[Afternoon Session.]
The SPEAKER announced the Special Order; and Mr. BILLINGSLEY from the Committee on Printing, (under a special order of the House) returned Mr. Shirley's bill [H. R. 9.] to abolish the office of Public Printer, With an amendment by substitute. He also returned Mr. Shirley's bill [H. R. 31] to provide for the Public Printing, by contract without recommendation.
Mr. FURNAS, from the Special Committee thereon, returned Mr. Billingsley's bill [H. R. 290] entitled an act Fixing the time and Mode of electing the State Printer, Repealing all Laws Conflicting therewith, and Declaring an Emergency - the question being on the second reading thereof.
Mr. SHIRLEY. I have but recently had a conversation with the Chairman of the Committee on Printing, (Mr. Billingsley,] and whilst I have been willing to indulge him in his preference to consider these propositions together, I am anxious also for the vote on the final passage of this bill No. 9, to abolish the Printer's office, and before we come to the consideration of the bill No. 290, and my bill, No. 31, just now reported upon. Sir, it has been whispered round outside of this Hall, and all over the State, that the House of Representatives have yielded their opposition to the Printers' office. I say then, that it is due to ourselves, on both sides, that we should have the privilege of voting upon this question. I would not say anything in the spirit of unkindness toward the Committee on Printing, but there were two resolutions passed this House during the extra session requiring that Committee to report those bills, numbered 9 and 31 to the House - the one abolishing the office and the other providing for the printing (by contract, and the Committee paid little attention to the instructions. I wish the House to either sustain these bills or reject them. I have been myself all the time prepared to vote on them; and I am unwilling that this matter should be put off any longer. Yet to accommodate gentlemen I have consented that the whole matter may be made the special order for Thursday at 2 o'clock. I have consented to this while I am myself ready now and anxious for the action. I want to place myself on the record to this effect: that the office of State Printer shall not be any longer tolerated on the statute books. I shall not say anything now at length; but when the matter shall come up on Thursday, I may desire to have a hearing.
Mr. GIVAN. It seems to me that this important matter should not hastily be passed upon. I therefore move that this bill. [Mr. Shirley's H. R. No. 31,] be laid on the table and two hundred copies printed.
Mr. HELLER. This bill comes to us from the last session. It was referred to the Committee on Printing of which I was a member, and when we met for its consideration there page: 299[View Page 299] were none of the Committee present except the Chairman and the Democratic members - perhaps not a quorum - but we told the Chairman to report the bill. But when the Chairman was called upon to report, he told the House that a majority of the Committee had instructed him to withhold the bill. I was, myself earnestly in favor of abolishing the Printers' office - and in favor of this bill to print by contract; and all I wish to do now is to clear my skirts distinctly of all imputations about killing those bills of the gentleman from Morgan and Johnson [Mr. Shirley,] by holding them in the Committee. I hope, as that gentleman has already said, that when these bills shall come up, they may be justly and fully considered.
Mr. FURNAS, from the Committee on Printing (by consent) returned Mr. Billingsley's bill, [H. R. 290,] fixing the time of the election of Public Printer, etc., recommending its passage.
Mr. BILLINGSLEY moved that it be printed.
Mr. BRANHAM. I hope the motion of, the gentleman from Dearborn [Mr. Givan,] will not prevail. Now sir, you have three distinct propositions before the House. One of them is to abolish the office of State Printer, and if that office is abolished you want to provide for the public printing in a different way. It is not necessary to pretend to consider either of those other bills till you determine the question whether or not you will continue the office of the Printer, and we could have done this as well at the last session as now. I think the question of abolishing the office is the only one we ought to consider now; and this calls up the question how we will provide for the public printing. But if all the subjects come up at once and we proceed to act upon them together, and then, if afterwards, the House should determine to abolish the office of Printer, the former labor will be useless. But when this first question shall be disposed of we can naturally and easily make such disposition of the other questions as shall be proper and right. I move that we take up the bill No. 9 and decide upon it now.
