HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
The House met at 9 o'clock, A. M. The reading of the Journal was dispensed with.
PETITIONS.
Mr. Williams, of Union, presented the claim of Andrew Keep.
Mr. HIGBEE and Mr. BRITTON also presented papers, the former on Temperance and the latter a remonstrance of 1,200 citizens of De Kalb against the Fifteenth Article amendment.
REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES.
Mr. HUNT, from the Committee on Ways and Means, reported on certain military disbursements by the Governor, that he acted properly, under authority.
Mr. BRECKINRIDGE, from the Committee on Rights and Privileges, returned the petition of citizens of Jefferson, praying for the release of a certain school officer from the repayment of certain school moneys stolen, recommending that its consideration be indefinitely postponed. The report was concurred in.
He also returned Mr. Davidson's bill [H. R. 291] defining who shall be eligible to vote, etc., recommending that it be indefinitely postponed. The report was concurred in.
Mr. HIGBEE, from the Committee on y and Township Business, returned Mr. Corry's bill [H. R. 289] providing that no elector shall vote for Supervisor who do not reside in his District, recommending that it be laid on the table.
The report was concurred in.
Mr. BRITTON, from the same committee, returned Mr. Wildmaux bill [H. B. 221] for Seldon's book-keeping in the offices of County Auditors and Treasures, recommending that it lay on the table.
The report was concurred in.
Mr TABIN, from the same committee, returned Mr. VATER'S bill [H. B. 319] to repeal the bill of March 4, 1869, repealing
Mr. STANTON, from the special Committee on Committee Rooms, reported-ample accommodations for committee rooms in the Capitol Building, in charge of Mr. Slocum.
These reports were severally concurred in.
THE FIFTEENTH ARTICLE.
Mr. COFFROTH (by unanimous consent) presented the remonstrance of 2,000 citizens of the counties of Ohio and Switzerland, against the ratification of the 15th article amendment, and instructing their Senator, Mr. Bellamy, and their Representative, Mr. Stewart, to resist said ratification or resign.
THE SOLDIERS' HOME.
Mr. STANTON (obtaining leave) submitted the following:
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring therein), That a Joint Committee of five, consisting of three on the part of the House and two on the part of the Senate, be appointed to visit the National Asylum at Dayton, Ohio, with a view to the transfer of the inmates of the Soldiers' Home to that institution.
Mr. Stanton caused the letter addressed to him by the Secretary of the National Asylum at Dayton (printed in the Senate ' proceedings of this day) to be read in this matter, stating that this action was to result in the soldiers being better cared for by the National Government; whilst it would admit of the State's appropriating the Home building as an Orphan Asylum.
The resolution was adopted.
SOUTHERN PRISON INVESTIGATION.
On motion of Mr. RUDDELL, it was ordered that the testimony taken by the Joint Committee for investigation of the affairs of the Southern Prison, transmitted from the Senate, be now read.
The testimony of J. B. Merriweather having been read-
Mr. UNDERWOOD moved that the testimony be printed.
After some conversation between Mr. Coffroth and Mr. Ruddell touching certain testimony before the Committee, given by said Merriweather, and not included in the report, and after the reading of a copy of page: 88[View Page 88] such rejected or suppressed testimony, which Mr. Coffroth had sent up-
Mr. COFFROTH moved to print the suppressed testimony.
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, submitted the following:
Resolved, That the report of tho evidence before the Committee on Prisons be referred to the Judiciary Committee, with instructions to inquire whether the said Directors or others are not liable under it, and if so, that suit be brought against them, etc.
Mr. RUDDELL said the Directors' attention was called to that, and they had acted on it in their supplementary report to the Governor. He insisted that the House itself should inspect the report, which was the result of a faithful and conscientious investigation. He did not expect the report to be referred to another committee.
Mr. WILLIAMS desired it referred, that we might get from gentlemen learned in the law a report as to whether the facts authorize suits to be brought. He meant no disrespect to the Committee on Prisons.
Mr. STEWART, of Rush, was favorable to the reference.
Mr. GORDON preferred to hear all the evidence first.
Mr. JOHNSON, of Parke, could see no impropriety in the reference to another Committee.
Mr. PIERCE, of Vigo, said the House was not unwilling to hear the testimony there was a difference of opinion as to how the testimony should come before the House.
Mr. DUNN submitted a resolution for a substitute for the pending motion-to concur in the report to discharge the Committee, and send the papers to the Attorney General with instruction to proceed against the parties in his discretion.
