THE BREVIER LEGISTATIVE REPORTS.
TWELFTH VOLUME.
INDIANA LEGISLATURE.
IN SENATE.
WEDNESDAY, February 15, 1871.The Senate met at 10 o'clock--the LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR in the Chair.
Prayer by Rev. G. H. Morron, of the 4th Presbyterian Church.
The Secretary's minutes of yesterday's proceedings were read, till
On motion by Mr. WOOD, the further reading thereof was dispensed with.
PETITIONS, MEMORIALS, AND REMONSTRANCES.
Mr. BRADLEY presented a memorial from the State Board of Education in favor of the increase of pay of school examiners.
For the last five years it has been apparent that, from the workings of our educational system there are many emendations needing to the School laws. The change of time in township elections increases this necessity. Some of the amendments most important to the State are presented below:
1st. Such as will secure to the counties an efficient superintendence by men having practical educational ability. The main difficulty now in the way of this result is the inequality of pay and the small allowance of time given by Commissioners. Inadequate pay renders it necessary to connect the office with some other business or profession, and the examiner is thus unable to give to our schools such aid and professional inspection as are essential for the work assigned them. A little expenditure in increasing creasing the efficiency of the School Examiner will greatly enhance the profit of our Common School system. We are convinced of this from the uniform experience of other States.
The State Teachers' Association and the State Convention of School Examiners have each unanimously expressed their judgment that satisfactory results can not be had in the State at less compensation than $5 for each day's service rendered, and judging from the cost of educated men as superintendents of city and corporation schools, we are unable to see how proper men can devote adequate attention to this service for less.
Should you, however, be persuaded that public sentiment will not sustain you in such increase of pay, we most respectfully ask you to give such expression to the statutes as will permit the Commissioners to increase the ordinary rates in such counties as desire it, to such amount as they may think necessary, not exceeding $5 per diem.
As a guide to our judgment in this subject, we may be profited by the laws of other States.
Kansas pays school examiners $3 per day in counties of small population; in those of larger population salaries of from $1,000 to $1,500.
Iowa $3, and such addition as the supervisors may allow.
Wisconsin from $800 to $1,500.
Minnesota $600, and such additions as commissioners may choose to give.
Missouri, whatever the commissioners' choose to give.
Ohio, three examiners, paid $2 per day each, equal to $6 for one.
Illinois $5 per day and rates for managing funds. In some counties their salaries amount to $3,000 or $5,000.
Michigan, not less than $3 nor more than $5 per day.
In Pennsylvania their salary is determined by a county convention of school directors.
Mississippi $5 per day.
Kentucky, $50 for office and travel, $5 for each school of twenty scholars taught five months, $10 for each school over twenty scholars taught five months, and $20 for each graded school over forty scholars, or from $300 to $800.
New England, town superintendents paid whatever the town--that is township--shall, determine.
2. Another subject we consider of special interest is the Normal School. Although the Autumn and Winter terms have been small, yet we anticipate a much larger attendance during the summer and in the future, as its merits become known. We much desire in common with the educators of the State generally, that it may receive, by your appropriations and emendations of the laws governing it,such aid will place it where the friends of education desire to see it, among the best Normal Schools in the nation. It must labor under great disadvantage until the building is finished. We feel that the State is impelled by the obligations of its page: 290[View Page 290] contract with the city of Terre Haute, by its duty to the teachers of the State, and by the reputation it has gained by what it has already done, to meet cheerfully whatever expense may be necessary for the completion of the building and the support of the institution. 3. There are several bills pending your action, which we especially commend to your favorable consideration, to-wit: Senate bills 40, 41, 107 and 111.
The first, relating to the duties of School Examiners, the 2d amendments to the school laws in general, the 3d relating to the Normal school, and the 4th to higher education.
We have carefully examined these bills, and believe they embody such amendments to the laws as the educators of the State especially recommend. We much desire their passage.
Trusting that you all feel in sympathy with any measure which will advance the interest and true prosperity of the State, we earnestly commend to your favorable disposal the matters here presented.
By order of a meeting of the Board, held at Indianapolis, February 13, 1871.
