HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
TUESDAY, Feb. 18, 1873.SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION.
Mr. Woodward's bill [H. R, 382] relative to the salary of the Superintendent of Public Instruction, and providing for the manner of the payment thereof($2,000 payable quarterly) was considered on the third reading, and finally passed the House of Representatives - yeas, 55; nays, 20.
PUBLIC LIBRARIES.
Mr. Hedriek's bill [H. R. 365] to amend section 13 of the act to establish public libraries-{they shall not keep for a longer time than six months more than $1,000 worth of property in land, etc., excepting property in books and library things) was considered on the third reading and rejectedyeas, 7; nays, 62.
TURNPIKES.
Mr. Furnas' bill [H. R. 412] to authorize Boards of County Commissioners to purchase and contract gravel and other improved roads and make them free to travel, was taken up on the third reading. (It proposes that such board shall not exceed twenty cents on the hundred dollars for their yearly levy for these purposes.)
Mr. Ramsey would prefer an amendment requiring the consent of the people interested.
Mr. Given also mentioned objections.
The bill was rejected; ayes, 43; nays, 48.
BILLS OF EXCEPTION.
Mr. Cauthorn's bill [H. R. 424] to amend the 120th section of the Criminal Practice act was considered on the third reading.
Mr. Given hoped the bill would pass. Our practice in civil cases allows the Court to fix the time at which the parties may make out their bills of exceptions, but in criminal cases they must be made out during the term of Court. This bill provides a discretion of the Court to extend this time thirty days beyond the term in criminal canes.
The bill was finally passed the House of Representatives. Yeas, 64; nays, 8.
EVANSVILLE BRIDGE.
Mr. Kimball's bill [H. R. 473], for the incorporation of companies formed for the purpose of constructing bridges over rivers and streams of water forming the State boundary, was considered on the third reading.
It was finally passed the House of Representatives yeas, 80: nays, 2. Mr. Cauthorn stating that the act of Congress has given authority for the proposed bridge at Evansville, and this biil requires the construction of such bridge to proceed under the provisions of that act of Congress.
Mr. Wolflin (in reply to an objection.) There can be no objection or difficulty about the approaches of the bridge to the river.
EVANSVILLE POSTOFFICE.
Mr. Gregg's bill [H. R. 416] granting the consent of the State of Indiana to the purchase by the United of one acre of land in the city of Evansville for the purposes of public building (a post-office) and ceding the jurisdiction of the State over the same, etc., was considered on the third reading. It was finally passed the House of Representatives - yeas, 77; nays, 1.
WAIVER.
Mr. Teeter's bill [H. R. 393] relating to service of summonses and publication of notice in civil actions, was considered on the third reading.
Mr. Shiriey explained that it is to give the defendant power to waive the service summons and publication of notice, and so save costs which he may he unable to pay.
Mr. Johnson said this practice of waiver has already obtained in some counties, and this bill was to remove doubts about the legality of a very good practice. The bill was finally passed the House of Representatives - yeas 75, nays 4.
CITY TAX LAWS.
Mr. Miller's bill [H. R. 415] to amend section 23, 24, 26, 36, 37, and 43 of the general city corporation act of March 12, 1867, was considered on the third reading.
Mr. Miller explained that its provisions are for the purpose of making the tax laws for cities uniform with those for state and county purposes; to make the date when the lien shall attach; the time the tax becomes due, and the date of the duplicate correspond with the provisions of the tax assessment and collection act of December 21, 1872, for state and county purposes.
The bill was finally passed the House of Representatives - Yeas 80, nays none.
Mr. Riggs' bill [H. R. 389] to amend sections 4, 5, 24, 26, 35, 47 and 58of the Evansville Charter of page: 177[View Page 177]July 27, 1847, was considered on the third reading.
Mr. Wolflin had consulted the minds of his constituents in Evansville, and was satisfied that this bill was desired by the majority, though it had the opposition of certain property holders, one of its objects being to obviate the difficulties there about the election of incompetent city officers through controlling caucuses.
Mr. Gregory opposed the bill, because it provides that there shall be no elective officers of the city except the Mayor and members of the Common Council. It was a proposition to take out of the hands of the people the right of electing such officers as suit them. He also expressed his opposition to all this kind of special legislation.
The bill was rejected - yeas, 38; nays, 45.
ILLUMINATING OILS.
Mr. Scott's bill [H. R. 272] to regulate the sale of mineral oils and other substances for illuminating purposes was considered on the third reading.