Mr. COFFROTH made the point, that the motion of Mr. Williams is not germain to the motion to permit, and therefore not in order.
The SPEAKER. The motion to refer has precedence of the motion to print.
Mr. JOHNSON, of Parke, continued. He was in favor of printing the evidence. He then stated the reasons why he should oppose the reference.
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, modified his motion so as to include an order to print.
Mr. OSBORN preferred to leave the matter in the hands of the Prison Committee till we have time to understand the testimony.
Mr. McFADIN commended the industry of the Committee on Prisons. They had brought out evidence of monstrous frauds and corruptions in the management of the Southern Prison. Then why not hear the evidence, and act upon it? He might be satisfied with the reference again, but it would be like going over the same again. He would have the testimony printed.
Mr. BARRITT opposed recommitment as he would oppose delay in this matter. He referred to the difficulty with which the chairman of the Prison Committee had been met in getting this report and evidence before the House; and opposed printing chiefly becuse of the delay which it would induce.
Mr. OVERMYER opposed the reference as he would oppose a movement to delay and smmuggle this report beyond the action of the House. He moved to lay Mr. Williams' resolution and Mr. Dunn's substitute on the table, demanding the yeas and nays.
Mr. DAVIS, of Floyd, preferred that the report be printed; which might be done and in the hands every member by to-morrow or next day.
The SPEAKER stated the question. The printing of the report has been ordered. The first motion is to print the evidence
Mr. CUNNINGHAM demanded a division of the question-the first vote on tabling Mr. Dunn's resolution.
Mr. DENNIS' substitute was laid on the table-yeas 73, nays 7.
Mr. WILLIAMS, Of Knox, obtained leave to withdraw that part of his motion which proposes to refer to the Judiciary Committee, and, the remainder-to print 200 copies-was adopted.
Mr. COFFROTH desired that the rejected testimony be included in the order to print, and made that motion.
Mr. DAVIS, of Floyd, supported the motion, and after desultory consideration thereon by Messrs. CORY, RUDDELL, PIERCE of Vigo, and others, with reference to a waive in blank in the suppressed testimony of J. B. Merriweather.
Mr. VATER moved to amend Mr. Coffroth's motion by adding that said testimony be not printed till the blank is filled.
Mr. COFFROTH stated that he submitted the paper as suppressed matter, and had not examined it; was unaware of the blank; and that, as the success of Mr. Vater's motion would prevent the printing, he moved to lay it on the table.
The question was decided in the negative, yeas 34, nay 50; and the question recurred.
Mr. DAVIS, of Floyd, interrogated the Chairman, Mr. Ruddell, as to this part of evidence, as to whether a journal of the committee's proceedings was kept, showing, that this evidence was rejected as if revelent; and that perhaps Mr. Meriweather took a copy of that part. Mr. D. insisted that the House has a right to this potion of the evidence before the committee it were in the power of the committee the name in blank should be furnished-to page: 89[View Page 89] relieve the House from the awkwardness of position of ordering printing when a certain blank can be filled.
Mr. RUDDELL, Mr. LAMBORN, Mr. BARRITT, and every member of the Prison Committee, stated that, while they could remember, that that testimony was before the Committee, they could not recover the same.
Mr. DAVIS of Floyd, concluded, asserting as before, the rights of the House and the duty of the Committee, and calling for a division of the question.
Mr. WILSON submitted that this was not a case of suppression, but of rejection of testimony. He considered that the Committee had a right to exclude this testimony, and that it couid not be printed without injustice to some.
Mr. NEFF considered that there was unnecessary nervousness about this matter. But he could not see how it should be concluded against using this testimony. In reply to Mr. Ruddell, he supposed this Prison Committee went down there to investigate all frauds connected with the prison, and was riot confined to the conduct of Mr. Merriwether. He admitted that the committee intended no unfairness, that they acted in all faithfulness and honesty, but now when this matter is sprung upon them it was strange to see members of the committee objecting to the printing.
Mr. CORY said the committee were not objecting to printing the testimony; but what they wanted was that the testimony to be printed shall be complete.
Mr. NEFF. That was the only strange thing about the matter-that these gentlemen oppose the printing of this testimony, which is admitted to be genuine.
Mr. JOHNSTON, of Parke, proposed to amend, by adding: "and that the Committee on Prisons be requested to fill the blannk." He submitted that the Committee were probably able to fill the blank, and that the House has the right to require the Committee to fill it.
