HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
TUESDAY, February 7, 1871.The House met at 9 o'clock A. M.
The order of the reading of the journal of Saturday, by the Clerk, proceeded till--
On motion of Mr. TEBBS, the further reading was dispensed with.
THE BRIBERY BILL.
Mr. CAUTHORN rose to a question of privilege, stating the history of the Bribery Bill [S. 21] in the Senate, and its provisions; that it has been awaiting the action of the House since the last day of January; that it has been inquired after by Senators anxious for the action of the House, and he moved for a suspension of the rules and restrictions so that the bill may be taken up and carried to the third reading and final passage.
Mr. WILSON. That is a very good bill, and I am in favor it; but the unfinished business pending at the adjournment on Saturday is the first thing in order, and that is the call of the House.
The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Marion is right.
On motion of Mr. NEFF, the proceedings under the call of the House were dispensed with.
The SPEAKER then entertained the motion of Mr. Cauthorn; and the rules and restrictions, being suspended by yeas 72, nays 8, the "Bribery Bill" [S. 21] was taken up, read the second time by title, and then read through and passed the final reading without amendment, in the House of Representatives--yeas 94, nays 0; and it was ordered that the Clerk acquaint the Senate thereof.
STATE AGENT.
Mr. McDONALD asked that the rules and restrictions be suspended, to enable him to offer a bill for a very important measure--it was to reduce the fees and stealings of the Agent of State from $6,000 to $1,000 per annum.
Mr. WILSON, Mr. RUDDELL and Mr. RAWLES objected to the suspension for anything out of the regular order.
Mr. STONE and Mr. BALLENGER preferred the suspension. Inasmuch as the Agent of State is to be elected to-morrow this bill ought to pass.
Mr. FRIEDLEY and others preferred that the office of Agent of State should be abolished.
The rules and restrictions were than suspended, by yeas 69, nays 16, and Mr. McDONALD introduced a bill, [H. R. 265], for an act to amend an act prescribing the duties and fixing the compensation of the Agent of State. (It provides that he shall receive an annual compensation of $1,000).
Mr. MACK, (Mr. Sabin in the Chair), proposed to amend so as to fix the salary and expenses at $2,000.
Mr. McDONALD moved to lay the amendment on the table.
Mr. FRIEDLEY desired and gave notice of an amendment to the amendment that might fix the salary at $500 per annum.
Mr. GORDON, of Boone, would support the amendment of Mr. Friedley. He was not in favor of any officer performing public service without compensation. But he was in favor of abolishing the office of Agent of State. The business of his office can be transacted by the State Auditor, or almost any other officer of State.
The motion to lay the amendment on the table was rejected--yeas 18, nays 72; and the question recurred on the adoption of the amendment.
Mr. McDONALD demanded the previous question thereon, and under its pressure the amendment was rejected--yeas 7, nays 85--Mr. Ballenger explaining his negative vote: The proposition of the gentleman from Whitly is perhaps the best thing we can get.
Mr. McDONALD again demanded the previous question.
Mr. CAUTHORN demanded the special order.
Mr. BIGGS moved to refer the bill to the Committee on Federal Relations, with instructions to make the compensation $500, instead of $1,000.
On motion of Mr. CUNNINGHAM, Mr. Biggs' motion was laid on the table.
On motion of Mr. WILSON, the restrictions were further suspended--yeas 83, nays page: 236[View Page 236] 12--and then the vote on the final passage of the bill resulted--yeas 81, nays 14--as follows:
YEAS--Messrs. Abbett, Ballenger, Barnaby, Beeler, Browning, Bruner, Butterworth, Caldwell, Calkins of Porter, Cauthorn, Conner, Copper, Cox, Cunningham, Curtis, Deputy, Devol, Donham, Friedley, Furnas, Galletine, Gentry, Goble, Gordon of Boone, Gordon of Cass, Guthrie, Hardin, Hartley, Haynes, Heilman, Henderson, Hendry, Hill, Hooker, Hynes, Kennedy, Kink, Kirkpatrick, Lines, Major, Martin of Wayne, McDonald, McDowell, McFarland, McGowan, Minick, Miles, Millikan, Mitchell, Monroe, Montgomery, Myers, Neff, Oakley Ray, Rawles, Rice, Sabin, Sayers, Simpson, Schoenemann, Shutt, Stanley, Stephens, Stephenson, St. John, Stone, Tarlton, Taughinbaugh, Taylor, Tebbs, Washburn, Warrum, Wilson, Wood, Woodard, Wymer, and Zenor--81.
NAYS--Messrs. Biggs, Calkins of Fulton, Defrees, Furnas, Knight, Martin of Putnam, Netherton, Rhodes, Ruddell, Snodgrass, Strickland, Walker, White, and Mr Speaker--14.
Mr. FRIEDLY, explaining his vote, said: I was anxious to have this office abolished, but as it is apparent that we can't get that, nor the reduction to $500, I vote "aye."