Mr. BILLINGSLEY. The reason why I desire that the House should not now take action on the bill No. 9 is this: I want the whole question should have a full discussion. I think before we abolish the Printer's office we should have something to put in its place that we should, at least understand what is the best system of printing for the State to adopt. If it should be determined to let the printing by contract to the lowest bidder, then it would be best to abolish the office. But if not, then it would be best to amend the system under which the State printing has proceeded heretofore.
Mr. WOOLLEN. It seems to me that the motion to print takes precedent of the motion of the gentleman from Jefferson, [Mr. Branham.] I do not think there is one member of the House who really wants to continue the old law. I think all of us will go for its repeal. Then the gentleman from Marion [Mr. Billingsley,] proposes to make another bill and place the State Printer under new restrictions; and the gentleman from Morgan and Johnson, [Mr. Shirley,] has already provided a bill which proposes that the printing shall be done by contract. I think the repealing ought to be done first: then the consideration comes fairly on the other questions whether we have another State Printer, or whether the printing be done by contract; and I can see either plan may be adopted by the House and a law proposed upon it so that the public interests may be well gaurded. A public printer is like most any other man; and I believe that a bill can be prepared so as to throw a discreet protection around that office. The thing is to have a law that shall protect the public interest ; and I shall support whatever bill may seem to me best calculated to secure that interest.
Mr. MELLETT. The gentleman has spoken my mind. But as to repealing the old law without providing for the public printing - (and I think there is no question that every member desires the repeal of the old law,) it seems to me that there should be some provision made first for the public printing. The new method proposed might result in great public hardships; therefore we should have all the bills before the Houseall the different methods by which we propose to do the public printing - and then consider them fully. We should substitute the new officer and prescribe his duties, before we abolish the present office.
Mr. WOOLLEN, [interposing.] I believe the present official term of the public printer expires on the 23rd of this month; therefore I think it ought to be abolished at once in order that all the arrangements may be completed by that time.
Mr. MELLETT. I am certainly in favor of the earliest time possible for the just settlement of this matter. I was, myself, on the printing committee, and that committee was waiting for bills to come before the House which might embrace everything that ought to be considered in that connection; for we could see nothing to be gained by abolishing the office, without first getting a better method. Gentlemen might possibly get a little political capital by abolishing that office, but we might at the same time by doing this thing hastily place the matter in a worse condition than it is now.
Mr. HELLER. As to this bill No. 290, I never heard of it till it was introduced here to-day by the gentleman from Marion. page: 300[View Page 300] Mr. BILLINGSLEY. I desire simply to exonerate the gentleman from Marion from any hand in the bill.
Mr. SHIRLEY. Both parties are pledged here to repeal the law creating the office of Public Printer. The eighth section of the Republican platform pledges the majority here to do that; and so far as I am concerned, and many who act with me, we have been outspoken in the same direction. And I will say here now, that we have already had ample time to have redeemed this pledge. We passed many a bill during the special session in less time than that which remains between this and the time when the term of the present printer expires. By my bill, which provides to let the printing to the lowest bidder, I put the whole matter into the hands of the State officers, so as to preclude the abuses that have grown up under the present system. But I am willing that these bills should all be printed, and made the special order as soon as may be; because there is no matter immediately before us, that is of more importance than this. I am in favor of taking the printing out of the hands of one man, and see if we can't do something better; for God knows we cannot make it any worse. All I ask is the right to act at once. We are now within a few days of the end of the printer's term, and there is no need of delay. The question is: Will we carry out our pledges to our constituents? It is no time for a man to say here that he is not ready to carry out his pledges to the people. Were gentlemen unprepared when they made their pledges? I presume they were not, and so they must be prepared now; and for myself, I feel that I have the right here to spurn by my action at the earliest moment, the charge that we are selling out to the State Printer.
