THE
BREVIER LEGISLATIVE REPORTS.
THIRTEENTH VOLUME.
INDIANA LEGISLATURE.
IN SENATE.
THURSDAY, December 12, 1872.The Senate met at ten o'clock, pursuant to adjournment.
After prayer by the Rev. Mr. Spratt, of the M. E. Church, in which he mentioned particularly the subject of temperance--
On motion of Mr. STEELE, the reading of the Secretary's journal was dispensed with.
TWENTY-SECOND JUDICIAL CIRCUIT.
The Senate proceeded to the consideration of the special order for this hour, being the bill [H. R. 49] creating the Twenty-second Judicial Circuit of this State to be composed of the counties Miami, Wabash and Huntington.
The bill was read the second time.
Mr. STEELE reasoned in favor of the passage of the bill, and moved that it be considered as engrossed, and that the constitutional restriction be suspended in order that it may be finally passed upon now.
Mr. DAUGHERTY moved to refer the bill to the Committee on Organization of Courts.
against any public man based upon rumors growing out of the heated debates of a political canvass.
Mr. CARNAHAN moved ineffectually to lay the amendment on the table--yeas, 20; nays, 23.
Mr. WILLIAMS protested that this action, striking out the provision for the investigation into the official conduct of the former officers and retaining it as to the present officers--was not fair treatment of the minority. He asked the Senators to lay the question to their hearts and say if they had done justly in the matter. He hoped the resolution would pass without showing the hand so plain as this vote indicates. Every investigation asked for so far had been passed almost unanimously, and now he hoped that the Senate would not rest content with this vote. If there is nothing wrong why shrink from an investigation; and why now investigate charges against two persons and let four others go?
Mr. BROWN explained that the four names he proposed to strike out were now in court having a judicial examination into the very things this resolution referred to, while the two persons, the present officials, are not in court. As a go between--not belonging to any party he did not take to himself any part of the lecture of the Senator from Knox. His object had been to relieve the gentlemen excepted by his amendment from an investigation during the pendency of the suits in which they were defendants. He thought an investigation by a Marion County Court, in which the cases were prosecuted by the ablest legal gentlemen in the State, would be sufficient in their case. Like the Indianapolis Sentinel, having now no politics and never expecting to have any, he repudiated the charge that it was designed to persecute or exculpate any one.
Mr. GLESSNER thought the ex-officers were entitled to the benefits of a full investigation. He believed they were hon- page: 258[View Page 258]orable gentlemen. The State top should have the benefit of the investigation. The suits referred to were instituted to recover money alleged to have been received on interest from deposit of the public funds. They were to ascertain a legal point merely. He favored the passage of the resolution that the parties interested may have an opportunity to vindicate their good name--a right which should be accorded to them; inasmuch as the suits may never be determined, or may be stricken off the court dockets to-morrow; and for other reasons which he named.
Mr. HOUGH offered the following substitute for the pending resolution:
WHEREAS, In the opinion of the Senate, there is a a great deal of looseness in the manner in which the tightness of the strings of the public purse is kept: and
WHEREAS An increase in the tightness of the looseness aforesaid, is a thing greatly to be desired: therefore
RESOLVED, That a committee of some unascertainable number be appointed to investigate the looseness of the tightness aforesaid, and report by bill or otherwise.
On motion of Mr. ARMSTRONG the whole subject was laid on the table.
Mr. GLESSNER moved to reconsider the vote of several days since adopting the resolution offered by Mr. Dittemore, to investigate why the $560,000 school fund was not distributed under the law requiring it.
Mr. DITTEMORE opposed the motion.
Mr. HOUGH moved to lay the motion to reconsider on the table.
This motion'was agreed to by yeas 34, nays, 9.
Mr. DWIGGINS, by consent, substituted the bill [S. 49] to amend section 22 of the town incorporation act of June 11, 1852, instead of the bill [S. 56] reported from the Committee on Corporations, submitted several days since.
It being a favorable recommendation, the report was concurred in.
On motion by Mr. BROWN, the bill [S. 17] was taken from the table and placed on the files.
Mr. GOODING offered a resolution for the appointment of a special committee of three to investigate the needs of the office of Secretary of State.
It was adopted.
RAILROAD FREIGHT CHARGES.
Mr. HUBBARD (in the chair) announced the consideration of the bill [S. 115] to prevent extortionate charges for freight transported over railroads in this State.
It was read the second time.
Mr. SCOTT moved to amend by adding the words to section 2, "nor when compensation allowed by law shall be less than the amount so offered" for carrying freight--shall not be liable to a penalty.
Mr. BROWN explained that as the law now is, a party can not bring suit against a railroad for extortion, because the company will plead a contract. He opposed the amendment, and concluded his remarks by moving to lay the amendment on the table.
The motion was agreed to, and after some debate the bill finally passed--yeas 38, nays 4, as follows:
YEAS--Messrs. Armstrong, Beardsley, Bird, Boone, Bowman, Brown, Bunyan, Carnahan, Cave, Chapman, Daggy, Dittemore, Dwiggins. Glessner, Gooding, Gregg, Hall, Harney, Haworth, Hough, Hubbard, Miller, Neff, Oliver, Orr, Rhodes, Ringo, Rosebrugh, Sarnighansen, Slater, Sleeth, Smith, Stroud, Taylor, Thompson, Wadge, Williams and Mr. President--38.
NAYS--Messrs. Collett, Francisco, Howard and Scott--4.
Mr. WADGE explained his affirmative vote because this bill is a move in the direction of protecting the people against the extortion of railroad companies, though he very much disliked the provisions in sections 6 and 7.
The result of the vote was then announced as above.
CITY TAXATION.
Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN moved to suspend the regular order to take up the bill [S. 10] to amend section 58 of the general city incorporation law of March 14, 1867. If passed it would save a very important law suit in his county, and was a measure very much desired by the citizens of his county. The bill authorizes the taxation of all lands inside the city limits.
The motion was agreed to.
The bill was read the second time, the constitutional rule suspended, and the bill read the third time and passed--yeas, 31; nays, 8.
Mr. DAGGY offered a resolution providing that in future the business of the Senate shall be conducted in the regular order as provided by the rules.
It was adopted.
DRAINAGE OF WET LANDS.
Mr. CHAPMAN moved to take up bill 88, which had been made the special order for 2:30 p. m.
Mr. HUBBARD, from the Committee on Engrossed Bills, reported back bill 88, (the special order) to encourage the construction of levees, dykes and drains.
Mr. BOONE asked and obtained unanimous consent offerto an amendment pro- page: 259[View Page 259]viding that no suit for the recovery of assessments shall be commenced after a lapse of five years from the time of recording the schedule.
The amendment was agreed to.
The bill was read the third time and passed--yeas, 36; nays, 5.
The Senate then adjourned.