Mr. STANTON. Was it the Committee or other parties proposing to bring this testimony before the House? He submitted that the filling of the blank belonged to those sending this testimony into the House. They should do that, or state the reason why they cannot do it; and until they do that-the one or the other-he submitted that the House ought not to print the testimony.
Mr McFADIN. Was there any other testimony suppressed.
Mr. RUDDELL. It was merely rejected testimony-rejected as irrevalent matter-relating to things which transpired long ago. In reply to Mr. Coffroth, he replied that while the order of the House was to investigate the affairs of the prison, the Committee (the Sub-committee) considered it their special duty to investigate charges against Merriweather and Ghee. He did not recollect that this testimony, just brought in here, was even taken down by the Committee's Clerk.
Mr. CHITTENDEN moved to lay Mr. Jolmston's, of Park, amendment on the table, which was decided in the negative yeas 39, nays 40, and question recurred on Mr. Jolmston's motion.
Mr. VATER. It was assumed that the committee have been trying to suppress evidence, while the fact was that gentlemen desire to thrust evidence upon the House which is not completewhich is not evidence, but was rejected by the committee.
Mr. Johnston's amendment was adopted yeas 39, nays 38-aand the question recurred on the adoption of Mr. Vater's motion as amended.
Mr. COFFROTH now said he would accept Mr. Vater's amendment, as amended, as a part of his motion.
Mr. WILLSON moved to lay the motion, as amended, on the table; which was decided in the negative-yeas 37, nays 41: and the question again recurred.
Mr. LAMBORN made an ineffectual motion to adjourn.
Mr. JOHNSTON, of Parke, now demanded the previous question.
Mr. COFFROTH said he accepted the amended proposition of Mr. Water as part of the text of his motion, originally approved, which he read as follows:
Resolved, That the suppressed testimony of J. B. Meriweather be printed with the other testimony taken by the Committee ;_that the blank be filled-and by the committee.
Mr. RUDDELL and Mr. WILSON taking a distinction between "suppressed" and "neglected" testimony-
Mr. COFFROTH (by consent) changed the word " suppressed " to the word "omitted," and so it was adopted-yeas 45, nays 29, as follows:
YEAS-Messrs. Addison, Admire, Bates, Carnahan, Cave, Chapman, Coffroth, Gory, Cotton, Cunningham, Davis of Floyd, Field of Lagrange, Hamilton, Higbee, Hutson, Hyatt, Johnson of Montgomery, Johnson of Parke, Kercheval, Lawler, Logan, Long, McFadin, MC-Gregor, Miller, Miles, Mock, Montgomery, Neff, Odell, Osborn, Palmer, Pierce of Vigo, Ratliff, Shoaff, Skidmore, Sleeth, Stewart of Rush, Sun-man, Tebbs, Wile, Williams of Knox, and Zenor -43.
NAYS-Messrs. Baker, Beeler, Breckinridge, Chittenden, Davidson, Dittemore, Dunn, Fairchild, Gordon, Greene, Hall, Hutchings, Jump, Lamborn, Overmyer, Pierce of Porter, Ruddell, Sabin, Smith, Stephenson, Taber, Underwood, Vardeman, Vater, Wildman, Williams of Hamilton, Williams of Union, Wilson, and Air. Speaker-29.
The House then took a recess till 2 o'clock.
page: 90[View Page 90]AFTERNOON SESSION.
The Senate bill No. 328, for meetings of District Appraisers, the Indiana University bill [S. 100], the City Railroad amendment bill. [S. 85], were severalty read and passed to the second reading.
Mr. UNDERWOOD made an ineffectual motion to take up the bill [S. 8] for the suppression of prize fighting.
The bill [S. 291] for transfering Brown county to the Second Circuit, and the bill [S. 290] creating the Twenty-sixth Circuit, were severally read and ordered to the third reading.
TWENTY-SIXTH CIRCUIT.
Mr. CORY moved the suspension of the constitutional restriction to admit of the passage of the-Court bill [S. 290.]
Mr. OVERMYER moved to amend, by adding the bill [S. 292.]
Mr. STANTON made the point that the amendment is not germane to the proposition.
Mr. COFFROTH supported and the SPEAKER sustained the point of order.
The constitutional restriction as to the bill [S. 290] was then suspended-yeas 70, nays 14-and the bill was then again read.
It creates the Twenty-sixth Judicial Circuit, fixing the times of holding Courts therein, and fixing the times of holding Courts in the Fourth Judicial Circuit.