Mr. WALKER. I think, if no accident befal the BREVIER REPORTS, that the gentlemen from Morgan and Johnson [Mr. Shirley,] will stand very fairly on the record as against the continuance of this office. I think he has already made a pretty good record against the management of the State printing. And his remarks have been very well directed against the office. The items of objections he made came from the acts of administration in the office, and not from the office itself. But, sir, if you abolish the office you shall be without the officer. All the items of objection that attach to the office of State Printer came clearly from its administration ; and I cannot think that, therefore the office ought to be abolished. As I understand the bill offered by the gentleman for Marion [Mr. Billingsley,] it comes in at the right time ; for when you present a bill to abolish the office of printer on account of evils in its administration, on the other hand he is bringing a bill to apply the remedy, and others have similar propositions. These are what we want. And, for the purpose of considering whether the gentleman has the panacea for these evils, let us consider and compare them together and see how much we may be helped by them in the work of eliminating the evil,by adopting the best plan, or by combining all of them, so that no man of straw can take away the spoils. We want to act in this way. But the gentleman from Morgan and Johnson seems to think that he can't survive the jeopardy of the States interests unless before he sleeps the office of State Printer is abolished. But I would say: Let us consider this matter as a whole - for I know of no effort here, either partizan or otherwise, to elect this officer till all the questions connected with it shall be decided intelligently. But it seems to me that this abolishment is the stock in trade of the gentleman from Morgan and Johnson, and that he fears that other propositions will cut off his, and the people will never hear of it again. But I stand by him when he says that the present system is full of fraud;still gross and bad as the present is, there are others that may prove worse. It may be, as he insists, that the office should be abolished. If that is so, upon a careful finding, we will all vote for it. But I can't understand why it should be urged now. Still, I would be in favor of doing it now, if we had both the bills matured, so that we could look at the remedy and be convinced that fraud can't enter there. I think I might assure the gentleman, that before my party calls upon anybody to vote for this officer he will have an opportunity of being heard.
Mr. BAKER. I am like my friend on the right [Mr. Walker,] I do not feel at present any anxiety for the abolishment of this office. That we have to get the State printing done by one party or another is patent to all; and we will have to do a good deal of printing before the term of the old officer expires; I would like to adopt the new system before the old printer goes out. We have now two months to go on, and somebody must do our printing. Now it may be that the proposed letting of the printing by contract will open the door for more and worse corruption. It will be like the biddings for the mail contract with the general government. Therefore I hope our bills in this matter will be carefully prepared, and for myself I will say that I prefer the continuance of the office of State Printer
Mr. KIMBALL. The remedy is not in abolishing the office, but in gaurding it against fraud. I stand here amongst those who represent the Republican party and respond to the Republican platform which recommended the abolishing of this office. We all know that at the time of the construction of that platform, the whole State was excited, in consequence of grave charges not only against the State Printer but other State officers. Now I am in favor of repealing the act creating the printer's office; page: 301[View Page 301] and I think the bill [H. R. 290,] presented by the Chairman of the Committee on Printing, [Mr. Billingsley,] will remedy this matter. I feel a delicacy in saying anything in this matter ; because it is known that I am connected with a newspaper. But, sir, I had my hand in preparing that bill; and it is for the purpose of saving money to the State; and I ask the House to consider that bill. It repeals the old law, and it provides that the printer can't defraud the State out of one cent unless he has the consent of Governor, the Auditor and the Secretary of State. These trusted officers are made commissioners of the Public Printing. It provides that the State Printer shall provide all the materials for his work - his types, engravings, plates, stereotypings, and everything connected with the requirements for the State printing, but he shall print nothing for the State except by the requirements of this commission. And furthermore, that he shall be allowed only such price for his work as this commission may determine; and the determination to be this: that he shall be allowed the name prices that similar work can be done for at other establishments. Now, sir, to abolish an office simply because one man has done wrong is not right. And, as to the letting of the printing by contract - we have just as much right to let out the