IN SENATE.
THURSDAY, April 29,1869.The Senate met at 9 o clock A. M.
On motion of Mr. JOHNSON, of Spencer, the reading of the Secretary's journal of yesterday was dispensed with.
PETITIONS AND MEMORIALS.
Mr. CRAVENS presented a petition from citizens of Jefferson county praying for the paying of the Morgan raid claims by the State.
Mr. DENBO presented a similar petition signed by several hundred citizens Of Washington county.
Messrs. HUFFMAN and BELLAMY presented similar petitions.
Mr. HENDERSON presented a memorial from members of the bar of Morgan county praying that said county may not be taken from its old Judicial Court Circuits.
Mr. ANDREWS presented a petition from 1,400 citizens of Jennings county praying For payment by the State of the Morgan raid claims.
These petitions were severally referred to appropriate committees.
NEW PROPOSITION.
A committee returned a new bill [S. 343] for an act supplemental to the just-valuation-for-taxation act of December, 1865 (prepared by the Governor and Auditor of State), recommending its passage. It was read the first time and passed to the second reading.
OLD INTERNAL IMPROVEMENT BONDS.
Mr. CARSON offered a concurrent resolution that the action of the Governor and the Adjutant General, in settling the claims of the General Government against the State by taking up old Internal Improvement bonds, was unauthorized by law, and that the State should make no provision for paying the old Internal Improvement debt except as provided in the Butler bill; and that he action of the Governor and Adjutant General in the settlement of $250,000 advanced to Governor Morton by the President of the United States was unauthorized; and that no legislation sanctioning the same should be entertained. He spoke in favor of the adoption of these resolutions as necessary to relieve the State from large claims that are ready to be brought in against the State, based upon these unauthorized acts of the Governor. He reviewed the history of this matter, reflecting severely upon the action of Governor Murton and Governor Baker in the premises.
Mr. FISHER replied-stating what he understood to be the facts in the case, to justify the acts of the Executive in this settlement. He insisted the Governor's action was more than justifiable. He understood that these bonds were not yet cancelled-not destroyed at any rate-and that the State could require the Trustees of the Erie Canal to issue stock to one-ban the amount, or the State can hold them just as they are.
Mr. SCOTT moved to refer these resolutions to the Committee on Federal Relations.
Mr. TURNER did riot like to see a disposition here to cover up the action of State officials; and this matter, he thought, should be ventilated thoroughly.
page: 127[View Page 127]Mr. CARSON moved to make the resolution the special order for this afternoon at 2 o clock.
Mr. WOLCOTT moved to indefinitely postpone the resolution. We are near the end of the session; and this matter had better be put out of the way at once.
Mr. RICE was not prepared to vote on this question to-day. He would prefer to see the resolutions take the usual course. To indefinitely postpone them would look too much like a disposition to cover up.
Mr. HANNA insisted that there was no law authorizing this settlement; it was an act of usurpation on the part of the Governor; and he desired to say upon the record by yeas and nays that the Executive of the State shall not pay large sums of money belong-to the people without the shadow authority of law. The Executive is authorized to execute the laws, and nothing more; then why should we sanction this usurpation? He did not object to reference of these resolutions to a committee.
Mr. SCOTT did not make his motion with a desire to smother the resolutions. The two questions are: The power of the Governor to make the settlement, and second, the liability of the State to pay the debt. He contended that if the holders of the bonds never consented to the provisions of the Butler bill they are not bound by it. A committee should investigate as to whether the Governor did or did not usurp power in this matter, and, for one, if it is found that the Executive exceeded authority he (Mr. S.) would say so, as soon as such is ascertained to be the fact.
Mr. TURNER was willing to a reference of these resoulutions if the committee were instructed to report to-morrow afternoon. He read from the Governor's message to show the Executive himself, seemed to be of the opinion that he had exceeded his authority in this matter. If the State would be compromised by paying the $196,000 referred to in the message, would not the State be compromised by countenancing this illegal actor the Governor? At his suggestion Mr. Carson modified his motion so as to make his resolutions the special order for to-morrow afternoon in Committee of the Whole Senate.