It was finally passed the House of Representatives without amendment-yeas 76, nays 12.
Mr. OVERMYER moved, ineffectually, to suspend the Constitutional restriction for the final consideration of the Brown county transference bill [S. 292]yeas 46, nays 34two-thirds not voting in the affirmative.
Mr. ZOLLARS moved to suspend the Constitutional restriction to save one read-of the Savings Banks' bill [S. 161].
Mr. COFFROTH did not think the friends of this bill should press it in this way. He knew the question was not debatable; but, regarding it as a most infamous bill, he hoped the restriction would not be suspended.
Mr. ZOLLARS withdrew the motion.
AGRICULTURAL REPORTS.
On motion of Mr. FURNAS, the order of business was suspended, for the consideration of his Agricultural and Horticultural Reports Appropriation bill [H. R. 194], and it finally passed the House-yeas 78, nays 0.
Mr. BEELER moved ineffectually to take up his bill [H. B. 206] for the transfer of Marion county to-the Southern Prison district.
On motion of Mr. McFADIN Mr. Logan's fox and wild cat bill [H. B. 168] was taken up. (It provides 50 cedts for scalps.)
Mr. BRITTON proposed to strike out the words "under six months old," which agreed to.
Mr. DAVIDSON proposed, ineffectually to make it read "red foxes."
The bill was then ordered to be engrossed.
THE CALENDAR.
The bill [S. 161] to provide for the Organization of savings banks, was read the second time with the committee's recommendation.
Mr. COFFROTH moved that the bill reported to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. ZOLLERS opposed the motion an supported the bill, setting forth especially the security to depositors which is require by the 14th section. It was a bill to be beneficial in its effects to the poorer men of th country. It had been before the proper Committees of both Houses, and its passage was fully recommended.
Mr. NEFF supported the motion to refer the bill again, and, if it has merits wanted to vote for it.
On motion of Mr. ZOLLARS the motion to refer was laid on the table.
Mr. MITCHELL proposed to amend the first section, by appropriately inserting after the words, "five thousand dollars in real estate," then: "exclusive of perishable improvements."
The amendment was adopted: and then the emergency clause reported by the committee was also adopted.
Pending the question on ordering the bill to the third reading-
Mr. COFFROTH stated, at length, his objections to its passage. If this bill becomes a law, he would as soon deposit his money in a Pharo Bank, as in such a Savings Bank as it contemplated. The provision in the first section, that the seven stockholders are required to be each possessed of $5,000 in real estate, and the amendment to this by Mr. Mitchell, (which was very well,) did not offer security to depositors. There was no provision to secure depositors from first to last. The security provided in the fourteenth section did not secure depositors because the officers of these banks were to manage them under the Directors. The Governor "may require the officers of these banks to give security." Another objection was, that is the sixteenth section it is provided that deposits cannot be withdrawn without notice ranging in time proportionate to the amount to be withdrawn-extending to as long a time as ninety days. He objected, also, to the 54th section, which provides that moneys of minors and insane persons may be deposited, without security, so as not withdrawn till the minor's majority, &c. He denounced the bill as an attempt to page: 91[View Page 91] fasten a confidence game upon the statute book. He moved that it be indefinitely postponed.
Mr. KERCHEVAL replied, complaining of the harshness of the gentleman from Huntington, in applying to the bills the estimation which he has for a grand confidence games. He said to the gentleman and the House that the Committee on Banks were ready to vote for any amendment that would better secure depositors.
Mr. GREEN defended the bill stating that it has been drawn after the savings banking statutes of New York and, other Eastern States, under which there have been no failures.
On motion of Mr. RATLIFF, the vote by which Mr. Coffroth's motion to refer was laid on the table was reconsidered; and then-
The bill was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, with instructions to report thereon next Friday.
THE CALENDAR.
The Drainage assessment bill [S. 89] amendatory of the act of March, 2, 1867, was read the second time.
Mr. PALMER proposed to amend by striking out all after the creating clause, and inserting matter by way of substitute.
Mr. PIERCE, of Porter, moved that the bill and proposed amendment be referred again to the Committee on County and Township Business.
Mr. STEWART, of Rush, moved, inaffectually, to refer to the Committee on Rights and Privileges.
Mr. Pierce's motion was then agreed to.
Mr. RATLIFF proposed a further amendment, which was referred without reading.
Mr. OSBORN called up his bill [H. R. 322] , to enable railroad companies to protect their lines by connections, but, pending the question thereon,
The House adjourned.