Mr. MARTIN of Putnam, explaining: I am in favor of abolishing the office of Agent of State; and believing that the passage of this bill will make it more difficult to accomplish that object, I shall vote against it. It is said that this agent is in the habit of stealing; but if you send the State Agent to New York on a salary of $1,000, you compel him to steal.
Mr. NETHERTON: I desire to see this office abolished, believing it to be entirely uncalled for. Still, as this perhaps is the best we can get I vote aye.
Mr. RUDDELL: I believe we have no no use for the Agent of State--that others can perform his duties. I am therefore in favor of abolishing the office; I shall vote no on this proposition.
Mr. STONE: Early in the session, on the 9th of January, I introducnd a bill that the Governor and Senate appoint a temporary Agent if necessary. That bill was made the special order for to-day at 10 o'clock. A minority of the committee to whom it was referred reported a proposition for a reduction of the pay to $1,000, and believing that this bill is right, as I believe also that that report was right, I vote aye.
Mr. WASHBURN: He understood that the stealing mentioned consists in the Agent availing himself of the use of the Government funds in his hands--the interest thereon for the time he holds them. Supposing this is the best we can now do, I shall vote aye.
Mr. WHITE, explaining: if we can't constitutionally abolish this office, we should pay enough to enable the agent to live without stealing. I believe I will vote no on this question.
Mr. MACK. I shall vote no upon this proposition for this reason; when the question comes before the House, as it will in a few days--whether we are ready to vote $600,000 to pay those 191 old internal improvement bonds--I believe that a majority will put their foot on it, and say these bonds shall be funded under the Butler Bill. I believe that $2,000 to be as little as the agent should have to discharge his duty. And when it comes to the question of the Governor's house, rent bill of $5,000, can we expect gentlemen to manifest a similar spirit? I think this office is necessary, and that $2,000 is little enough. I vote no.
Mr. DAVIDSON said he had voted on this question with some hesitation, and upon reflection desired to change his vote. If we maintain this Agency, and I think we should--to pay but $1,000 is virtually an abrogation of it. I do not believe it can be maintained on that, and if we attempt to patch up the thing in that way we will place the Agency in such a shape as to bring us into trouble. On reflection, however much I may be in the minority, I desire to change and vote no.
The vote was then announced as above, and so the bill passed the House of Representatives.
Mr. NEFF asked, ineffectually, for unanimous consent to report on Mr. Ruddell's Sinking Fund bill [H. R. 204.]
THE SO-CALLED FIFTEENTH AMENDMENT.
Mr. WILSON and Mr. MITCHELL now demanded that the House recur to the consideration of the special order, to-wit: the Senate joint resolution No. 7, in relation to the so-called amendment, etc.--the question being on Mr. Browning's motion to refer the resolution to the Committee on Federal Relations, and it being under the force of the previous question--
The SPEAKER ordered the vote to be token, which resulted--yeas 47; nays 43--as folllows:
YEAS--Messrs Abbett, Barnaby, Britton, Browning, Bruner, Caldwell, Cauthorn, Copner, Cox, Cunningham, Curtis, Davidson, Devol, Galletine, Gentry, Goble, Gordon of Boone, Gordon of Cass, Guthrie, Hardin, Hartley, Haynes, Henderson, Hynes, McDonald, McDowell, McFarland, Minnick, Miles, Montgomery, Neff, Oakley, Rice, Simpson, Shutt, Stanley, Stevens, Stone, Tarlton, Taughinbaugh, Tebbs, Walker, Warrum, Zenor, and Mr. Speaker--47
NAYS--Messrs. Ballenger, Beeler, Biggs, Butterworth, Calkins of Fulton, Calkins or Porter, Conner, Defrees, Deputy, Donham, Friedley, Furnas, Heilman, Hill, Hooker, Kennedy, King, Kirkpatrick, Knight, Lines, Martin of Putnan, Millikan. Mitchell, Monroe, Myers, Netherton, Rawles, Rhodes, Ruddell, Sabin, Sayers, Schoenemann, Snodgrass, Stephenson, St John, Strickland, Taylor, Washburn, White, Williams, Wilson, Wood, Woodward and Wymer--43.
SINKING FUND INVESTMENT.
Mr. NEFF now obtained unanimous consent to submit his report from the Committee on Ways and Means, a majority thereof returning Mr. Ruddell's sinking fund investment bill [H. R. 204] with amendments, making the rate of interest 8 per cent., and the proportion of distribution according to the last census; and requiring the Auditor of State to notify the County Auditors of the amounts due them.
Mr. NEFF also presented the report of a minority of the same committee, returning Mr. Ruddell's bill with an amendment by way of substitute, viz:
A bill [H. R. 266] for an act to amend the page: 237[View Page 237] 6th section of an act to provide for the custody and management of the notes, bonds and mortgages arising directly out of loans heretofore made by the Board of Sinking Fund Commissioners, etc.
Mr. BROWNING moved that the report of the minority be concurred in.
Mr. RUDDELL. It seems to me that the orignal bill for which this minority bill is offered for a substitute is every way preferable.