BARNABAS C. HOBBS, Chairman. A. C. SHORTRIDGE, Secretary.
Mr. MILLER presented a memorial from the Common Council of Peru concerning gravel roads, praying for favorable legislation in the matter of assessments by such companies.
These we appropriately referred.
REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES.
Mr. BRADLEY, from the Committee on the Judiciary, returned the bill [S. 128] to amend sections 349 and 350 of the Practice act with amendments.
Mr. WOOD, from the Committee on Corporations, returned the bill [S. 26] to amend the drainage law, with amendments.
Mr. HENDERSON, from the same committee, returned the bill [S. 185] declaring the meaning of the railroad aid, act of May 12, 1869, with a favorable report.
These reports go to the files.
Mr. DENBO, from the Committee on Claims, reported adversely on the claim of John Lefler for purchase money of defective title.
Mr. CAVEN, from the Committee on Claims, reported on the claim of the Adjutant General of State that $500 be allowed--Mr. Denbo dissenting.
Mr. CARNAHAN, from the same committee, reported unfavorably to the claim of Levina Hopkins for attorneys' fees expended by her husband.
These reports were concurred in.
Mr. BIRD, from the same committee, reported unfavorably to the claim of Mrs. Mary E. Coburn for $23,892 16, for the reason that it was completely and finally adjusted at the last session when $10,000 was allowed. The committee are informed, and believe, that only $2,000 of that amount went to the Coburns'; where the balance went they say not.
Mr. CAVEN regarded the latter as a mere rumor, and probably not proper to report about, and was not willing that it should come from the committee.
Mr. CARNAHAN said these statements were embodied in the body of the claim.
Mr. CAVEN would not accept of such recitement as proof, and dissented from its appearing in the report. He moved to recommit the report for amendment in this particular.
It was so ordered.
Mr. CARNAHAN, from the Committee on Claims, reported adversely on the claims of the Indianapolis and Cincinnati Railroad Company for transportation of soldiers.
It was concurred in.
Mr. JOHNSTON, from the Committee Rights and Privileges, returned the bill [S. 186] regulating speed of locomotives through cities and towns, with a favorable report.
Mr. MORGAN, from the Committee on Benevolent Institutions, returned the bill [S. 164] to make further provision for the insane, with a recommendation that the blank be filled with $100,000.
These reports go to the files.
Mr. MARTINDALE, from, the select committee thereon, returned the bill [H. R. 19] for the appointment of pilots by the Jeffersonville Common Council, recommending that it lie on the table--Mr. Dittemore dissenting. The report was concurred in.
COMMON SCHOOLS.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR announced the special order, being the consideration of several bills amendatory of the common school law. The bill [S. 140] to amend the common school law and adding supplemental sections, was read the second time.
Mr. DITTEMORE moved to amend the bill by striking out "$5" for each day employed and inserting "$4"--pay of the School Examiner, which amendment was agreed to.
Mr. DENBO thought the bill was wrong almost all the way through and he moved it be recommitted.
Mr. GLESSNER regarded the expense of furnishing an office for the Examiner at the county seat as one the people were not asking for; then another section authorizes the Examiner to occupy every day in the year at his salary of $5 per day. Under this rule the office will cost each county about $2,500 a year. He pointed out other objections to the bill, and declared the law as it is, is as good as it ought to be, except that the School Examiner should have $5 a day for the time actually employed. The Committee on Education have recommended that change. He favored the motion to recommit.
Mr. WOOD thought the estimate of the Senator as to the cost of the Examiner under the bill was extravagant. If the County Commissioners find the Examiner is claiming too many days service they can determine the amount he shall be allowed. There are many good provisions in this bill, and one is the duty imposed to go to Justices and other officers to see that all fines &c.,are paid page: 291[View Page 291] over to the school fund. This item alone will probably save more than the cost of this office, for it will secure a large revenue to the school fund.