duties of the Secretary of State, or the Auditor, or the Treasurer. And I hope, before the House is called upon to vote for or against this office, that gentlemen will thoroughly examine the matter of the State printing and see whether the State is to be the gainer or loser by abolishing it. The indignation of the people is not hurled against the office. The object which the people aim at is not to get rid of the office, but to get rid of the corruptions which have grown out of it. And I here make this statement: that so far as the contract system has been tried in other States, there has grown out of it as much fraud and corruption as we have found here in the State of Indiana ; and I can show that it has cost those States more to do their printing by contract than it would have cost by an honest administration of the office of State Printer. Under the bill which I hope will be passed, the State Printer has no power under the sun to print a line for the State, unless he is so authorized by the Governor, Auditor, and Secretary of State; and then all his bills must be approved by them. The Auditor is forbidden to draw his warrant for the Printer's work, and he can't draw it, without having on it also the names of the Governor and Secretary of State. Now all I ask of the House as a representative of the people and of the press, and as a democrat, is this, not to inflict upon the State a greater wrong in this matter than that which now exists. I cannot think that either party in the State, Republican or Democratic, would be guilty of conniving at fraud in this or any other matter. Here is a bill framed which I wish the General Assembly and the people to read; and if it is not sufficiently guarded I hope the House will put the guards in, and strengthen it where it may be weak All I ask is for the House to act understandingly, and not inflict a greater than the present wrong, as they have done in some of our neighboring States on the subject of the public printing. The bill makes the State Printer elective; it compels him to provide his paper for the State's work and do it in a good and substantial manner. It requires the commissioners to take his account and submit it to the scale of prices of printing, and call in other printers to say whether it is overcharged, or if it is just; and if it is just they pay it, and if it is overcharged they will cut it down. All this is required under the proposed bill. Now I have a letter here from the Secretary of the State of Ohio, and another from the Superintendent of printing for the State of Illinois, complaining of greater public wrongs by the contract system, than by the other. I do not wish to consume the time of the House, but I will read an extract from this letter from Ohio. It is dated Nov., 26, 1872, and addressed to J. M. Ridenour, President of the Indianapolis Journal Company.
Mr. BRANHAM. [interposing.] Is that gentleman engaged in getting up this bill?
Mr. KIMBALL. I am reading merely for information of the House and the people I represent - not to make partizan objections. It is in answer to a letter asking about the operation of the contract system. (The letter states the prices which the State of Ohio pays - for composition 66 2-3 cents per thousand ems; for press work, 52 cents per token; that one of the worst features of their system is the delay about getting the work done; then the quality of the work is not good; they are "very much annoyed by provoking blunders," and the writer is satisfied that "it could be done more economically and better under a more direct system.") I have read this to show, that officers of the State of Ohio who have had experience in this matter are of opinion that the public printing can be done by an officer of State under just and proper guards and restrictions with a saving of money to the State, and with greater promptitude and satisfaction on all sides, than it can be done by any man that can be found under the contract system. And if we go back into the history of this State some 30 years, when the duties of the office of Public Printer were honestly discharged, we will find that the public printing for 1842 down to 1852 never cost the State more than $17,829 in any one year. He read his figures giving the cost of the public printing for some of these years, saying that there were times when we had an honest administration of this office, and these corruptions grew up in after years, to page: 302[View Page 302] which it is unnecessary to refer here. But in order to enact a law that will throw the proper guards around this officer, I have prepared this bill and I ask the House to examine it. - He desired simply to do his duty as a Representative. He would acquiesce in the repeal of the State Printer act; and only asked for a careful consideration of the whole matter.
Mr. SHIRLEY proposed only a word in reply to the gentleman from Wayne [Mr. Walker.] That gentleman seems to be alarmed at my anxiety for action ; and he thinks I am too violently in earnest. I am certainly in earnest while acting here in behalf of an honest constituency ; and I think I am complimented, when gentlemen taunt me with watchfulness and earnestness. If the gentleman from Wayne is not alarmed at the corruptions which have appeared in this office, I confess that I am.