Mr. CALKINS, of Porter. Will the gentleman explain the difference between the two bills?
Mr. RUDDELL. The original bill provides that the funds now in the hands of the State Auditor belonging to the School Fund, and such as may hereafter come into his bands, shall be loaned under the provisions of the act with all the safeguards and guarantees provided by the college fund law, which is acknowledged by all to be superior to any law we have for loaning our funds. The money to be loaned on real estate security--in amount not exceeding $1,000 to one man; and the real estate security shall be in double the amount loaned, and be valued according to the appraisements for taxation. And no real estate to be taken as security the title to which may be in dispute or in the hands of heir, executors, or administrators. It provides that the money shall be distributed to the counties in proportion to population as shown by the last United States census. It proposes that all the people shall be equally benefited by the distribution of this fund which is the proceeds of their own earning, for the benefit of their children. It provides that the State Auditors shall notify the auditors of the different counties that applications will be received from their counties for loans of their distributive share of this fund, by publication in the INDIANA STATE JOURNAL and Indiana State Sentinel. It then provides that these loans shall be effected within ninety days--the object being to secure the profits arising from the interest to the school fund immediately, for if it were all loaned the amount of interest would exceed a hundred dollars a day. It piovides that the citizens of each county shall borrow their shares by filing their claims; and if any county fail to make application within the prescribed time, that surplus shall be loaned on application from any part of the State. This bill will secure the prompt investment of all this fund.
The substitute proposes to distribute the money outright immediately to the counties; and that County Auditors shall be responsible each for the investment of his counties distributive share--regardless of applications from the counties for loans. There may not be a sufficient number of borrowers to absorb the money in every county and that surplus may be idle. This substitute does not provide that in case the money distributed to any county is not borrowed within 90 days, or any other time, it shall be returned to the State Treasury and loaned in any other county; but such surplus will remain there uninvested and profitless to the school fund.
When he had concluded--
On motion of Mr. WILLIAMS the further consideration of he subject was postponed, and it was made the special order for tomorrow, 3 o'clock p. m.
THE WILE SHOENEMANN CONTEST.
Mr. McDONALD called for the special order, towit : the consideration of the report from the Committee on the Judiciary and the Committee on Elections--the question being on the adoption of Mr. Cauthorn's resolutions, declaring that Mr. Shonemann's seat is vacant and authorizing the clerk to acquaint the Governor.
Mr. McDONALD, deprecating debate, declared that this is not a question as to victims. The House did not want a victim in the person of Mr. Schoenemann, it was a question of fact and of constitutional law as to whether he is entitled to a seat here. He made the points of fact and of law here and in committee--that Mr. Schoenemann was holding and receiving the benefits of the office of Deputy Postmaster at the time he was sworn in--that he was laboring under a disability and could not be made a member of the House by law. He then read from the laws of the United States concerning the duties and responsibilities of Postmasters, declining to go farther into the argument. He demanded the previous question on the resolutions of Mr. Cauthorn.
Mr. RUDDELL. Does the gentleman from Laporte (Mr. Shoenemann) now labor on the alledged disability?
Mr. McDONALD. Yes.
Messrs. FRIEDLEY, COPNER and WILSON deprecated the demand for the previous question, and there being no second--
Mr. ST. JOHN followed in a prepared speech, which is crowded out in this place, coming to the following conclusions: First. That the contestee was eligible to be voted for and elected. Second. That he received 275 more votes than the contestor and was duly elected. Third. That he was ineligible to a seat in this House while he remained Deputy Postmaster. Fourth. That his disability was completely removed by his resignation, accepted on the 20th of December, 1870. That on the fifth day of January, 1871, he was eligible to a seat in this House, and that he is defacto and dejure the Representative from the county of Laporte.
Mr. ZENOR. On account of the similarity of this case to that of the Beatty-Peele contest here two years ago, and believing that that decision was right, he would be compelled to vote for the resolution.
Mr. CAUTHORN called for a division of the question on the resolution--the first question being on the declaration that Shoenemann is not entitled to his seat.
The yeas and nays being demanded and taken thereon resulted--yeas , nays , as follows:
YEAS--Messrs. Abbett, Barnaby. Britton, Browning, Bruner, Caldwell, Cauthorn, Copner. Cox, Cunningham, Curtis, Davidson, Devol Dunham, Galletine,Gentry. Goble, Gordon, or Cass, Guthrie, Hardin, Hartley, Haynes, Hendry, Hynes, Knight, McDonald, McDowell, McFarland, McGowan, Minick, Miles, Mitch-
page: 238[View Page 238]ell, Montgomery, Neff, Oakley, Rice, Shutt, Stanley. Stephens, Tarlton, Taughinbaugh, Tebbs, Walker, Warrum, Zenor and Mr. Speaker--47.