Mr. Miller, having been informed that the bill was in the interest of gas manufacturers and to crush out the manufacturers and venders of what is called sunlight oil, which has come into very general use in many places, and has the certificate of Dr. Brown, an eminent chemist of this city, that it does not emit an explosive gas by the burning. He was at first in favor of the bill, till he learned that it might interfere with legitimate trade. So he should oppose it, notwithstanding what is claimed by its friends, that it is a copy of the Ohio law.
Mr. Hatch stated the satisfactory workings of the Ohio law, from which this is taken.
The bill was finally passed the House of Representatives - yeas 51, nays 28.
CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE.
Mr. Kimball's bill [H. R. 306] to regulate the recording of instruments and declaring the legal effect thereof, was considered on the third reading.
Mr. Buskirk. In the first place, this bill proposes to overturn a principle of common law which has stood for hundreds of years - which has been the law of England for centuries, and has long been the law of nearly every State of the Union and of the State of Indiana. That principle is: that if a party has constructive notice of some other instrument of title to the real estate it has the same effect of actual notice. This bill provides that all unrecorded instruments shall be good only as to the parties in the interest, but void as to all others; and this does away with the law as to constructive notice. He understood also that the bill provides for printed records, under forms so divided into columns and so different from those now in use in our Recorders' offices, that it will require a new set of books for every office. While it might be a very good bill for those interested in printing, it seems to to me that it would put the counties to needless expense.
Mr. Walker. If the gentleman from Gibson will look at the statute, he will find that this is an exact copy, in respect to the books, of the law as it now is, with this additional column headed "To whom delivered after being recorded." As to the "date of reception" and the "day" and "hour," the Recorder, if he chooses, can make those lines, or he can make the record without them. I believe the people of the State are ready for this change in our legislation for their own protection. It is not my bill; but I believe it will most effectually close the doors against frauds that are being perpetrated by fraudulent conveyancing. Under the law as it now stands, when a man purchases land, it is impossible for him to tell whether he has a good title or not till the end of ninety days; for if before the close of the ninety days, the prior grantee comes in and gets his instrument with the recorder, he is estopped. I believe that before the grantee leaves the Recorder's office, he ought to be able to know that he has a clear title to his property. There is where he goes to determine his title, and he ought to be able to ascertain it there, clearly and at once. And I think it does not affect the doctrine of constructive notice after the ninety days. Persons who hold outstanding unrecorded deeds ought not to divest the title of those who have put their deeds on record. How often is it the case that parties hold mortgages for years unrecorded. This bill simply requires that parties who receive mortgages or deeds shall put them at once upon the record; and then all will be well and clear as to the title. Now, on account of the existing intricacies, none but a lawyer can successfully examine and determine the title; but under this bill the party can trace his title from the record - with the single exception of the case of a mechanic's lien, the bill leaving the law in that respect just as it is. But in all such cases the grantee may generally know well enough about the fact of buildings being erected on the premises. Under this bill, if you are the buyer of a farm, you may know at once from the records whether you have the realty free from outstanding titles. This bill proposes also to requires the sheriff who makes sale of real estate in another county to cause the same to be recorded in the Recorder's office.
Mr. Shirley thought this a good bill, excepting only section 2, and should vote against it unless it were amended. That section declares that every recorded deed shall have priority over every other, without regard to the date of the instrument. There was hardship there; as he gave example of the grantee living at a distance, and desiring to see his deed before it goes to record. He would be in favor of making the limitation thirty days for record.
On motion of Mr. Walker, the further consideration of the bill was postponed, and it was made the special order for to-morrow at two o'clock P. M.
COURTS IN GIBSON COUNTY.
Mr. Buskirk's bill [H. R. 344] in relation to the terms of the Circuit Courts and the Courts of Common Pleas in Gibson county(Circuit Courts last Monday in May and November, to continue three weeks; the Common Pleas, the first Mondays of February, June and October, to continue two weeks)was considered on the third reading.
Mr. Buskirk stated that it was to affect no county but Gibson - to avoid terms in the summer months, and to give the Circuit Court for three weeks instead of two.
The bill was finally passed the House of Representatives - yeas 70, nays 2.
JURISDICTION.
Mr. Branham's bill [H. R. 275] to provide for the acquisition and enjoyment by the United States of land within this State for public purposes, was considered on the third reading.
Mr. B. said, this is just a general law in accordance with Constitution of the United States for giving jurisdiction to the general government. It is just like the bill we passed this morning giving the United States jurisdiction in Evansville, only it is a general law.