Mr. BRANHAM. I do not propose to detain the House long. But I want to say this: That there is no law that you can throw round a dishonest man that will make an honest man of him; and when I say this, I am not committing myself to the bill No. 31 nor to any other bill. But I wish to say this: In all our State conventions, and by all our public speakers we have pledged ourselves on both sides to wipe out this office ; and this I wish to say further, that we are placed here to-day - after a session of 40 days - without having taken any action in this matter on the part of the House - and by whom? I say it is because of a positive disregard of the order of this House on the part of the Committee on Printing. I do not wish to say anything more then the facts of the case will warrant. The reason why these bills were not reported back by that Committee was to drive us to the point when we might not have time to act on them. Sir, the correspondence read by the gentleman from Marion shows - what? It shows that this whole matter has been under the supervision of parties who expect the public printing at your hands. Has it come to this - that the House of Representatives can't perform its duty without outside aid? Another gentleman says we should come to this question without embarrassment. But who shall provide for us the Public Printer? The caucus, I suppose; and woe be to the man that won't obey its high behests.I say sir, that it has been demonstrated that the State Printer's office is the high road to corruption - and why? Because in carrying on our political campaigns it requires money; and we see that men in certain positions are allowed a liberal salary because they contribute liberally to their party; and because the Public Printer is a representative of the party in power, and has thrown upon him the burden of the expense of his party campaign, the caucus would provide him with the means of doing so illegally. I am not talking here as a Republican or a Democrat when I say that this order of corruption has been known to prominent Republicans, and they dare not move their finger to remove it, because it might injure their party. Therefore I am not disposed to allow the Public Printer to be leader for either party. Gentlemen have never fathomed the half of this corruption. Then, as to the question before the House, I say : Let us try some other scheme. It may be a worse one: But I want to know why the law can't guard a matter as well in the hands of a contractor as in the hands of a public officer? No sir, gentlemen can'tby all the safeguards they may throw around a dishonest public officer - they can't make him honest; and if you get an honest man in office - the noblest work of God - he does not need your safeguards. I want to relieve this whole question of the public printing from these private influences. I have got my friends, and I am in favor of them. But I wan't to wipe out this office now; and if we determine again to elect a printer, let us elect the best man ; and if you say we do not abolish the office, then we will consider the safegaurds. If you say, abolish the office, then we will provide for a different system entirely.
Mr. BILLINGSLEY. I think the journals of the House will show that the Committee on Printing asked for further time.
Mr. BRANHAM. If I am not mistaken, the journals will show that resolutions were offered three several times requiring them to report.
Mr. BILLINGSLEY. When I was present further time was granted, and we desired this, and still urged it, because of the necessity of maturing a better system before abolishing the office of State Printer. I do not wish to say anything in reply to the gentleman from Jefferson; but I think there will be ample opportunity for the gentleman to vote for abolishing the office, and to vote for Printer, if necessary. But I urge that we should first fully consider the matter.
Mr. WOOLLEN. As to the repeal of the old public printer law, we wouldn't be in any trouble if we were without a public printing law so long as the Legislature is in session. We are all agreed that it should be repealed. I believe the Scriptures say that the tree which brings not forth good fruit shall be hewn down ; and we are here for the purpose of cutting down the corruptions that have shown themselves. Let us strike at that law as it is in existence now, because it is evil: and then let us discuss the question as to what is proper for the future. And then it will remain for the Legislature to determine whether they will have a public printer, or whether they will do the work by contract; and I repeat that while the Legislature is in session there can no harm grow out of it. We have plenty page: 303[View Page 303] of time; and the trouble about it is that the public is getting to believe that we are trying to delay this question, as if it were believed that we are willing to sanction the wrong. But I don't believe gentlemen will permit it. And I believe that the only way to convince the people of our integrity now is to repeal that law at once; for the 40 days session is passed and we have not yet reached it. Then let us repeal the law;hew it down. We can then build up another, and I could hope at least that it will bring forth good fruit. So the pledge made by the Republican party will be redeemed. Then if we have to elect a public printer, we may throw such gaurds around him as will protect the interests of the State. But I say that law should be stricken down without another argument or word.Mr. KIMBALL. The gentleman from Jefferson [Mr. Branham,] is in earnest in the advocacy of the position he has taken. He spoke somewhat excitedly and with a great deal of vim. He tried to show the House that this whole matter has been under the supervision of the Journal Company, intimating that if it had not been for the Company the order of