Mr. HANNA regarded this action of the Governor, if acquiesced in by the Legislate, as only an entering wedge for the Payment of about eight millions of dollars or the entire amount of outstanding old Internal Improvement bonds. And he charged the Senator from White, [Mr. Wolcott,] with trying to repudiate a portion of this debt, while trying to sanction the action of the Governor in paying another portion. Why is it that a portion of this debt is more sacred than another portion? The holders of these bonds refused to assist us;these very men held back and would not lend us a helping hand in the darkest hours of 1847-8and yet the Governor says they shall be paid in full; and the Senator from White moves to indefinitely postpone any proposition to inquire into the Governor's conduct!-the demands, as a partizan, that we shall not investigate this subject at all!
Mr. FISHER said that this matter has got into an interesting condition. The Governor thought the passage of a law, making any other provision than that contemplated in the act of 1846-7, might compromise the State with regard to that whole debt. Here is a party owing us money, and will pay it if we take these bonds. The Governor took them. This is not a resolution to approbate the action of the Governor, by no means. It is a resolution censuring him, and if you don't vote for that, the Senator from Sullivan [Mr. Hanna] says you lay yourselves liable to pay all this great internal improvement debt; and if you don't censure the Governor, you are in favor of the assumption of this old debt. That is great logic.
Mr. TURNER. How can we abrogate this debt? The money is paid over. Have we the power to compel the paying of it back?
Mr. FISHER supposed we have not. But what could be done with the General Government when it said to the State: We won't pay you unless you take your note; here it is; you may take that or go to the dogs?
Mr. TURNER. The Government of the United States never refused to pay allowed claims.
Mr. FISHER. Unquestionably it did, unless you allowed a set-off.
Mr. TURNER. Our Governor held no authority of law for paying these bonds, even if we never got our pay from the General Government.
Mr. FISHER. Then the claim of the Government would be running on interest, and our claim against the Government would not. It is a clear, plain case, and the advantage to the State is clear and prominent. The power of the Governor to do it is a question he was not going to argue at all. He was not seeking to approbate the Governor, but what he was speaking of is this: While this resolution was introduced for the purpose of censuring the Governor, the threat is held over those who might be supposed to approbate the action of the Governor, that unless you vote this censure and condemnation upon the Governor you expose the State to the payment of this vast debt.
page: 128[View Page 128]Mr. WOLCOTT contended that Governor Baker's settlement in no way affected the bonds cancelled under the arrangements of the Butler bill. The original bonds remaining uncancelled are still obligations against the State, and the difference between the two classes of indebtedness are as different and distinct as it is possible to conceive. The action of the Governor, in allowing the offset to these bonds, even if recognized by the General Assembly, need not affect the question involved in the interest represented by the surrendered bonds. He denied any violation by the Governor of the law of 1847. He saw nothing in these resolutions but a purpose to sow discord and create a faction in the Republican party. It has been the policy of the Democratic party since the fall session to foment disturbance and discord in the Republican ranks, and he believed these resolutions were introduced for no other purpose: And as Republicans we should vote them down.
Mr. CARSON replied to the question why these resolutions were brought before the Senate, by inquiring why the original resolutions on this subject were sprung upon the Senate at the regular session; and lie recited the history of the matter to show that it was certainly riot by any Democratic manooeuvring.