The bill was finally passed the House of Representatives - yeas 67, nays 12. The House took recess till 2 P. M.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
Mr. Henderson's bill [H. R. 349] to repeal the act providing for the redemption of real property sold under execution or other order of safe, and providing for an issue of certificates of purchase in such case, and for the execution of conveyances, approved June 4, 1861, was considered on the third reading.
page: 178[View Page 178]Mr. Henderson. This bill was passed under the stress and emergency of war in 1861which no longer exists. It is to repeal what is called the Redemption law, which operates injuriously to the credit of the State - especially to those who desire to borrow money of persons residing without the State.
Mr. Schmuck showed how under the existing redemption law the creditor in compelled to wait two or three years for his collections, and urged its repeal.
Mr. Cobb. It seemed to him that we have legislated enough in favor of wealth and against poverty - in favor of the strong and against the weak; and he thought that one of the wisest provisions of the laws which allows the man who has been so unfortunate as to have his farm sold on execution, one year to redeem it.
Mr. Gregory replied in favor of the bill. The nearer we can come to the destruction of the credit system the better for the poorer classes. This legislation places the debtor and the creditor on an equality.
Mr. Gifford stated his opposition to the bill:
It was rejected. Yeas, 26; nays, 47.
CEMETARY FUND.
Mr. Butter worth's bill [H. R. 356], concerning cemeteries, was considered on the third reading. Mr. B. stated that it provides for raising a cemetary fund, by which any man having a lot in the grounds can keep it in repair by depositing the requisite amount of money.
The bill was finally passed the House of Representatives. Yeas, 73; nays, 5.
REVENUE LAW.
Mr. Kimball, from the Committee on Ways and Means, to whom had been referred two bills of the House for amendment of the assessment act of 1872, reported that the committee had considered the same, and under the suggestions therein, had authorized him to report a new bill [H. R. 504] supplemental to, and amendatory of, the act to provide for a uniform assessment of property, etc., approved December 21, 1872, which was read and passed to the second reading.
Mr. Branham. This being a matter with which the House is well acquainted, he moved for a suspension of the Constitutional restriction that the bill may be advanced to the final vote.
Mr. Shirley objected to the hurry.
Mr. Branham. The only thing in the bill is a proposition for the semi-annual collection of the taxes. There are some other changes, as the change in the time of the reports from the 15th of December to the 15th of November; and it changes the amount to be paid per tract for advertising delinquent lands from 30 cents to 60 cents per tract.
Mr. Kimball. It also authorizes the Treasurer to take the goods of the delinquent taxpayer to the Court House for sale.
Mr. Givan moved to amend the bill by striking out "60" and inserting "40," in lieu for the price per tract for advertised delinquent lands.
Mr. Schmuck supported and Mr. Mellett opposed the amendment.
Mr. Walker made an ineffectual motion to lay it on the table.
Mr. Buskirk proposed to amend the amendment so as to make it fifty cents.
Mr. Schmuck moved ineffectually to lay it on the table; and then it was agreed to, and the amendment as amended was adopted.
Mr. Edwards of Lawrence, proposed to amend the bill by making the taxes payable but once a year, which was rejected.
The constitutional rule being suspended for the purpose, the bill, as amended, was considered as engrossed and finally passed the House of Representatives - yeas 76, nays 10.
Mr. Kimball, from the Committee on Ways and Means, returned Mr. Feed's bill [H. R. 448] to repeal section 55 of the act to amend the act to authorize and regulate the business of general banking, approved March 3,1855, recommending its passage. He stated that this is a proposition to repeal the law which authorizes the Treasurer and Auditor of State to receive $800 and $1,500 each year for attending to duties required of them under the old free banking law, and as that business is about wound up, we see no necessity for continuing the pay. The bill was passed to the engrossment.
Mr. Kimball also returned Mr. Hatch's bill [H. R. 347] to amend sections 155, 159 and 180 of the abstract of December 21, 1872, and Mr. Satterwhite's bill [H. R. 207] to provide for the semi-annual collection of taxes, with recommendations that they be laid on the table: the committee believing that the bill reported by them this day (and which has just passed the House as above recited) embodies all the amendments that should be made to the revenue laws of the State. The report was concurred in.
Mr. Kimball, from the Committee on Ways and Means, returned the bill [S. 155] to provide for the reimbursement to certain counties therein named certain, taxes illegally assessed and collected in 1869, and paid into the State Treasury, recommending its passage. It was ordered to the third reading.