NAYS--Messrs. Ballenger, Beeler, Biggs, Butterworth, Calkins of Fulton, Connor, Defrees, Deputy, Freidley, Furnas, Gordon, of Boone, Heilman, Henderson, Hill, Hooker, Kennedy, King, Kirkpatrick, Lines, Major, Martin of Wayne, Martin, of Putnam, Millikan, Myers, Netherton, Rawles, Rhodes, Ruddell, Sabin, Sayers, Snodgrass, Stephenson, St John, Stone, Strickland, Washburn, White, Williams, Wilson, Wood, Woodward and Mr. Wymer--43.
Mr. HENDERSON in explaining his vote said:
Mr. SPEAKER. In reality there is but one point in the whole matter, and that was whether Schoenemann resigned prior to the 5th day of January and was no ager Postmaster. We nearly all agreed upon the other points of law in the case. The evidence showed middling clearly that Schoenemann did resign, and that resignation was accepted prior to the sitting of this Assembly. On these facts I claim that Shoenemann was as eligible to a seat in this Assembly as any man in it. After he resigned, and that resignation was accepted, he no longer held office; he was no longer postmaster according to the spirit of the Constitution of the State of Indiana. It was true, sir, that his bonds was still in force against him--large enough, doubtless, to cover all losses that might have occurred during the whole time he was postmaster. Shoenemann's bond will doubtless be in force long after his successor is qualified and has taken possession of the property of the office. Now, sir, the question is, when was Shoenemann divested of the office of postmaster? On this point we differed, and I claim, sir, that he was no longer postmaster after the acceptance of his resignation by the government The only thing that was left for him to do was to deliver, when called for, all the books, papers and such other property belonging to the office to his successor or some other agent of the government authorized to receive them. Now, sir, the office has clearly gone out of Shoenemann's reach. He could not get it back without the consent of the government. Neither could the governmen compel him to serve as postmaster any longer. I claim that the postoffice has gone far enough from Shoenemann for the light to shine distinctly between them. It has gone so far that it was out of the power of Shoenemann to get it back.
Mr. KNIGHT, explaining: I believe that where a man accepts the office of Postmaster, to discharge the duties and receive its emoluments, he must hold it till his successor can take his place. He can not appoint his successor. At first, I had made up my mind to vote to admit Mr. Shonnemann, but from additional facts developed, I shall have to change my mind, for it is admitted that Shonnemann accepted the emoluments of the office till the 10th of January; that he continued to report to the Department--having failed to notify the Government of the emergency in time: and therefore he must be regarded as ineligible. I vote no.
Mr. ST. JOHN (interposing). I did not make the statement that Shoenemann accepted the emoluments after his resignation.
Mr. RAY was excused from voting.
Mr. RUDDELL. I have had no doubt in my mind of the eligibility of Shoenemann at the commencement of the session, and that he was removed as postmaster; and there being no other man who received the majority of votes in his county I vote "no."
Mr. TAYLOR was excused.
The vote was then announced as above, and the question recurred on the second division of the first resolution, the yeas and nays thereon resulting--yeas, 61; nays,30--as follows:
YEAS--Messrs. Abbett, Ballenger, Beeler, Biggs, Bruner, Butterworth, Calkins of Fulton, Cauthorn, Conner, Cunningham, Deputy, Devol, Friedley, Gordon of Boone, Hardin, Hartley, Heilman, Henderson, Hendry, Hill, Holland, Hooker, Kennedy, King, Kirkpatrick, Knight, Lines, Major, Martin of Wayne, Martin of Putnam, Minich, Miles, Millikan, Mitchell. Monroe, Myers, Neff, Oatley, Ray, Rawles, Rhodes, Rice, Ruddell, Sabin, Sayers, Snodgrass, Stephens, Stephenson, St. John Stone, Strickland, Taughinbaugh, Washburn, Warrum, White, Williams, Wood, Woodward, Wymer, Zenor and Mr. Speaker.
NAYS--Messrs. Barnaby, Britton, Browning. Caldwell, Copner, Cox, Curtis, Davidson, Defrees, Donham, Gallentine, Gentry, Goble, Gordon of Cass Guthrie, Haynes, Hynes, McDonald, McDowell, McFarland, McGowan, Montgomery, Netherton, Simpson, Shutt, Stanley, Tarlton, Tebbs, Walker, and Wilson.
Messrs. Ballenger, Biggs, Britton, Browning, Friedley, Kennedy, Lines, Netherton, Rawles, Rhodes, Ruddell, White and Zenor explaining their votes, and Messrs. Furnas and Taylor being excused--the result was announced as above.
So, the first resolution was adopted.
The second resolution, recommending that the reports from the Committee on Elections and from the Committee on the Judiciary, be laid on the table, Was adopted by yeas 61, nays 25.
The House then took a recess till 2 o'clock.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
The SPEAKER resumed at 2 o'clook P. M.
THE MORTON-CALKINS CONTEST.
