REPORTS FROM COMMITTEESRESIGNATIONS
Mr. DUNN, from a majority of the Committee on the Judiciary, returned his bill [H. R. 337] to amend section 50 of the act in relation to commissions, certificates and resignations of office, recommending the passage thereof without amendment.
Mr. COFFROTH, from the minority of said committee, submitted a report that said bill be indefinitely postponed.
Mr. COFFROTH. This bill is one ft prevent resignations. The present law provides that the resignation of members of the General Assembly shall be presented to the Governor. This bill provides that they shall be presented to their respective Houses, and that they shall not be valid till they are ratified or accepted by the proper House and the Governor is notified The report of the minority, recommending the indefinite postponement of the bill, requires the action of the House. The minority have made their report in contemplation of the right of every man, (when he desires to do so,) to resign or divest himself of office, and that just as soon as his resignation is made out and placed in the hands of the party having the right to receive it, his official existence ceases. He moved that the House concur in the report of the minority.
page: 181[View Page 181]Mr. DUNN. If there be any question as he propriety of the passage of this bill it is a constitutional question. And he held that there is no provision in the Constitution prescribing as to when or in what manner resignations shall be effected. For example. If it is competent for the Legislature to say that resignations of its members shall be sent to the Governor, is it not competent for the Legislature to say that their resignations shall be submitted to their respective Houses? And you have said by law that all resignations of members of the funeral Assembly shall be sent to the Governor. Where did the Legislature get that right? Not from the Constitution. Then because the Constitution is silent on he subject, if it is competent for the Legislature to say that these resignations shall be sent to the Governor, it is equally competent for it to say that they shall be sent to the proper House; and be ratified before they are binding. Now what was the necessity for the passage of a bill of this kind? Gentlemen might say, that there are party tactics in it. But he called attention to the fact, that it ties the hands of both parties alike. If it ties the hands of a Democratic minority, it also ties the hands of a Republican minority. Its object is simply to provide, that members, after they have qualified here shall not destroy the legislation of the State, by resignation. It simply requires of members to stay here and do that which they have sworn to do. It ties the hands of John Doe as well as Richard Roe, the black man as well as the white man, (and if a black man ever comes here as a member, he expected that he would come as a Democrat.) It ties the hands of all parties alike. And he assured the House that the people of the State are asking that this manner of defeating legislation, shall be stopped at once and fur all time.
Mr. BARRITT, interrupting. This I say : That I will never stay in my place here, and see such a bill as that pass.
Mr. DUNN continuing. It was just because that spirit is here, that he insisted that this bill ought to be passed. And if the gentleman from Bartholomew can go before the people, upon that issue, and say we, the minority, are proper judges whether rt is proper that such and such legislation shall be had or not, he, for one, was willing that the gentleman should go; and he felt the assurance, and he assured the gentleman from Bartholomew that upon such an issue, he would never represent his own or any other county again.
Mr. BARRITT. I have been sustained once; and, as I have been so instructed, I will try it again.
Mr. DUNN continued, and closed by alleging that the only question here is, Will the people indorse the doctrine that minorities shall be judges of the expediency of subjects of legislation?
Mr. COFFROTH demanded the yeas and nays on the question of concurrence in the minority report, and the vote resulted-yeas 43, nays 48 as follows:-
YEAS-Messrs. Addison, Admire, Barrett, Bates, Bobo, Britton, Calvert, Carnahan, Cave, Chapman, Coffroth, Gory, Cotton, Cox, Davis of Floyd, Dittemore, Fuller, Furnas, Greene, Hutchings, Hyatt, Johnson of Montgomery, Logan, Long, McBride, McDonald McFadin, McGregor, Miles, Mock, Montgomery, Neff. Palmer, Shoaff, Shoemaker, Sleeth, Gunman, Tebbs, Underwood, Wile, Williams of Knox, Zenor and Zollars-43.