Mr. MARTINDALE--could not see the objections to the features of this bill, attempted to be urged by Senators. This law makes examinations free to teachers--it cuts off the present fee of $1, and the compensation is now, by the amendment just adopted, $4 a day. The matter of office rent would be small--a very trifling matter. It is a fact well known to every lawyer and many others, that not one-half of the fines and forfeitures are collected in the State of Indiana for the benefit of the school fund, and it is a wise provision in this bill which directs the School Examiners to look into this matter, and see that they are paid into this fund. He insisted that the pay of this officer would not amount to one-half the sum named by the Senator from Shelby, (Mr. Glessner.) He disclaimed the authorship of the bill it was drawn by one who had made this matter a study and a business for more than four years past.
Mr. BRADLEY thought it not worth while to recommit this bill to the committee--they have examined it carefully, and expressed their opinion of it.
Mr. DENBO objected to this bill on the ground stated by the Senator from Shelby (Mr. Glessner). This Examiner can convince the Board of Commissioners that it is necessary for him to be engaged every day in the year, so it would be an expensive office to the counties.
Mr. BRADLEY showed that this latter objection would apply as well to the present law as to this bill.
Mr. GRAY moved to amend section 9 by adding these words: "if employed after such information is received."
On motion by Mr. MARTINDALE, the motion to recommit was laid on the table yeas--26, nays 18.
The amendmet was agreed to.
Mr. GLESSNER moved ineffectually to indefinitely postpone the bill yeas 17, nays 26
Mr. BOBO moved ineffectually to amend by striking out the clause which provides that the school examiner shall be, or has been, "a successful professional teacher."
On motion by Mr. FOSDICK, the words "not less than," before the pay of the examiner, were stricken out.
On motion by Mr. DWIGGINS the words "and expenses" were also stricken out.
On motion by Mr. STEELE the bill was further amended by striking out the clause allowing the county commissioners to determine the number of days the examiner shall visit the schools in the county.
Mr. GRAY moved to amend by adding to section 6 these words: "provided it is required by an elector of any incorporated town and cities said teacher's license shall be approved by the county commissioners before being allowed to teach."
Mr. DWIGGINS suggested a chance for the display of mulishness by an elector under this amendment which might be productive of mischief.
Mr. BIGGS moved to amend the amendment by striking out all of section 6.
Mr. DWIGGINS moved to lay both amendments on the table.
Mr. BROWN demanded a division of the question.
The amendment to the amendment was not laid on the table on a division--affirmative 13, negative not counted, but--
The amendment was laid on the table on a division affirmative 18, negative 17.
Mr. BROWN moved to strike out section six--it is better to leave examinations of teachers with the school examiners.
Mr. MORGAN opposed this motion. Trustees of cities should have the privilege of examining teachers.
Mr. SCOTT said the section also covered graded schools, and cities ought to have the privilege of determining the qualifications of teachers for the different grades. He was very much opposed to the striking out.
Mr. MORGAN suggested that more than half the expense of city schools was borne by the taxation of the citizens thereof; and they certainly should have the privilege of determining the qualifications of their teachers.
Mr. GRAY moved to amend the motion to strike out by stiking out only the words "and incorporated towns."
And then came the noon recess.
CORRECTION.--Mr. Dwiggins' first amendment to the Drainage law repeal bill [H. R. 23], yesterday afternoon, should read "bond or bonds shall not," instead of lands or lands shall." His second amendment was not "by inserting appropriately" the words "keeping up the organisation and," but to strike out these words.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
The Senate met at 2 o'clock.
On motion by Mr. GREEN, his bills [S. 180] in relation to lots unmarked on town plats to be used for school purposes, and [S. 192], authorizing certain drainage companies to amend their articles of association, were read the second time and severally ordered engrossed for the third reading.
Mr. SCOTT, from the Judiciary Committee, returned the bill [S. 5] giving married women the right to join with their husbands in the execution of certain contracts recommending its passage; and the bill [S. 188] defining certain felonies with an adverse report. The latter report was concurred in, the former goes to the files.
Mr. BROWN introduced a bill [S. 219] to amend section 4 of an act of June 11, 1852, touching gaming contracts, which was read the first time and passed to the second reading.
COMMON SCHOOLS.
The Senate returned to the consideration of the common school amendment bill [S. 40] the Lieut. Governor holding that a motion (Mr. Gray's) to strike out part of a section pending a motion to strike out the whole section is not in order.
