HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
The house met at 9 o'clock A. M., and the reading of the Journal was dispensed with.
CRIMINAL CIRCUIT COURTS.
Mr. DUNN asked and obtained leave to introduce a bill [ H. R. 334 H. H 334 ] in relation to the Criminal Circuit Courts and the Judges thereof. [It declares their elections valid, and the proceedings of said courts legal and binding] It was read and referred.
COLLECTION OF SCHOOL TAX
Mr. Palmer introduced a bill [H. R. 335] to amend section 17 of the Common School law [so as to provide for the collection of the special Common School tax of such persons have been transferred for educational purposes.] It was read and referred
LEGISLATIVE QUORUM - RESIGNATIONS.
Mr. OSBORN introduced a bill [H. R. 336] defining certain misdemeanors, and prescribing punishment therefor [Any person elected as a Senator or Representative who shall, for the purpose of preventing a quorum, fail or refuse to quality, or who shall resign for that purpose, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction shall be fined not less than $1 000]
Mr. OSBORN moved that it be referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. MILES moved to reject the bill.
After debate by Messrs. WILLIAMS, of Knox, deprecating the bill as not contemplated in the Governor's proclamation calling the session; and by
Mr. JOHNSTON of Parke, against the motion, and deprecating the revolutionary act, it is intended to restrain - Mr. SHOAFF and Mr. McFADIN participating -
Mr. MILES, continuing the debate, stated that members have resigned their places here in order to submit a principle of the people - whether a constitutional amendment can subvert the Constitution of the State. And they were backed up by the people, and instructed to resist the fifteenth amendment to the last. They came here to do all the necessary legislation of the State, but when it is proposed by that legislation to put the fundamental law of the State in jeopardy, they are instructed. page: 71[View Page 71] to resist. When a fire brand of this character is thrown into the House, there was a justification for him to return his trust to the people; and it was the right and duty of a Representative, when a principle involving the rights of the people is attempted to be set up, if he can not resist it in any other way, to resign and go home, and he ought to be allowed to do so without any restraint. Sir, we came here on the call of the Governor to do certain necessary legislative business, but if instead you proceed to force upon us these fire brands of contention you can break up the Legislature again if you desire it.
Mr. OSBORN did not expect to engage in any discussion of this bill this morning; but supposed it would take the usual course - be sent to the committee, etc. But as gentleman have seen fit to take the bill up at the outset he was ready to meet them. Now what did this bill propose? Some gentlemen denounce it as a fire brand, others as unnecessary legislation; and others say it is not mentioned in the call of the Governor. Perhaps it was not, but Democratic members have also offered bills here, which were not mentioned in that proclamation, and no objection was made, because the Governor could not name all the legislation which should be done here in a single proclamation. Then that was no good reason why the bill should be rejected. Then why were we met with this extraordinary motion? I was perhaps the first time, either at this session or the last, that a motion has been offered to reject a bill at once, and in this case it came from a quarter he had scarcely expected. What did the bill propose that this motion should be made with so much feeling and interest? It proposes that the Legislature shall do the duties which the Constitution prescribes it shall do. I simply proposes that members coming here, representing their people and swearing to support the Constitution of the State of Indiana; and if they fail to do that, they shall be punished for it. The Constitution of the State has provided that two-thirds of the members of the Legislature shall be present in order to transact business. In other words it shall take sixty-seven members to constitute a quorum of this House. So, without a quorum we can do no business at all. And this bill provides simply for quorum, and that any member who, for the purpose of breaking a quorum - not for any other cause, as sickness, &c., when he has tried to do his duty -
Mr. WELBORN (interposing) How is the gentleman to know motives? Is the gentleman to be here all the time to determine what the object is for resigning?
Mr. OSBORN. No sir. Not at all. He left that with the court and jury, and the rule of law; which is determined by overt acts and declarations. He proceeded: These gentlemen, sir, have shown me their resignations now written out. They are ready to resign at any moment to prevent legislation distasteful to them. Sir, it is a sheer factious movement for the purpose of preventing the Legislature from performing its duties under the Constitution.
Mr. WELBORN What duties?
