to vote for the indefinite postponement of the whole concern.
Mr. HUGHES. We can't debate this question about white and black children in the schools for this bill dodges the question evidently intentionally. I offer this amendment to bring the question up and have it settled. It will take a dozen lawyers to decide whether under this bill negro children are included or not.
Mr. RICE. I am decidedly opposed, not only as a matter of justice to the white children, but as a matter of justice to the negro, to mixing them together in the schools. [A VOICE--"sound."] I don't care where you tell it. I don't expect ever to send a child of mine to a mixed school. I never expect to choose associates out of the colored race. I am for educating the negroes and I am willing to be taxed for separate schools.
Mr. STEIN (interposing.) Suppose the Senator lived in a township in which there were half a dozen colored children, do I understand that his superior intelligence is so great that he would not permit his children to attend the same school with them.
Mr. RICE. No sir, I would not permit my children to attend a school with them.
Mr. STEIN (in his seat.) I would, I would.
Mr. RICE. I am a friend to the negro, and a friend to the cause of education, but when you attempt to mix the races in the public schools you will cut down and destroy the efficiency of the system. The time may come when this equality will exist, but I hope never to see the day. I want the negro by himself, and I want him educated by himself. I don't want any mixing of the races; I don't want any social equality. I want to make laws so that they will get out of my neighborhood and get into a neighborhood where they can have schools of their own.
Mr. HUGHES. I will ask the Senator whether he is in favor of negro suffrage?
Mr. RICE. When that question comes up I will answer it.
Mr. KINLEY. I desire to call attention of the Senate to the fact that didn't occur to me before. There are six North-eastern States which permit colored children to attend the public schools. The States of Pennsylvania, New York, New Jersey, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, all except Indiana, Ohio and Illinois permit negro children to attend the public schools with white children. A fact I regret is, that so large a class of white people--such men as John Quincy Adams and other distidguised men of those States, are so degraded in consequence of contact in the schools and breathing the same atmosphere with colored children.
Mr. RICE (interposing.) Are you sufficiently conversant with the family history of John Adams to know that to be a fact.
Mr. KINLEY. No sir.
Mr. RICE. Then it is not pertinent in this discussion.
Mr. KINLEY. I know that the best men in the city of Boston patronize the public schools, and I know that the negroes attend the public schools on the same terms with all others. Social equality with white folks cannot be established by law. The effort of this bill as it stands will not throw the colored children in the schools. I suppose it would result in something like this: they will form separate schools by their own choice.
Mr. HUGHES. I would ask the Senator whether he understands that the children of the two races are to be collected together in the same school.
Mr. KINLEY. I am not ready to give the information.
Mr. HUGHES. That is the difficulty with me.
Mr. KINLEY. As far as I am concerned, I desire that they shall have the privilege of the public school.
Mr. HANNA moved to lay the bill and amendments on the table.
Mr. HOOPER moved to indefinitely postpone the bill.
Mr. HANNA withdrew his motion.
Mr. LASSELLE. The bill demands that colored children shall have equal privilege with the white children in our common schools. [He reads from the bill commencing at line 16.] That settles the question if gentlemen have any doubts.
Mr. HOOPER. I desire to explain the reason why I made the motion to indefinitely postpone this bill. I am satisfied from its discussion and from the amendments that have been made to this bill and the condition in which I find it, that there is clearly no advantage to be derived from the passage of the bill. It would be making the law simply worse than it is now. Especially do I make this motion for the reason that I find the friends of this bill unable to determine the question whether it provides for the admission of negro children or not. We ought not to pass any law of this character. I do not make this motion to avoid this question, because I am ready to meet it. I have introduced a bill that does meet this question squarely; and when that comes up I will meet this question fair and square.
Mr. CHURCH. Mr. President: I prefer to see Senators vote square upon this bill. The time has passed when I have a disposition to dodge these questiens.
page: 495[View Page 495]Mr. HUGHES (in his seat.) I have felt that way.
Mr. CHURCH. Yes sir, when I thought the interest of the party that saved this country, was at stake I have avoided talking my real sentiments for the sake of party. I am inclined to think, to-day, that this terrible feeling towards the negro is worse with persons that know less about the negroes than those better acquainted with them. I don't believe the gentleman from Parke [Mr. Rice] would have this objection if he and his family had lived with them. In the place where I live I call to mind one negro--a fine appearing, well dressed man, who does shaving for men in the city, during the past summer built a house worth four thousand dollars. His children I see on the street neat and clean, and I can't tell for the life of me what harm it would do my children to be in the same class. I believe if the Senator from Parke would put his children in the same school with negro children they would become favorites with his.
Mr. RICE That is just the very reason I do not want them to go there. [Laughter.]
Mr. TURNER. The Senator has told us about the negro man and children, I would to like for him to tell us what he knows about the negro's wife. [Laughter.]
Mr. CHURCH. She is a nice woman as far as I know. She is in as good society as many Democrats, and she is a more respectable woman than some Democratic women I have known of; and her husband is mroe respectable than many Democrats I know of. I am speaking plainly for I mean it. I believe it is in the minds of Senators that if there is any objection it is because they fear it is going to have an effect upon the election of Republicans in the next campaign.
Mr. RICE (interrupting.) For the time has arrived when it is necessary to have the party in tact:--they are forming an organization in our midst called the "Spartan Band." [Laughter.]
Mr. CHURCH. I call them by a different name. They call themselves the "Spartan Band." I say I want the negroes to help the Republican party because there is a little band which has deserted it. I understand that men who have been nominated in caucuses and elected because they were nominated by a caucus have come here and deserted the same organization. I call them bolters and not a "Spartan Band." That is the difference.
