THE CALENDAR.
Mr. Welborn's bill [H. R. 95] for relief of John Ingle and John Ingle, Jr., was ordered to the engrossment
Mr McDonald's special court term bill [H. R. 175] was read the second time with committee amendments.
Mr NEFF moved to lay the bill on the table; but withheld the motion.
Mr COFFROTH thought the principle of the bill would work well when the docket is heavy.
On motion of Mr NEFF it was referred on the Judiciary Committee.
Mr Pierce, of Vigo's dog bill [H. R. 211] was taken up, with the unfavorable committee report thereon. The report was non concurred in, and the bill was ordered to be engrossed
Mr. JOHNSON, of Porter's bill (H R 117) to correct a misprint in the 16th Section of the contested elections act of May 6, 1852 and to provide relief in cases of con[es s?] erroneously commended by reason of the misprint of said 16th Section, and to provide for taking depositions in all cases of contests for circuit and district offices coming up -
Mr. COFFROTH, thinking the matter sufficiently clear, moved the indefinite postponement of the bill
Mr GORDON liked the provisions authorizing the taking of depositions
Mr PIERCE of Vigo, suggested that the author the Senator from Parke, (Mr. Johnson), is not in his place, and he moved that it be referred to the Committee on Elections.
page: 67[View Page 67]The motion was agreed to.
Mr. Hudsons Felony bill [H. R. 198] was ordered to the engrossment.
Mr. Gilham's Valuation and Assessments by [H. R. 158] coming up -
Mr. COFFROTH said the bill was for a remedy against the practice of sham sales of property for United States bonds to avoid tax assessments.
It was ordered to the engrossment.
Mr. McGregor's joint resolution No. 3 for the taxation of United States bonds was Committee on Federal Relations
Mr Coffroth's bill [H. R. 186] for proceedings supplementary to executions in courts of Justices of the Peace, was read the second time
It was ordered to be engrossed.
Mr. Palmer's Evidence bill [H. R 104] amending section 397 of the Practice act, was ordered to the engrossment.
Mr. Shoemaker's Tax List bill [H R 243] coming up, with the recommendation of the Committee on County and Township Business -
Mr SHOEMAKERS explained that the object of the bill to change the time of assessments for taxes from the first of January to the first of March, and he stated it's advantages o farmers &c.
Mr RATLIFF and Mr HIGBEE were unfavorable to the proposed change
Mr MONROE said he would be glad for such a change to the law as to require taxes to be assessed and paid in the same year, the he failed to see the need of this bill.
The House refused to order the engrossment - 18 to 35 - no quorum But the order was [?] used - yeas 28, nays 45
Mr CORY asked, but failed to obtain leave to introduce an appropriation bill to defrary the expenses of the present session of the General Assembly
Mr. Shoemaker's Cancelled County Orders Preservation bill [H. R. 213] was ordered to be engrossment.
Mr. Zenor's One Dog Exemption bill [H. R. 224] was read the second time.
Mr BEELER desired to gain all the revenue we may from dogs that people will keep, and not encourage keeping more
Mr ADMIRE moved for a tax of $5 on each additional dog, which was laid on the table.
Mr. OSBORN would rather encourage the protection of sheep than encourage the keeping of dogs
Mr McFADIN spoke in favor of the bill, thinking that the bill of the gentleman from Vigo, keeping dogs at home in the right time, would be sufficient security against dog depredations.
Mr DAVIDSON spoke against the bill He referred to the State Agricultural Reports for a statement, that the destruction of sheep by dogs in a single year amounted to fifteen millions of dollars. He preferred to let the law remain without change. If any change was made, he would prefer, after the tax of one dollar for the first dog, a tax of five dollar for the second &c.
Mr FURNAS thought the bill would encourage dog keeping. The dog revenue in Hendricks county amounts to $2 000 a year, which is nearly all expended in paying daying damages for the destruction of sheep by the dogs.
Mr BRITTON proposed to amend the bill by taxing the first dog $5, and taxing $10 for each additional dog.
Mr CUNNINGHAM made a speech more favorable to the dog, and seemed to be in favor of taxing dogs as other property - ad valorem.
Mr Britton's amendment was rejected. The bill failed on the engrossment - yeas 30 nays 53
On motion of Mr. STANTON the order business was suspended in order to hear a report from The Committee on Claims
Mr Sabin, from the Claims Committee, reported for the allowance of sundry claims, for printing, clerk fees and stationary expenses incurred on account of the Morgan raid investigations
On motion of Mr COFFROTH, the report was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means.