Mr. CAUTHORN (presenting a paper from C. N. Morton, addressed to the Speaker, and withdrawing his contest for the seat of Mr. Calkins of Porter, because the same point involved in his case has been decided by the House in the Wile Shoenemann case, and because he would not put his county to the expense of another election), submitted the following:
WHEREAS. The contestor in the case of Charles N. Morton against W. H. Calkins has asked leave of the House to withdraw the contest now pending in relation to the seat, in the preset; Assembly, from the county of Porter, for the reason therein stated; therefore,
Be it resolved, That Charles A. Morton be allowed to withdraw his contest herein made.
Resolved, That the Committee on Elections are hereby instructed to return the papers in said case to the Clerk of the House, to be by him preserved as others papers are preserved, and take no further action therein.
page: 239[View Page 239]Resolved, That said Charles N. Morton be allowed the sum of $50 for expenses incurred herein. and $175 for 35 days attendance as per diem, and $64 as mileage for 320 miles travel--that the same be paid by order drawn on the State Treasury, attested by the Speaker of the House.
Mr. CALKINS, of Porter, hoped that objection would not he urged against the adoption of this resolution. In a similar case which was taken in a contest during the last session, a larger compensation was allowed.
After further debate by Messrs. GORDON of Boone, NEFF and CALKINS--the latter insisting that it was but a matter of justice to his contestor, who is a gentleman, himself taking a liberal and highminded view of the case--under the force of the previous question, the preamble and resolution was rejected--yeas 24, nays 58.
Mr. CALKINS of Porter then submitted the following:
Resolved, That Charles W. Morton be allowed the sum of $175 for thirty-five days attendance, and $65 for 320 miles travel, which shall be paid on an order on the State Treasurer, attested by the Speaker.
Which was adopted by yeas 48, nays 42.
CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION BILL.
Mr. CALKINS--of Porter's Constitutional Convention bill [H. R. 103], was now taken upon the second reading, it being the especial order of the day--the question being on a motion to indefinitely postpone the bill.
Mr. CALKINS, of Porter, spoke at length in support of the bill--the speech being reserved for revision will appear hereafter.
Mr. NEFF replied briefly.
Mr. BUTTERWORTH demanded the previous question, and under its pressure the motion was agreed to on a division--affirmative, 48, negative not announced.
So the bill was indefinitely postponed.
Mr. STONE presented two claims.
COMMERCIAL LAWS.
Mr. CAUTHORN presented the memorial of the convention of business men of the State held in Indianapolis on the first day of February, together with the draft of several bills for sundry amendments to the commercial law of the State. The memorial is in the following words:
To the General Assembly of the State of Indiana:
The undersigned, a committee appointed by a delegate convention of the business men of the State, held at Indianapolis, on Wednesday, the 1st day of February, 1871, respectfully submit to your honorable body the following
MEMORIAL:
Said convention was called, pursuant to public notice through the daily and weekly papers of the State, and by circular letters addressed to Boards of Trade and business men in various towns and cities, for a commercial convention to consider, with a view to recommending appropriate legislation, certain subjects, on which a revision of the laws was deemed necessary, in order to further the interests of commerce, trade and manufacture, and thereby promote the general welfare. The convention was numerously attended by leading business men of the State, every Congressional district but one being represented, and the convention, after careful deliberation, adopted, with remarkable unanimity, the following propositions and recommendations, the favorable consideration of which by your body will, in the judgment of the Convention, promote the best interests of the State.
The Convention was of the opinion that the great need of Indiana, in order to develop her vast resources, was the enactment of such laws as should promote the introduction into the State of more wealth producing citizens and more capital--briefly, more men and more money. To this end, it was deemed requisite that labor should find active and permanent employment in diversified pursuits, at good wages, and that capital, whether in trust, or investment, or in the immediate control of its owners, should receive fuller protection by law in order to secure it from fraud and perversion, and its returns from unnecessary delay. The committee submit the several propositions adopted by the convention without explanation or argument. The reasons which actuated the Convention can, if desired, be presented in detail to the various committees to which the subjects may be referred.
THE CONVENTION RECOMMEND:
- The adoption, by the General Assembly, of such measures as will promote immigration to this State.
- Asking Congress to pass an appropriation to construct an outside harbor and otherwise improve the port of Michigan City in accordance with the recent recommendations of the United States Board of Engineers.
- Asking for an act providing for deeds of trust for amounts not less than five thousand dollars.
- Asking for a law protecting the holders of warehouses receipts and bills of lading, the issuing of wrong receipts made a felony, and punished accordingly.
- Asking the Legislature to pass a law more clearly defining embezzlement, and making it felony on the part of any bailee, factor or commission merchant to convert property or proceeds to his own use in amounts exceeding $25.
- Asking for a law defining days of grace on bills of exchange and drafts, and to allow three days grace on sight drafts, with no grace on demand or "no time paper," except ordinary bank checks and banker's drafts.
- Asking the Legislature to amend the law so as to require that deeds and mortgages shall be recorded within thirty days, instead of ninety days as at present.
- Asking for a law providing for the return of all executions in the hands of sheriffs within ninety days instead of six months.
- Asking for a repeal of the law allowing redemption of property sold at sheriff's sale, in all contracts hereafter to be made.