the House would have been complied with. I stand here to deny that. The Journal Company made no effort to interfere with the Printing Committee or with the Legislature in this matter. That letter which I read was procured by one of the gentlemen of that paper ; and though I am in that interest it was presented to me, not as an advocate of the old law, but of something better that might be substituted for it. Whatever I have done in the matter has been done openly. And then the intimation that attempts have been made to postpone this thing come with a bad grace from one who has never consulted a single man in the House as to this matter. I pledge myself sir, that I have not said a word to the Committee in this matter, further than that I aided the Chairman [Mr. Billingsley,] in the preparation of the bill which he presented. And I had a right to do that. And as to the intimation that there is any attempt to spring this matter and force it upon the House by caucus nomination, no man has ever heard from me that this thing was to be trusted to the Republican party for its action in caucus. So far from that when it was suggested to me, I objected, and stated the impropriety of such a course. But I said also, that whenever it becomes necessary to caucus for nomination on a political issue, I will go in and stand by its action, but not where mere personal interests are concerned. This question is in the interest of the State; and whether the man getting the work belongs to my Company or not it matters no to me further than as I stand here to represent the people. I am opposed to the old law, but I believe you can get nothing better than to provide a State Printer, and for that purpose I have suggested the provisions of the bill which the Chairman of the Printing Committee has presented. So far as I know, my Company has not to my knowledge made any effort toward influencing that Committee. It is true I was asked by a member of my Company to present a document to the Committee which I did. If the Republican party have pledged themselves to abolish the office of State Printer, let them do as their consciences dictate; but if that pledge were taken without the knowledge of what would be right now, I say they are not bound by it; but they are bound to do what is right. What I ask in this matter is that whatever shall be done, let it be with full knowledge and judgment made up as to what is best for the people.
Mr. BRANHAM. All I have to say is that the differences of statement between the gentleman from Marion [Mr. Kimball,] and myself are before the House, and I am perfectly willing to abide their decision.
Mr. BARRETT. I told my people that no matter what party might succeed, I would vote to abolish the office of State Printer. In the State of Ohio they adopted a different mode in 1852 ; and to my knowledge there never has been any effort made to have that law changed. I was in the State of Ohio in the intermission between the adjournment of the last session and opening of this; and there were some who asked me what we were going to do with reference to the State printing. I told them I did not know ; but as for myself I was willing to try most any other mode than that we have. And then I asked in turn: How does your system work? They said: Very well; that they had got the printing into the charitable institutions, where they expected to do a great deal of it; and it was a great saving to the State. And I thought that a good plan. Now, Mr. Speaker, I am ready to vote to abolish the old law to carry out my pledge and my own conviction of duty. And I am willing to try almost any other mode for the public printing. It seems to me that it cannot be much worse. I want to abolish the old law, and give the House time to adopt a better plan. I am willing to adopt most any other mode. I don't say I am favor of the lowest bidder, and I won't say I am in favor of putting it in the hands of a commission. But let us first get rid of the old law.
Mr. MELLETT. The insinuation that the Committee may have been influenced from abroad, deserves this simple answer: As a member of the Committee on Printing no individual has approached me on the subject of the State Printer. In regard to the seeming neglect of the Committee about reporting back these bills, I think (other members of the Committee will bear me out in saying) that I have never met but once with that Committee; and that it is not the fault of the Chairman [Mr. page: 304[View Page 304] Billingsley;] for he has invited me to their sessions several times. And they did not report because they considered it was not important till it was known what the House would be willing to do. I will say that I am in favor of abolishing the old law. I have said so all the time. And the suggestion has been made by some gentleman across the way that this thing has been purposely postponed; and I presume that charge will rest here on the Committee - of course under the pressure of my honorable friend the gentleman from Marion. But if this matter has been postponed till on the very eve of the expiration of the term of the office of State Printer, in order that another election might be forced by the majority, I must say in regard to that matter, that until to-day I have not been enlightened. I did not know but his term had already expired ; and I did not know but it might be continued further - nor did I care. But I do say that that charge is without foundation. I have this further, simply, to say, that the minority need have no fear on account of my course; I have no friend for whom I would vote to place him in the office of State Printer under the present law. I would as soon send a friend to purgatory. This is a question upon which the eyes of the people are fixed, and any negligence or mistake about it would be fatal to the best interest of the country.