Mr OSBORN The Constitution requires needful legislation - the performance of our duties as representatives of the people. Does the Constitution make it out duty here to resign when the Congress of the United States proposes an amendment to the Constitution of the United States? The general Constitution provides that the Constitution of the United States and the laws of Congress in pursuance thereof are the paramount law of the land; and that it shall be the duty of all the Courts, whether State or Federal, to observe the laws of Congress and the Constitution of the United States, although the law of the State may be conflicting. Then I say that when the Congress of the United States proposes an amendment of the Constitution of the United States, by the same Constitution we are bound to act upon it, and whenever members of a Legislature refuse to act upon such a proposition they are refusing to support that Constitution which they have sworn to abide by and observe.
Mr. McFADIN (interposing). Is it the duty of the majority here to pass that which they know is contrary to the wishes of 75 000 majority of the people of the State?
Mr OSBORN If I admitted the premises in the gentleman's interrogatory, I might answer it as he would. But I do not admit that a majority of the people are opposed to the fifteenth article.
Mr McFADIN. Then why don't you submit it to the people?
Mr. OSBORN Because the Constitution of the United States says it shall be submitted to the Legislatures. And when you deny that, you dodge - you have not the manhood to do your duty.
Mr. McFADIN Are you not afraid to submit it to the people?
Mr. OSBORN I am not. The Constitution of the United States provides how amendments shall be made. And the 14th Amendment and other amendments have been ratified before, and none have asked that they should go to the people. I say, sir, that the only Constitutional way is that laid down in the Constitution itself, and that is submission to the Legislatures. And whenever members stand up here, page: 72[View Page 72] who are thinking men sent here by the people, and say "We are afraid to remain here and cast our votes on a question of this kind," it partakes of demagogueism.
Mr. MILES (interposing vehemently.) Are you afraid of your constituents? Are you afraid of the people? I say that any man afraid of his constituent is a coward.
Mr LAMBORN interposed a question of order
The SPEAKER. The Chair hopes the gentleman will stick to the question.
Mr. PIERCE of Vigo, was perfectly willing that cowardice or any epithet gentlemen please to indulge, may be implied in this debate.
Mr OSBORN. I shall not answer the gentleman here.
The SPEAKER The Chair is satisfied that the question of the gentleman from Sullivan [Mr. Miles] was not made in any offensive way. That question is for the House to determine. Whenever a member makes a declaration out of order, it is the duty of the Chair simply to submit the matter to the House
Mr MONROE thought it better that this matter, though not a political question, should go to the committee.
Mr. NEFF desired to say something; but now only that his colleague was not a coward
Mr OSBORN continued. I am rather at a lost to know where I left off, and what I was discussing at the time of this explosion. It was as to the submission of such a proposition to the people. Now, sir, there is no gentleman on the floor who has greater deference to the people than I.
Mr WELBORN here made the distinct point of order that the gentleman is not speaking to the question.
The SPEAKER sustained the point, thinking that the debate should be confined to the points of the bill.
Mr OSBORN. I propose to discuss the merits of the bill just as other gentlemen have, and to answer their arguments. The gentleman from Knox [Mr. Williams] said this was an indirect way of avoiding the submission of this question to the people. And this is a question on which I think a large latitude of discussion should be allowed. My only regret is that gentlemen have seen proper to spring it now. My idea was that it should go to the Judiciary Committee and take the ordinary course of bills. I have no desire to take an step for advancing the bill in any hurried way. I want fair and necessary legislation. And I regard this as necessary legislation.
It is said that this bill ought to be rejected, because the people of the State are opposed to such legislation; but there is nothing in it about the Fifteenth Amendment. We were told by the Governor a few days ago that it has grown almost into a custom to prevent legislation by means of a dodge; that is for the purpose of defeating what is deemed a political measure - for the purpose of advancing the interests of a party - members would come together in a factious way for the purpose of destroying a quorum and preventing legislation. And he told us that both parties have been guilty of it. Now, sir, I deplore this state of facts as much as any man, and I offer this bill in good faith to prevent bolts and factious movements on both sides. It has been drawn to apply to both parties alike. It is true that the Democrats are in the minority now, and they seek to defeat the Constitutional Amendment by resigning their seats. Two years from now Republicans may be in precisely the same position. And this thing ought to be prevented. This Legislature ought to be a Legislature beyond the power of any factious body of men to succeed in overthrowing for political purposes. This bill is for the purpose of enforcing the Constitution, which says we shall have a General Assembly composed of not more than one hundred members of the House, and not more than fifty members of the Senate. This bill is nothing more than for the purpose of preventing this way of breaking up the General Assembly.