Mr. GRAY submitted a substitute author- page: 292[View Page 292] izing cities and town trustees to conduct examinations of teachers for special grades in addition to the school examiners.
Mr. MORGAN could not understand why teachers should be subjected to two examinations. He regarded the city examiners as at least four years as a general thing in advance of county examiners.
The substitute was agreed to, and the section as amended was adopted.
On motion of Mr. MARTINDALE there was added to section four the following: "The commissioners shall allow such examiner for days sufficient to make one visit to each school taught in the county.
Mr. GLESSNER moved to strike out the words "or printed'' where it refers to questions of the examiner to teachers requiring answers. He desires to avoid this printing in every county throughout the State every month as required in this bill; then there would be chances for these printed question's to be obtained by teachers previous to the examinations, and there would be no difficulty about the answers.
Mr. MARTINDALE thought this was fishing low for economy.
The amendment was rejected.
Mr. BRADLEY, by consent, amended section 4 by striking out $4 a day and insert not less than $3 nor more than $5 a day in the discretion of the County Courts.
Mr. ANDREWS moved to amend by requiring the examination of Justices and other records to be made in the month of November.
Mr. DWIGGINS moved to make it in September.
It was so ordered.
Mr. DENBO moved ineffectually to strike out the provision for furnishing the School Examiner an office.
Mr. MORGAN moved to reconsider the vote adopting a substitute for section 6. He thought the original section was just the thing needed. It was unnecessary for the teacher to go before an examiner that was not competent.
On motion of Mr. BRADLEY, this motion was laid on the table.
Mr. BEGGS moved to amend by striking out the clause directing information to be furnished to the Grand Jury.
On motion by Mr. MARTINDALE the amendment was laid on the table.
Mr. MORGAN moved to strike out the word "cities" in section 9, so that such trustees shall not be held liable for paying out money to incompetent teachers after information.
Mr. BROWN opposed the amendment. He desired city Trustees should be held equally responsible with Trustees of towns and townships. He moved to lay it on the table.
It was so ordered.
The bill was then ordered engrossed for the third reading.
FEMALE SUFFRAGE.
Mr. BEESON called up the special order--being the consideration of a minority report made yesterday from a select committee, embracing the joint resolution [S.11] proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the State by adding a section conferring on women of the age of twenty-one years and upwards the right to vote.
Mr. BEESON addressed the Senate in support of the report of the minority, and in favor of the passage of the joint resolution.
Mr. MORGAN spoke in opposition.
Mr. DWIGGINS followed, giving it as his opinion as a lawyer, that women are entitled to vote under the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States; but desiring to put the question beyond all cavil, he argued at length in support of the pending resolution.
Mr. HADLEY expressed his opposition to female suffrage in a speech of considerable length.
Mr. BROWN also indulged in extended remarks, closing by offering an amendment, that where the word "female" occurs twice in the resolution it shall be immediately preceded by the word "white."
Mr. WOOD, as this question has been pretty thoroughly discussed on both sides, and in view of other important business pending, demanded the previous question.
The demand was seconded by the Senate, and under the operation of the previous question, the amendment [Mr. Brown's] was agreed to by yeas 25, nays 22, as follows:
YEAS--Messrs. Alsop, Armstrong, Beggs, Bobo, Bradley, Brown, Bird, Carnahan, Cave, Denbo, Dittemore, Dougherty, Elliott, Francisco, Fuller, Glessner, Gress, Henderson, Johnson, Keigwin, Lasselle, Morgan, Rosebrugh, Straud, and Williams--25.
NAYS--Messrs. Andrews, Beardsley, Beeson, Case, Caven, Collett, Dwiggins Fosdick. Gray, Green, Hadley, Hess, Hooper, Hubbard, Martindale, Miller, Robinson, Scott, Steele, Taylor, Wadge and Wood--22.
Pending the roll call--
Mr. BEESON, when his name was called, said: I have always been in favor of the fullest liberty to all. I therefore vote "no."
Mr. DWIGGINS When his name was called, in explanation of his vote, said: While I am in favor of granting to everybody, no matter what their color is, all the rights I have myself, I desire to say that if this amendment does prevail I will still vote for the resolution on the principal that half a loaf is better than no bread. I vote "no."