Mr. CRAVENS apprehended that the-great purpose of this discussion was an organized and intended raid upon the present Executive. And this view was warranted by the declarations made by Democrats upon this floor; to which he referred. Then why censure the Governor of the State for having acted under authority given him by the Legislature? Why censure him for doing the very thing the people of Indiana declared he should do?-settle these claims? He spoke at length in justification of the act of the Executive of the State in the matters questioned by the resolutions under consideration. When he had concluded-
The Senate took a recess till 2 o'clock.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
Mr. WOOD demanded the previous question, and there being a second-
The pending motion to indefinitely postpone Mr. Carson's resolutions as agreed to by yeas 20, nays 17, as follows:
YEAS-Messrs. Andrews, Beardsley, Bellamy, Caven, Church, Cravens, Eliott, Fisher, Fosdick, Hadley, Hamilton, Hess, Hooper, Jaquess, Johnson of Spencer, Morgan, Reynolds, Stein, Wolcott, Wood-20.
NAYS-Messrs. Carson, Hanna, Henderson, Howk, Huey, Huffman, Humphreys, Johntson of Montgomery, Lee, Montgomery, Robinson of Madison, Robinson of Decatur, Scott, Sherrod, Smith, Taggart, Turner-17.
Pending the roll call-
Mr. ANDREWS, in explanation of his vote, remarked, that he was anxious to be entirely liberal with our Democratic friends. He wished them to go their full length. The best service they can do the country is to show up the imperfections of our public men. After the discussion had on this subject during the regular session and here he thought they ought to be satisfied. Thanking them for what they have done, he voted "aye."
Mr. BELLAMY, in explanation, was understood to say that if the resolutions had been introduced in a proper form he should have voted differently, but as the matter now stands he would vote "aye."
Mr. JOHNSON, of Spencer, when his name was called, said: Mr. President: I ask the indulgence of the Senate while I very briefly express my views on the subject now under discussion. I am one of those who can see no good reason for thus hastily considering the action of any of our public servants. By hasty and inconsiderate action we may do an injury which it will take years to repair. At an early day in the last session of our Legislature, a few-Republicans suffered themselves to do what I believed to be a very unwise, and I hope you will pardon me when I say, a very foolish thing. I refer to the resolutions of censure of Lieutenant Governor Cumback. It was my private opinion then that each one of these individuals would live to repent their hasty and I think, indiscrete actions. I am one that does not like to shut my eyes to lessons of the past, The Democracy may, if they will, continue to censure our Republican officers, but I, for one, will decline to join with them. I prefer rather to indorse them all The Republicans can, surely indorse our Governor, and also our Lieutenant Governor, and all the rest of our public officers. When I was a candidate for Senator the Republicans of this State had a resolution in our State platform indorsing Andy Johnson, and also one indorsing Congress. I do not believe it will require any more stretch of conscience now than then. [Laughter.]
Mr. ROBINSON, of Madison, when his name was called, said he believed he had never voted to indefinitely postpone any proposition legitimately before the Senate, and that he never should. If there was anything in these resolutions, he was perfectly willing they should be investigated by a committee. If there is nothing in them an investigation by a committee will amount to nothing. Therefore, he voted "no."
So the motion to indefinitely postpone the resolutions was agreed to.
AGRICULTURAL COLLEGE,
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR laid page: 129[View Page 129] before the Senate a message from the Governor, enclosing a communication from Jesse Mehary, of Tippecanoe county, proposing to donate 320 acres of his farm, worth $30,000, to the State Agricultural College, provided that institution shall be located thereon. The letter of Mr. Mehary states that his neighbors are willing to give $50,000 more on the same conditions.
The communication was referred to the Committee on the Agricultural College.
NEW PROPOSITIONS.
Mr. HOWK, by leave, introduced a bill [S. 344] to legalize sales of guardians under orders defective, in that sales shall be made without notice, which was read the first time.
Mr. TURNER regarded that bill as intended to affect a case of an intended removal of a county seat in Martin county. He moved to reject the bill.
Mr. HOWK said he offered the bill at the request of a friend.
The motion was rejected yeas 17, nays 21.
The bill was then passed to the second reading.
Mr. CRAVENS, by leave, introduced a bill [S. 345] authorizing the Boards of Commissioners of the several counties of this State to provide for the destruction of foxes therein; which was read the first time.