- Asking for the repeal of all laws providing for appraisement and valuation of property sold on execution.
- Asking the passage of a law making judgments bear the same rate of interest as the contracts upon which they were obtained.
- Asking that the Legislature pass a law prohibiting all seining and netting of fish in the streams and lakes of the State of Indiana.
- Asking that the existing statutes relating to landlord and tenant, being harsh and oppressive, may be greatly modified.
- Recommending a law fixing the weight of corn in the ear at seventy pounds per bushel.
- Recommending the passage of a law against the sale of salt fish and other articles of merchandise in short-weight packages.
- Recommending a revision of the laws for the collection of taxes and the adoption of a system which will insure the collection of the entire amount of taxes assessed by State, county or township authority throughout the State.
- Recommending the enactment of a law defining legal holidays.
The Committee have prepared bills and petitions comprehending the above subjects, all of which are respectfully submitted to the General Assembly for their consideration.
By order of the Convention:
WILLARD CARPENTER JOHN ZULAUF, B. F. JONES, IRVIN REID, W. P. FISHBACK, FRANCIS SMITH, J. W. MURPHY, WILLIAM WINES, L. A. FOOTE, C. B. KNOWLTON, JOEL B. EDWARDS, H. H. WALKER, W. R. NOFSINGER, A. L. ROACHE, NATHAN KIMBALL, T. B. ELLIOTT, W. C. TARKINGTOM. Committee.
Mr. CAUTHORN, thereupon, also submitted a resolution,which was adopted, that the said memorial of the business men of the State together with the drafts of resolutions and bills recommended by them be referred to a joint select committee, to consist of four members on the part of the House of Repre-ratives to act with a similar committee on the part of the Senate, and that said committee be required to consider and report on the same as they may see proper,
Mr. WARRUM presented a petition for amendment of the divorce laws.
Mr. NEFF asked and obtained leave to introduce a bill reported in compliance with the resolution of Mr. Taylor, to-wit: A bill [H. R. 267] for an act to provide for the payment into the general fund of the State Treasury all moneys collected from the State Debt Sinking Fund tax which may not be needed for the payment of the State debt.
CHANGE OF VENUE.
Mr. TARLTON introduced a bill [H. R. 268] for an act to provide for changes of venue from the criminal courts, and legalizing changes already granted.
Mr. MACK (Mr. Cauthorn in the chair) stated that there is no law for a change of venue from the Criminal to the Circuit courts.
On motion of Mr. CALKINS of Porter, (the rules and restrictions being suspended for the purpose) the bill was read three times and finally passed the House of Representatives, yeas 82, nays 1.
Messrs. St. John, McFarland and Britton presented temperance petitions. Mr. Milligan a divorce petition, and Mr. Cox a petition to let the gravel road law alone.
THE CALENDERSTATE CLAIMS.
The Senate joint resolution No. 6, for the prosecution and collection of State claims, was passed by the House of Representatives without amendment by yeas 82, nays 2.
The Senate joint resolution No. 8, in relation to an appropriation by Congress for the completion of the Michigan City harbor, was passed by the House by yeas 86, nays none.
The engrossed bill [S.149] to amend section 14 of the act concerning promissory notes, etc., was passed on the first reading.
IRON-CLAD NOTES.
Mr. Ballenger's iron-clad note bill, [H. R. 75,] was finally passed the House of Representatives--yeas 74, nay 13.
Mr. Defrees' game law bill, [H. R. 62,] coming up on the third reading, was rejected by yeas 39, nays 53.
THE WORD WHITE.
Mr. WILSON called for another vote on his bill, [H. R. 82,] to amend the act providing for the enumeration of white male inhabitants of the State, &c., which failed before for want of a constitutional majority--
After debate thereon by Messrs. Wilson, Mitchell and Cox, the second vote thereon resulted yeas 47, nays 47; so the bill was rejected.
Mr. MINICH explaining and voting no.
Mr. McDonald's Fifth Judge of the Supreme Court bill [H. R. 68] was read and considered on its final passage.
After debate by Messrs. McDonald, Cauthorn, Cox, Copner, Biggs and Browning, the yeas and nays thereon resulted--yeas 44, nays 52.
So the bill was rejected.
Mr. BROWNING moved to reconsider the vote and to lay his motion on the table.
The latter motion was agreed to.
Mr. RUDDELL moved ineffectually to take up the Senate joint resolution postponing the election of Agent of State till the 22d of February.
On motion of Mr. SIMPSON Mr. Holland obtained leave of absence till next week.
STATE TEMPERANCE ALLIANCE MEMORIAL.
On motion of Mr. STONE the House took a recess till 7 1/2 o'clock--[at which time the two Houses attended on the memorial of the State Temperance Alliance.]
NIGHT SESSION.
The Senate and House met in joint session at 7 1/2 o'clock to hear the memorial of the State Temperance Alliance presented by their committee.
The memorial was read by Professor B. C. Hobbs, their chairman, as follows:
page: 241[View Page 241]To the General Assembly of the State of Indiana.