Gentlemen say it is thrown in here as a fire brand - an insult to the people who have returned their resigned representatives. And these gentlemen claim that they have come back here endorsed. I do not know why my friend and colleague here (Mr. N) thinks about that, but I am inclined to think that he was glad to get back here, even with 500 votes less than he had before. And last fall I received over 3,000 votes. I come here endorsed by more votes than he. And I speak of this as an example of the result in the entire State.
Mr. McFADDIN (Interrupting). If this amendment had been placed before the people last fall, would you have been on the floor to-day?
Mr. OSBORN The question, in effect, was squarely before the people. Last fall when I was a candidate I told the people that I would come up and discharge my duties as their Representative - that I would vote for or against any measure presented in a Constitutional way. That I have done. That the gentleman from Cass has not done. And I am here to-day to act - to muster up to the front and meet every question in a Constitutional way, without dodging - without resigning. And I hope page: 73[View Page 73]every member elected here will have the to do the same thing.
I will now say a few words in regard to the bill and then I will have done, and I hope that every member here who wants talk will have the privilege of doing so. I drew this bill at my room without consulting a single member, Democrat or Republican. I believe no one had seen it except myself till this morning. It has been submitted to no clique-to none but the Indiana Legislature-this branch of it. It is offered for the purpose of securing a Quorum in the Legislature-the wishes of any political party to the contrary notwithstanding. I repeat here that I did not intend to take any step to advance the passage of this bill, beyond or out of its regular coarse. Let it go to the Committee on the Judiciary, which has more Democrats on it than any other committee in the House. Let them pass upon it as to whether or not it is necessary legislation, and let it come back with their opinion and go upon the files it the regular way. I shall seek no advantage for it; and indeed if any advantage is attempted I believe I will pledge myself to prevent it, for these gentlemen are dodging at everything, like a moon eyed horse in the night Why, I was amused here all last week at their carefulness about a little agreement which I had to sign in order to get Democrats here to stay in town. And I even offered to the gentlemen from Huntington to go before a Notary Public and swear to it. And after they had got what I thought would satisfy them, they were still afraid of us. And one Democrat followed me to the depot and wanted to know whether the agreement had a revenue stamp upon it. [Laughter.]
Mr. McFADIN. What was the reason you were afraid to make it public?
Mr. OSBORN What was the reason you wanted to make it public?
Mr. McFADIN. Because you wanted to carry it out very secretly.
Mr. OSBORN You wanted a pledge, and we gave you a written pledge; then, you wanted to publish it to make a show that we had come down. We were not afraid, but we did not desire to make it public in order to give you a political advantage; but when you failed to comply with it, then we did make it public.
Then I say, without detaining the House longer, that this bill is legitimately before the House in the regular way, and I hope the motion to reject will be voted down promptly. And I want to see our Democratic friends voting with us, instead of threatening to leave us here, because a bill has been offered simply for the purpose of a misdemeanor. But when "Sambo" comes up, then I suppose they will go and tell the people they can not stay.
Mr. NEFF regretted the motion to reject the bill He said his colleage (Mr Osborn) did a great deal to effect the organization even to the point of offending his party friend, and this bill might be by way of salve for his course in that matter. If this bill were to go to the Judiciary Committee, he rather thought it never would be heard of again He regarded it as unconstitutional. He was satisfied that it could never pass the General Assembly And it ought not to pass, in his judgment. He replied to the intimation that he was glad to be returned by the people to his place again, by stating that the reason why he had no opposition was because no man could defeat him on the issue. He reviewed the history of legislative bolting, and justified certain occasions for resigning office: otherwise, it would be to make an official position like a prison to every free man accepting office. He closed by intimating again the excuse of his colleague for submitting this bill because the gentleman desires to regain the disfavor he had incurred
Mr PIERCE of Porter, said it had been the feeling of Republicans, and he had felt it himself, that some such bill as this ought to be brought forward. And a leading Democrat of the Senate had said, that after the present occasion to resign had passed, he would himself be in favor of such a bill. We are simply forestalling that action by the opposition
Mr. PIERCE, of Vigo, said there was nothing startling in the proposition, or in the motion to refer it to the Judiciary Committee. But the gentleman from Sullivan [Mr. Miler] makes a motion that brings the question directly before the House. He rehearsed the pledges by which the organization was effected; the order to postpone the Fifteenth amendment. He appealed to gentlemen to vote down the motion; and when the bill comes up in order, he would be prepared to meet its enemies on principle.