By leave, Mr. GRAY also introduced a bill [S. 340] to amend section 29 of the school law; which was read the first time, and passed to the second reading.
On motion by Mr. CAVEN his bill [S. 273] authorizing the issuing of arms and equipments to independent military companies, was read the second time.
Mr. CAVEN made an ineffectual motion for a dispensation to read the bill the third time now.
On motion by Mr. HANNA, the bill [H. R. 7] to authorize foreign guardians to take possession of the property of their wards >n this State, was read the third time, and passed by yeas 35, nays 1.
SENATE BILLS ON THE THIRD READING.
On motion by Mr. WOOD, the Senate Proceeded to the consideration of Senate bills on the third reading. Mr. Green's bill [S. 98] to provide for the assessment of taxes for municipal purposes on bank stock, coming up -
On motion by Mr. GRAY, it was laid on the table.
Mr. Reynolds' bill [S. 54] empowering cities to establish public parks, and to acquire title to land for that purpose, coming up - it having heretofore (March 2d) failed to pass for want of a Constitutional majority -
On motion by Mr. GRAY, it was read.
The bill again failed to pass for want of a Constitutional majority, by yeas 23, nays 14.
Mr. Cavin's bill (S. 53,) to authorize the formation of co-operative societies, for the purchase and erection of dwellings and other buildings, was read for the third time.
Mr. CARSON objected to the provision requiring the paying in of only one per cent, of the stock subscribed; and opposed the bill on other grounds.
Mr. CAVIN explained the provisions of his bill, and as a measure much needed by the poorer class of persons in cities and large towns, commended it to the favorable consideration of Senators.
Mr. CARSON said the Committee on Corporations came to the conclusion that the measure was one calculated to wrong the poor man, because there was no responsibility provided for in the bill.
The bill failed to pass for want of a Constitutional majority; yeas 21, nays 15.
Mr. Rice's bill, [S. 118,] to amend section 10 of the act of May 4, 1852, concerning election contests; and to provide relief in cases of contests erroneously commenced by reasons of the misprint of said 10th section, etc., was read the third time and passed the Senate by yeas 28, nays 9.
Mr. Bradley's bill [S. 147,] creating the 9th and 12th Judicial Circuits, coming up-
Oo motion by Mr. FISHER it was laid on the table in the absence of its author.
Mr. Bellamy's bill [S. 148] to legalize the acknowledgements of instruments required to be recorded, taken by notaries after the expiration of their commission, was read the third time and passed by yeas 36, nays 1.
Mr. JOHNSON, of Montgomery's, bill [S. 149] to amend section 17, of the act of March 2, 1805, concerning the fees of officers(in relation to witness fees)was read the third time arid passed by yeas 32, nays 7.
Mr. Lasalle's bill [S, 162] to provide for the serving of process upon railroad companies was read the third time.
Mr. CARSON would like to amend the bill so that when both parties are nonresident, at least two months' pay of the employe shall be free from garnishment.
Mr. LASALLE regarded the amendment unnecessary.
The bill passed by yeas 33, nays 2.
Mr. CRAVENS' bill [S. 166] providing for the establisment of election precincts, was read the third time.
Mr. CRAVENS explained that the bill simply provides for the establishment of election precincts in incorporated towns.
It was passed by yeas 35, nays 0.
Mr. Caven's bill [S. 172] to exempt burial grounds from liens or sale on execu page: 130[View Page 130]tion or other process, being read the third time-
Mr. ELLIOTT asked and obtained leave to offer an emergency clause.
Mr. CARSON'suggested difficulties that might arise under this bill.
It was passed by yeas 37, nays 1.
Mr. Cvaen's bill [S. 173] to change the corporate name of the Widows and Orphan's Asylum to the Indianapolis Orphan's Home - was read the third time and passed by yeas 38, nays 0.
The Senate then adjourned.