At the last session of the Indiana State Temperance Alliance, held in the city of Indianapolis, February 1st and 2d, 1871, among other proceedings the following memorial was adopted, viz:
"Memorial to the Senate and House of Representatives of the State of Indiana by the State Temperance Alliance of Indiana.
GENTLEMEN: Being solemnly impressed with the belief that the peace, order and prosperity of a State depend on the industry, temperance, intelligence and virtue of its citizens, and that the use and sale of intoxicating liquors as a beverage is subversive of these ends; and that the State is not without its responsibility for the results of imperfect laws, and for any lack of legislation that will render the people unable to protect themselves from the damages of immorality and crime; and remembering that the constitution of this State concedes to the people "that all free governments are, and of right ought to be, founded on their authority and instituted for their peace, safety and well being;"
And while we declare that our ultimate object and purpose is the entire supression of the traffic in intoxicating liquors as a beverage, yet for the purpose of advancing toward, and attaining that object, we respectfully and earnestly ask your honorable body,
- To enact such law or laws as will forbid and suppress the traffic in intoxicating liquors as a beverage, except upon petition of a majority of the legal voters of the township, town, or city ward in which such sale is proposed to be made.
- That all venders of intoxicating liquors shall be held by law, jointly liable with the person intoxicated, for the crimes or misdemeanors of those whom they have caused by such sale to be intoxicated.
- That all rooms used for the sale of intoxicating liquors be kept open to the public,and unobstructed by screens or other blinds while making such sales, and that such rooms be closed, and sales declared illegal, that are made on the Sabbath, Christmas, New Year, Fourth of July, Thanksgiving days, and on all election days; and whenever the provisions of the law under which permission to sell intoxicating liquors has been given, are violated, such permission shall be forfeited.
- That it be made the duty of the Prosecuting Attorney of the Criminal, Circuit or Common Pleas Courts, or some of such attorneys, to appear before the boards of county commissioners of their respective circuits or districts, and for and in behalf of the State of Indiana, resist the granting of any and all permission to sell intoxicating liquors in less quantities than a quart; providing, that the applicant shall pay the fees of such attorney on the basis of a smaller amount where permission is granted, than when refused, and, also, providing that appeals shall be taken from any subordinate tribunal, in the name of the State, without bond, and pending such appeal the applicant shall not sell, barter, or give away liquors.
Holding dear the interests of both Church and State, and desiring the guarantee to ever citizen of all those rights and privileges which are not inconsistent with the general good, and which will not be a snare for and a ruin to our youth, we earnestly ask for the enactment of such laws as will shield the citizens of the State from intemperance and crime, and inspire our youth with the love of temperance, purity, virtue, and truth--and for these things we shall ever pray.
BARNABAS HOBBS, F. C. HOLLIDAY, A. L. ROBINSON, T. B. MCCORMICK, JOHN W. RAY, Committee on Temperance Legislation .
We, R. T. Brown, President, and Thomas A. Goodwin, Secretary, of the Indiana State Temperance Alliance, hereby certify the foregoing to be a copy of the memorial passed by the Indiana State Temperance Alliance, February 2, 1871.
Witness our hands this day of February, A. D. 1871.
R. T. BROWN, President. T. A. GOODWIN, Secretary.
The reading of the memorial was followed by an address from the Chairman, to-wit:
Prof. BARNABAS C. HOBBS, Superintendent of Public Instruction, spoke as follows:
We appear before you in the interest of the law loving people of the State. We come in the interest of all who love its honor. Industry, wealth, prosperity, religion, virtue, all depend on the success of our cause. Good and steady habits, clear heads and good consciences are the powers that elevate and sustain the State. True patriotism, benevolence, intelligence, honor, all that enables man and goes to make up the true grandeur of the State and nation, can be successfully sustained only when the legislator and the citizen unite their labors in their support.
It is estimated in these United States that 130,000 places are licensed to sell spirituous liquors, employing 390,000 persons. Its manufacture and wholesale traffic will swell this number to 570,000, or one man to every seventy-five inhabitants.
The whole number of clergymen and teachers is estimated at 150,000--or about one fourth the above number.
Clergymen cost the United States about $12,000,000.
Criminals are estimated to cost us $40,000,-000; intoxicating drinks $700,000,000. Total, $740,000,000, sixty times the cost of religious teaching.
Every year intoxicating drinks are estimated to send to prison 100,000 persons, to reduce 200,000 children to worse than orphanage, to add 600,000 to the list of drunkards, and to send 60,000 to premature graves.
I regret that I cannot obtain reliable statistics of the relation of the liquor traffic to our State interests, except for her capital page: 242[View Page 242] city. Indianapolis is estimated to have forty wholesale liquor stores, that sell $6,000,000 worth each year. It has three hundred licensed saloons, which are estimated to employ three persons each, or nine hundred persons, at a probable cost of $600,-000. Her entire educational work costs about $100,000. It will be seen then that the retail profits of Indianapolis, not counting the cost to the consumer, is six times the expense of the education of her 12,000 children, and the receipts of her wholesale liquor traffic are more than three times the cost of the educational work of the public schools of the entire State.