Mr. SHOAFF rather regretted the motion to reject, for the bill, if good, certainly needs amendment. It should provide against the death as well as the resignation. In reply to Mr Pierce, of Porter, he admitted that he resigned in March even to break a quorum, and so, as best he could, to prevent infraction of the Constitution he had sworn to support He cared not now whether this bill goes to the committee or not. He warned gentlemen against trenching too far on the rights of the minority-that they may not be left again, without tho power to legislate. He spoke page: 74[View Page 74] to concilitate, and would rather the motion to reject might be withdrawn, and depend for its defeat upon the feeling and the belief that it is unnesessary at this time in the legislation of the State.
Mr. STEWART, of Rush, objected to the motion to reject, on the ground that it is discourteous. He showed that the principle of penalty for refusing to qualify was not new. There was a statutory provision which imposes a fine of $6 upon so low an officer as a supervisor of highways if he refuses to qualify.
Mr. CARNAHAN said that was the only case of penalty of refusing to qualify.
Mr. STEWART continued. He was opposed to gentlemen setting themselves up in their seats here, ex cathedra, as judges of the Constitution; and rehersed his objections to the motion to reject.
Mr. VATER contended for the free exercise of the judgement of the representative in cases where he does not know the wish and will of his constituents on the questions of the Fifteenth Amendment be believed that his constituents, and his people of the State would sustain him. And if they would not, he was willing to risk it. It was manifestly the duty of the enemies of the Fifteenth Amendment, knowing the will of their constituents to be against it, to stand here and combat it, and not dodge and run away from their plain duty. He said that, in come quarters, the patriotism of these resigning members was doubted. And their dutiful consideration of the bill would exonerate them (as he was willing to do,) from that imputation.
Mr. McFADIN charged that in his region this question involved in the Fifteenth Amendment was dodged last fall. If they had come out last fall, in its favor, the Democracy would have come out more than 50 000, at least. And if the Amendment should be adopted by this body, they come here under misrepresentations before the people. Being ruled out of order on this line of remarks, he proceeded to reply to Mr. Osborn's remarks on the outside proceedings by which the organization of the Session was effected.
Mr. STANTON submitted, whether the majority or the minority of the counties have a right to instruct their representatives to break up the Legislature?
Mr. McFADIN held that representatives have the right to obey the instructions of a majority of their people. He spoke at length of the unmistakable emphasis of the popular indorsement which he received - getting a hundred Republican votes, etc. He spoke of the monstrous impropriety of hastily passing a proposition against the will of the majority, which it is impossible to reverse. And this Fifteenth Amendment once passed, can not be reversed, either by the courts, the powers at Washington, or even the people themselves. He closed by correcting the error in these reports of his remarks yesterday in regard to the loss of documents at the post office. He simply wanted to inquire whether the blame at the post office or with the officials of the House.
Mr. HAMILTON moved to lay Mr. M's motion on the table - the vote thereon resulting - yeas 46, nays 31, as follows:
YEAS. Messrs. Baker, Barnett, Beatty, Bowen, Breckenridge, Chapman, Davidson, Davis of Elkhart, Dunn, Fairchild, Field of Lake, Field of Lagrange, Furnas, Gilham, Goodman, Green, Hall, Hamilton, Higbee, Higgins, Lutson, Johnson of Parke, Kercheval, Lamborn, Mason, Millekan, Miller, Monroe, Osborn, Overmeyer, Pierce of Porter, Pierce of Vigo, Radcliff, Ruddell, Sabin, Skidmore, Smith, Stanton, Stewart of Ohio, Stuart of Rush, Taber, Underwood, Vater, Williams of Hamilton, Williams of Union, and Mr. Speaker - 45
NAYS - Messrs. Admire, Bates, Briton, Calver, Carnahan, Cave, Cory, Cotton, Cunningham, Dittemore, Fuller, Hutchings, Hyatt, Johnson of Montgomery, Logan, Long, McBride, McDonald, McFadin, McGregor, Mives, Mack, Montgomery, Neff, Odell, Shoemaker, Sleeth, Sunman, Tebbs, Welborn, and Williams of Knox - 31.