Mr. JOHNSON of Montgomery. Are you going to swap off the spartan band for negroes? [Laughter.]
Mr. CHURCH. I got disturbed because I ran off on the question as to whether the Republican party should admit a few black children in the schools. I think it better that the Republican party and the people at large should do right regardless of consequences. When I find a negro child whose mother washes him and teaches him to be a gentleman upon the street, and I am asked whether that negro boy should be educated, or the boy of some woman who don't wash his face or who don't care for the morals of her boy, I say I give the negro boy the preference over the other one. These are the reasons why I do believe when we have an ignorant class we should educate them. The negro in my town has two or three children, and shall they be brought up in ignorance simply because some white children in town do not want to go to school with them? The white children will play with them on the street--Why? Because they are pleasant and agreeable, for the black man teaches them how to behave.
I am surprised at the Senator from Pake, [Mr. Rice] who does not belong to the spartan band, for taking such a position.
Mr. RICE (interposing.) I am more favorable to the education of the negro than the Senator from Porter [Mr. Church.] The man that does not feel in the atmosphere this antipathy of the white for the black race don't feel the pulse of the time--she don't know it. I say I am for the education of the negro, and I am for being taxed along with him to support his schools, but I want them separate from the white schools. I want to elevate the negro and elevate him in the scale of humanity; but I deem it wrong to attempt to mix the two races in the same school.
Mr. CHURCH. The Senator has failed to catch the argument. In the rural districts where there may not be half a dozen black children, how is he to favor their education unless he put them in the schools?
Mr. RICE. The force of circumstances will educate them to go into communities where there are schools for negroes, and thus you will have them colonized.
Mr. CHURCH. I am not in favor of such a course of circumstances, or such rules and regulations as will compel negroes or any other persons that may be useful in a neighborhood to leave it. A short time ago there was another prejudice--the white soldier would not fight by the side of the black. And a short time ago there was another--that the negro race should be kept in bondage. But the people have wagged along, and whether the negro votes this year or not, it won't be two years until he does vote and we may as well put this in her now. It is for the interest of this country that all the people be educated, and these black persons will be scattered around, but they can't be educated in any way except in these schools.
Mr. LEE. I have but a word to say, sir. I want the party I act with not to dodge this question. Let it come fairly and squarely. It page: 496[View Page 496] is a matter we have got to meet, and I want to see if this Senate is in favor of making negro children equal with the whites.
Mr. CHURCH. If we can make them equal let us do so.
Mr. GREEN. My constituents all know that I can make as good a speech in favor of the negro as any one here; and I am not going back on the negro after he has got so near out of the wood pile. I hope it will not be indefinitely postponed. I understand that there is another bill that will meet our views as well or better than this, and I hope the motion will be changed so as to lay this on the table.
Mr. GIFFORD demanded the previous question, and there being a second--
Mr. Bellamy's amendment to the amendment providing for separate lists for white and colored children was agreed to--affirmative 22, negative 18.
Mr. HUGHES moved to indefinitely postpone the bill.
Mr. GREEN moved to lay the bill on the table.
The motion was agreed to by yeas 33, nays 8--as follows:
YEAS--Messrs. Andrews, Beardsley, Bellamy, Bird, Bradley, Case, Caven, Denbo, Eliott, Gifford, Green, Hadley, Hanna, Henderson, Hess, Hooper, Howk, Huey, Huffman, Hughes, Jaquess, Johnson of Spencer, Johnston of Montgomery, Lasselle, Lee, Montgomery, Morgan, Rice, Robinson of Madison, Robinson of Decatur, Smith, Stein and Turner--33.
NAYS--Messrs. Church, Cravens, Fisher, Gray, Hamilton, Kinley, Reynolds and Scott--8.
Mr. HUGHES moved to reconsider the vote just taken, and to lay that motion on the table.
The latter motion was rejected by yeas 19, nays 22, as follows:
YEAS.--Messrs. Bird, Bradley, Denbo, Gifford, Hanna, Henderson, Hooper, Howk, Huey, Huffman, Hughes, Jaquess, Johnston of Montgomery, Lasselle, Lee, Montgomery, Morgan, Smith and Turner--19.
NAYS.--Messrs. Andrews, Beardsley, Bellamy, Case, Caven, Church, Cravens, Eliott, Fisher, Gray, Green, Hadley, Hamilton, Hess, Johnson of Spencer, Kinley, Rice, Reynolds, Robinson of Madison, Robinson of Decatur, Scott and Stein--22.
Pending the roll call--
Mr. GRAY, in explanation of his vote, said he believed it the duty of all of us to provide some means for the education of colored people. He was willing to have a proper respect for the prejudices of others, and perhaps bringing the two races into the same school would impair the usefulness of the school--it would make no difference to him. He voted "No."
M. HADLEY bid not want this bill finally disposed of in this way. He sought an opportunity to make a record on this question. He voted "no."
Mr. HANNA said this bill contained a clause which made all the talk about separating simply nonsense. He voted "aye."
Mr. HUGHES voted "aye" for the reason that the bill is ambiguous, uncertain and evasive, and does not meet the question, therefore no Senator can make a record on it.
Mr. MORGAN was a friend to free schools and a friend of the negro, but he did not wish to bring down the schools nor to kill the negro, therefore he voted "aye."
Mr. RICE. For fear Mr. Hooper's bill may not go through which provides for the education of colored children, and in order that this bill may be placed beyond the power of the Senate to amend it properly, he voted "no."
Mr. SCOTT voted "no," because he believed it to be the last chance this session to provide any sort of schools for colored children.
So the motion to lay the motion to reconsider on the table, was rejected.
And then--
The Senate adjourned till nine o'clock a. m. to-morrow.