NAYS-Messrs. Baker, Barnett, Beatty, Beeler. Bowen, Breckinridge, Davidson, Davis, of Elkhart, Dunn, Fairchild, Field of Lagrange, Gilham, Gordon, Hall, Hamilton, Higbee, Higgins, Hutson, Johnson of Parke, Johnson of Marshall, Jump, Kercheval, Lamborn, Mason, Millekan, Miller, Monroe, Osborn, Overmyer, Pierce of Porter, Pierce of Vigo, Ratliff, Ruddell, Sabin, Skidmore, Stanton, Stephenson, Stewart of Ohio, Stewart, of Rush, Taber, Vardeman, Vater, Wildman, Williams of Hamilton, Williams of St. Joseph, Williams of Union, Wilson and Mr. Speaker18.
Mr. GREENE explained his affirmative vote by the consideration which he took, that to press this bill now would be violative of a pledge that was given to the minority in this House.
Mr. UNDERWOOD voted affirmatively, not so much because he regarded this bill as unconstitutional, as that he regarded it as in direct violation of that pledge to the minority here; as to which (though he had no part in it,) he was no more inclined to assist others to break their pledges than to break his own.
So the minority report was rejected, and the bill passed to the files, with the report of the majority.
Mr. OSBORN, from the majority of the Judiciary Committee, returned his bill [H. R. 336] defining certain misdemeanors and prescribing punishment therefor, recommending its passage.
Mr. COFFROTH, from the minority of the same Committee, returned the same bill recommending that it be indefinitely postponed. He said this bill provides, in the first section, that any person elected a member of the General Assembly, and refusing to qualify, shall be fined $1,000.
Mr. OSBORN. Refusing-for the purpose of preventing a quorum.
Mr. COFFROTH accepted the explanation, they shall be fined at least one thousand dollars, and as much more as the court and jury see proper. The second section provides that, if members resign for a like object, they shall be treated in like manner. He moved that the report of the minority be concurred in, and thereupon demanded the yeas and nays.
Mr. OSBORN. This bill has been offered in good faith. It is for the purpose of secu page: 182[View Page 182]ring legislation proposed by the majority. There being barely time to pass the pressing bills, he gave notice that some time today he would move to take up these bills this and that of the gentleman from Lawrence and consider them. He hoped the minority report would riot be concurred in. The vote was then taken and it resulted as follows: yeas 54, nays 38.
YEAS-Mesrrs. Addison, Admire, Barritt, Bates, Bobo, Bowen, Britton, Calvert, Carnahan, Cave, Chapman, Coffroth, Cory, Cotton, Cox, Davis of Floyd, Dittemore, Fuller, Furnas, Gordon, Green, Hall, Hatchings, Hyatt, Johnson of Montgomery, Johnson of Parke, Logan, Long, McBride, McDonald, McFadin, McGregor, Miles, Mock, Monroe, Montgomery, Neff, Palmer, Ratliff, Shoaff, Shoemaker, Sleeth, Smith, Stephenson, Stewart of Rush, Sunman, Tebbs, Underwood, Welborn, Wile, Williams of Knox, Wilson, Zenor and Zollars-54.
NAYS-Messrs. Baker, Barnett, Beatty, Beeler, Breckinridge, Davidson, Davis of Elkhart, Dunn, Fairchild, Field of Lagrange, Gilham, Hamilton, Higbee, Higgins, Hutson, Johnson of Marshall, Jump, Kercheval, Lamborn, Mason, Millekan, Miller, Osborn, Pierce of Porter, Pierce of Vigo, Ruddell, Sabin, Skidmore, Stanton, Stewart of Ohio, Taber, Vardeman, Vater, Wildman, Williams of Hamilton, Williams, of St. Joseph, Williams, of Union and Mr. Speakre.-38.
Mr. GORDON, explaining, said he voted to concur in the report, to secure the consideration of Mr. Dunn's bill, [H. R. 337.]
Mr. MONROE voted affirmatively, because of the indefiniteness of the bill.
Mr. WILLSON explaining. We have a great deal of important legislation yet to do; and it would be impossible to pass this bill in its regular order; and we might consume the balance of the session in discussions of such propositions; and believing that we have the same power to perform any act of legislation without the minority that we have with them; he voted aye.
So the report of the minority was concurred in, and the bill was indefinitely postponed.
Mr. COFFROTH moved to reconsider this vote arid to lay the motion on the table; the latter motion was agreed to.