A. C. EDMUNDS.
Mr. Schmuck submitted a preamble and resolution reciting the breach of privilege by one A. C. Edmunds by printing and publishing with his book of biographies of members of the General Assembly false and absurd, and offensive statements concerning members who are not subscribers to his work, and therefore expelling him from the privilege of the lobby of the House of Representatives. He read from the pamphlet in his band certain paragraphs and phrases of the offensive matter referred to in the resolution; as
"Mr. Schmuck is a Dutchman," and the writer was incorrect as to the time of his residence in this country; "Mr. Lenfestey is a native Hoosier;" "Mr. Baxter is an oratorical failure;" "Mr. Shirley feeling his importance as a member of the Legislature," etc., and demanded the execution of the order he had submitted.
Messrs. Lenfesty and Offutt referred humorously to the harmless paper, but held firmly for the order.
On the motion of Messrs. Walker and Blocher, the resolution was amended by adding a clause prohibiting the pages and others from selling the infamous thing, and so the resolution was adopted; whereupon the doorkeeper, without further order, ejected the said Edmunds from the hall.
TOWNS AND CITIES.
Mr. Glasgow's bill [H. R. 414] to repeal the act in relation fo the taxation of lands in towns and cities, approved June 18, 1852, was considered on the third reading. Mr. G. set forth the object of the bill, to repeal the law of 1852, which exempts the owners of tracts of land in towns and cities on the excess above twenty acres within the corporate limits. It was rejected - yeas 36, nays 40.
LAWRENCEBURG INSURANCE COMPANY.
Mr. Cauthorn asked and obtained unanimous consent for the consideration of the bill [S. 160] to amend the act of February 28, 1832, to incorporate the Lawrenceburg Insurance Company. (It proposes to change the style to the Citizens Insurance Company, to increase its capital stock to $100,000 and thence indefinitely.)
Mr. Miller. If we want to pass a law that will place this insurance company entirely beyond the reach and control of the Legislature, I think we have now one of the best opportunities of doing so. Here is an old, defunct corporation, organized in 1832, one of the oldest in the States; yet, living not very far from Lawrenceburg myself, I know nothing about it. But I undertake to say here, that this bill is to revive a charter page: 179[View Page 179]that gives extraordinary privileges to the corporators - such as can not be obtained under the general law - that it is now undertaken to galvanize this defunct institution into life again, because of extraordinary powers in the original charter. If this is not the purpose, why should the citizens of Evansville go up to Lawrenceburg and buy up these franchises? Why did they do this if they did not want to hedge themselves in the possession of peculiar advantages so that it will be impossible for future legislatures to reach them? And he insisted that a bill of this kind should not be supported here especially at a time when we are casting about us to get up a good insurance law, such as might be suggested by the sad experience in Illinois and Massachusetts.
Mr. Wolflin considered that the gentleman took a wrong view. It was to favor the establishment of insurance companies in this State and so to keep capital in the State that the bill was introduced here.
Mr. Cauthorn submitted the absurdity of the assumption that the bill was to galvanize into life a defunct institution. The institution is living, and the bill proposes to do just what the House has done with a bill introduced here by the gentleman from Marion, (Mr. Kimball,) which was to remove the Franklin Insurance Company from Franklin to this city, and to increase its capital stock and otherwise enlarge its franchises. He considered the endorsement of the Senate equivalent at least to that of a committee of the House of Representatives.
The bill was rejected - yeas, 40; nays, 41.
RAILROADS.
Mr. Offutt submitted a resolution, which was adopted, requiring the Committee on Railroads forthwith to report back to the House the several bills in their possession on the subject of passenger fare and the tariff of freight charged by the railroads of this State; whereupon -
Mr. King, from said committee, returned the bill [S. 6] concerning the transportation of freight and passengers over the railroads in the State; also, Mr. Otfutt's bill [H. R. 158] declaring all railroad companies in this State to be common carriers, and to regulate the fare and tariff of freight thereon, the committee recommending that these bills take their places on the flies of the clerk.
Mr. Branham, from the same committee, returned the bill [S. 115] to prevent extortionate charges, and to prevent unjust discriminations on the part of railroad companies; to provide remedy, etc., with sundry amendments.
Oh the motion of Mr. Branham, the further consideration of the whole subject was postponed, and it was made the special order for Thursday, at two o'clock P. M.
ELEVATOR GRAIN RECEIPTS.
Mr. King's bill [H. R. 429] concerning grain elevator companies, and receipts issued by them, was considered in its order on the third reading.
Mr. King said the principal object here is to prevent the elevator companies from giving receipts unless the grain for which they are given be actually in store. Then it makes such receipts negotiable in bank, so that the grain owners may have their receipts cashed with facility. The vote thereon determined the fact that there is not a quorum present to do business.
Messrs. Satterwhite and Riggs obtained leave of absence. The former indefinite on account of sickness in his family.
The House adjourned.