The influence of this work on our people can not be overlooked. Taking the entire population of the country as estimated by the Medical Review of St. Louis, "122 men out of every 300, a little more than one-third, never drink spirits. One hundred drink moderately, but, not to intoxication; fifty are ephemeral drinkers; twenty-five drink moderately, called spreeing; and three, or one hundredth are confirmed inebriates. There is one inebriate to every 59 1/2 men."
Of 700 women, 600 never taste alcoholic drinks of any kind; thirty taste wine occasionally, seventeen ardent spirits, thirty-six ale or beer constantly, fourteen ardent spirits periodically, and three, or one in 233 1/2 are habitual inebriates," Bear in mind these estimates are taken for the whole country, and not for Indiana.
"Fewer women drink than men, but a larger proportion of those who drink become habitual drinkers. Debauch drinkers rarely become habitual, but periodical drinkers; the latter rarely become habitual inebriates as the violence of their drinking is too great and leads to disgusting satiety, and hence to intervals of sobriety.
"But this wonderful power, terribly arbitrary in its demands, while it is carrying on its work leaves the wreck it makes for benevolence and Christianity to relieve.
"THE PEOPLE MUST FOOT ITS BILLS."
Jails, penitentiaries, infirmaries, hospitals, reformatories are the relief humanity feels compelled to give, and every man and woman whose name goes on the tax list must share in the payment of the bill it sends up to us year by year.
If this were all we might be contented passively to permit the law to distrain our goods in its support. When we look over our State and remember that near one million of our population are under twenty one years of age, and will be in life just what the laws and people of the State make them, we can feel some sense of our responsibility and duty.
What father, what mother does not feel solemn in conjecturing the future of a son or daughter--of a son when he fears that a small snare set by a siren hand is insidiously doing an unsuspected work, and like a vampire is sapping every vestige of joy and hope, just as manliness of form and a well trained mind are entering upon active life; of a daughter who, trusting in the intelligence, standing, opportunities and vows of one to whom she has confided her life, discovers in the betraying breath, the late hour, the conscience paralyzed, that all her hopes in earthly happiness are dead.
How much of deep hidden, silent sorrow--sorrow unknown to the dram-seller, unknown to busy men in the street, unknown to the legislator, unkown to all but Him who looks down from the deep blue sky and beholds the workmanship of his own hands a wreck--a wreck perchance beyond redemption.
But what can we do? may be asked. Men's appetites are imperious in their demands, and in a free government, majorities must rule. All power is derived from the people, and the law maker is only their delegated representative, and government is instituted "for their peace, safety and well being."
That is just what your memorialists desire. The great problem our nation undertook to solve one hundred years ago was that the people had the right to make their own laws and to govern themselvees; and since no people can be long free without virtue, what we need is wholesome laws for the protection and support of virtue, and such that the people desiring this end may obtain it. This is one of the fundamental rights we ask in our laws regulating the use and sale of intoxicating drinks. Give the people the power to determine in their corporations, in their primary spheres of government, the power to act for themselves, and in such communities where the majority may demand the right to use and sell it, that the good of the State and the happiness of the sufferer can not be overlooked. Minorities have rights on the side of virtue, love and justice.
But one more solemn duty rests on the General Assembly, a duty from which no power on earth can absolve itself. It is both solemn and imperious and for the right performance of it--all good men pray that you may have grace from Heaven to see what your duty is, and the moral courage to perform it. That solemn duty under the laws governing this State is to determine what is a crime and what shall be its penalties. The Great Legislator has given a book for our instruction. "See that thou do all things according to the pattern shown thee in the mount." If making a man drunk is a crime let us call it so in our laws. If, from this cause, homes are made desolate, innocents suffer, strife and crime are in the streets, why, not require that each who is an agent in the offense shall be held jointly responsible to the State.
One thought more and I will close. There are some men who think that when the millennium shall come, when intelligence and virtue shall rule the earth, the work of the Legislator will be at an end. Not so. In no place can we conceive of a more perfect system of law, and a system enforced with greater precision, beauty and perfection than in Heaven itself. In the millennium legislators will only be so wise, so just and so true that the laws they make will harmonize with the Divine Law, and the King- page: 243[View Page 243] doms of this world will become the Kingdoms of our Lord and of His Christ.
After the delivery of the address, Dr. Holliday and Col. John W. Ray, as members of the Committee, spoke at length on the interests of the State in connection with Temperance Reform, showing its economy and desirability in the diminution of crime. The speakers all favored a fair, just and honorable course, having a due regard to the rights of all.
Mr. Representative NETHERTON, being called upon, also spoke earnestly and effectively in favor of the objects sought by the memorialists.
The LIEUT. GOVERNOR declared the Convention adjourned.
The SPEAKER commanded order, and--
The House adjourned.