So the motion to reject was laid on the table.
And then, on the motion of Mr. OSBORN, the bill was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. DUNN asked and obtained leave to introduce a bill [H. R. 337] to amend section 5 of the act in relation to commissioners, certificates and resignations of office.
[It proposes that members of the General Assembly, when the resign, shall tender their resignations to that branch of the General Assembly to which they belong for acceptance, & c, and other officials of the authorities from which they receive their appointments, &c]
It was referred to the Judiciary Committee.
SOLDIERS OF THE WAR OF 1812 AND MEXICAN WAR
Mr LONG asked and obtained leave to introduce a joint resolution [H. R. 12] for Congressional instructions for the passage of a law to place the soldier of the war with Mexico upon the pension roll on an equality with the soldiers in the war of the rebellion in 1861.
It was referred to the Committee on Federal Relations.
LEGISLATIVE EXPENSES
On the motion of Mr. CORY the order of business was suspended for a report from page: 75[View Page 75] the Committee on Ways and Means - yeas, 45; nays 24.
Mr. STANTON, from said committee, reported back Mr. Cory's bill [H. R. 333] appropriating $40,000 for the expenses of the session, with an amendment making the sum $60,000
Mr. OSBORN moved that it be laid on the table, which was decided in the negative - yeas 29, nays 42.
Mr. CORY moved that the orders of the day be further suspended, and the bill be read the second time.
Mr. STEWART suggested a clerical error of the bill. This is not the 47th session of the General Assembly; but a special session of the 46th General Assembly.
The SPEAKER said the question is on non-concurrence in the amendment reported by the committee.
It was adopted, and then the clerical error was corrected.
Mr Cory's motion was then agreed to, and the bill was read the second time
Mr. JOHNSTON, of Parke, proposed to amend by appropriately inserting these words, after the word dollars, "or so much thereof as may be necessary."
Mr NEFF moved to suspend the Constitutional restriction and pass the bill today
Mr OSBORN moved to lay that motion on the table, and the question was decided in the negative-yeas 27 ways 43
The House then took the recess till 2 o'clock.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
The SPEAKER, resumed at 2 o'clock p. M, and announced the pendency of Mr. Neff's motion to suspend the Constitutional restriction for the final passage of Mr, Cory's Legislative Appropriation bill [H. R. 332]
After the hearing of sundry privileged motions for leaves of absence
On the motion of Mr. WELBORN, the vote of yesterday on the order to adjourn from Saturday till Tuesday was reconsidered; and then-
On his further motion, the order was amended so as to read: when the House adjourns to-day it shall be till Tuesday morning, at 9 o'clock; and so it was adopted
Mr. VATER (obtaining leave) introduced a bill [H R 338] amending sections 4, 13 and 15 of the act to establish a Home for disabled Indiana Soldiers and Seamen and their orphans and widows; approved March 11, 1867, and supplementary thereto
It respects the duties of the Trustees of said Institution. They shall make a secretary of their number, shall be entitled to four dollars per day. The expenses of the inmates of the Home not to exceed $2 50 per week, etc Said Trustees to be legal guardians of the person of all children entitle to admission to said Home. Said Trustees may employ an Assistant Superintendent, who hall be a reputable minister of the gospel, at not exceeding $600 per annum, who shall officate as chaplain, and have quarters at the Home; and shall perform such other duties as shall be assigned him by said Trustee.
On motion of Mr. UNDERWOOD, the order of business was suspended to admit of a report from the Committee on Education.
Mr. STEWART, of Ohio, from said committee, then returned Mr. Underwood's bill [H. R. 321] to amend the school law, so as to allow cities and towns to sell bonds for the purchase of school houses and buildings, with a recommendation that it do pass.
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Knox, moved to further suspend the order of business, so as to admit of the order for the introduction of bills; and the vote thereon discovering no quorum present The House adjourned till Tuesday.