Mr. GREEN, in explanation of his vote, when his name was called, said: This I hold to be a fundamental principle that if you make the female part of the community liable to law and make them suffer the penalties of the law, I say give them the right of suffrage. He voted "no."
Mr. MORGAN, when his name was called, said: I am apposed to classing my wife with negroes, therefore, I vote "no."
Mr. STEELE, when his name was called, said: I am placed in a difficult position. I profess to be an accommodating man when I can be without violating principle, and would be glad if this question presented itself in a shape where I could accommodate my friends the democrats in ridding them page: 293[View Page 293] of what may possibly happen to them if this amendment does not prevail, and that is the embrace of Dinah. [Laughter.] I am very sure the Democratic party has suffered more in that way than any other party in the world. I vote "no."
The vote was then announced as above recorded; and so the amendment was agreed to.
The question recurring on the passage of the resolution, it was rejected by yeas 20, nays 27--as follows:
YEAS--Messrs Andrews, Beardsley, Beeson. Beggs, Brown, Case, Caven, Collett, Dittemore, Dwiggins, Fossick, Green, Hess, Keigwin, Lasselle, Miller, Robinson, Scott, Steele, and Taylor--20.
NAYS--Messrs. Alsop, Armstrong, Bobo, Bradley, Bird, Carnahan, Cave, Denbo, Dougherty, Elliott, Francisco, Fuller, Glessner, Gray, Gregg, Hadley, Henderson, Hooper, Hubbard, Johnson Martindale, Morgan, Rosebrough, Stroud, Wadge, Williams and Wood--27.
Pending the roll call--
Mr. DITTIMORE in explanation of his vote, when his name was called said: Not wishing to spoil the vote I gave in favor of white women, I vote "aye."
Mr. GRAY, when his name was called laid: I would have been happy of an opportunity to reply to the speech of the Senator from Jackson [Mr. Brown] but was cut off by the previous question. If the resolution had not been amended I should have voted for it, as it is now, I vote "no."
Mr. MARTINDALE, in explanation of his vote, said: While I should have heartily voted for the resolution as introduced originally, I believe that the time has passed in this country when distinctions should be made in law on account of color in every thing either civil or political, and while voting for this resolution would commit me to the doctrine that persons should be excluded from political rights on account of color I can not vote for it, therefore I vote "no."
Mr. MORGAN, when his name was called, said: As I introduced the resolution that called forth this one, I would like very much to vote for it, and intended to do so, and probably would do so now but I have been instructed by my wife to vote against it. [Laughter] I vote "no"
Mr. SCOTT, when his name was called, said: I don't clearly apprehend the resolution as it now stands. I understand that the word "white" has been inserted.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR. Yes, sir.
Mr. SCOTT. Believing that a half loaf is better than no bread at all, I am willing to vote for that even; though that word certainly makes it void. I vote "aye."
Mr. WADGE, when his name was called, said: In explanation of my vote I will say that I am most unequivocally in favor of extending the elective franchise to females of Indiana, and should have been pleased to support the resolution as introduced, but can not consent to record my vote in favor of a resolution which makes such discrimination on account of color. I am therefore compelled to vote "no."
The vote was then announced as above recorded, and so the resolution was rejected.
The question recurring on concurrence in the report of the majority of the Committee--
The Senate refused to concur therein, by yeas 20, nays 27, as follows:
YEAS--Messrs. Alsop, Armstrong, Bobo, Bradley, Bird, Carnahan, Cave, Denbo, Dougherty, Elliott, Francisco, Fuller, Glessner, Greg, Henderson, Jehnson, Morgan, Rosebrugh, Williams, and Wood--20.
NAYS--Messrs. Andrews, Beardsley, Beeson, Begars, Brown, Case, Caven, Collett, Dittemore, Dwiggins, Fosdick, Gray, Green, Hadley, Hess, Hooper, Hubbard, Keigwin, Lasselle, Martindale, Miller, Robinson, Scott, Steele, Strud, Taylor, and Wadge--27.
And then the Senate adjourned till ten o'clock to-morrow.