Mr. OFFUTT. I have no disposition to prolong this discussion. It seems to me that there has been quite enough said. But I have opinions that will control my action. I have been a little amused at the course of the opponents of this bill No. 9. They are all in favor of abolishing the system by which the printing is now done; yet they urge as a reason why they will not vote for the repeal at this time, that they do not know what law will be passed to take its place. It seems to me that is begging the question. The Legislature is in session; and, if this law is repealed, why can't another bill and another system be constructed just as well after this repeal shall have taken place as before? And, if we can't find a better system, it will only take a day or two to re-enact the old law, I am in favor of the unconditional repeal of that law. There is not a man, so far as I know, of either party in the county I have the honor to represent, who has ever thought on this subject, or who knows anything about the abuses that have grown out of this system, but demands that that law shall be repealed and the office of State Printer abolished. It seems to me that we have had about enough black cats skinned in Indiana and that we should now destroy the cat skinner. Let us wipe out the system that has disgraced the people by the enormous frauds it has permitted, inasmuch that men charged with its administration have barely escaped the penitentiary. And yet gentlemen can say : We will not repeal it because we do not know what we will have in place of it. I have no reflections to cast on the gentleman from Marion; but I have a right to state the impression which that gentleman's remarks made on my mind. I will say that the argument made by the gentleman reminded me more than any thing else of the effort of a hired attorney. He has said that he is in favor of the repeal of thia law; but then why does he bring in here his documents from the States of Ohio and Illinois, and read them to the House, if it is not for the purpose of defeating this repeal, or delaying the vote on this question? I say, let us meet it at once; because the people are demanding it; and because the system is wrong;it is nothing more nor less than a highway to corruption and perjury, as the past has abundantly proven. I have said more than I intended; and what I am most particular to say, is this: that I intend to vote for this repeal, because it is right and should be done now; and I am not to be intimidated or frightened from my position by gentlemen charging that the friends of this repeal are endeavoring to cast reflections upon somebody. I do no such thing; but I am entitled to my position, and I take it.
Mr. BRANHAM. Mr. Speaker, I wish to inquire what is the condition of this bill No 9.The SPEAKER. All three are on the first reading; none of them have been read the second time.Mr. BRANHAM. It seems to me that the motions before the House are not very distinct. - The motion I wish to make is that the bill No. 9 be read the second time now and made the special order for to-morrow morning.
Mr. WILSON of Ripley. I am in favor of redeeming every pledge of the Republicanparty; but I am not in favor of repealing this law till we have something to take its place. I have the honor of being a member of the Committee on Printing, and I have not met with them yet. I am not a practical printer, and I have failed to meet with that Committee because I felt that I could do no good there. What do gentlemen purpose? Do they propose to leave us without any law on this subject? This is a very difficult matter to handle. What are we to do without this officer? What are we to do without printing; so long as we have nothing in our legislation to take the place of that which we propose to repeal? There will be ample time to repeal, and it will be better and safer, when we shall have matured the remedy. I do not believe that there is a man on this floor, who does not desire some change in our legislation on this subject. I think it would be the utmost folly to repeal any law before we have something to take its place. It is sometimes better to bear the ills we have than page: 305[View Page 305] fly to those we know not of. If we repeal this law now, any measure which we propose may be so met and so treated that we will be left without any action upon the subject.
Mr. WOODARD. I introduced a resolution in regard to this measure during the special - session. I am willing that parties who have made pledges - and I know of no gentleman of either party who have not made pledges of - some kind - should have opportunity to make them good. I believe we all want to arrive at correct conclusions. Now as we have passed through the extra session, l am willing to give a reasonable time to the consideration of this question. The motion of the gentleman to make it a special order suits me.
Mr. MILLER. Unfortunately for myself I am not a member of the Committee on Printing. I have very little interest in this question; and I am not excited; nor do I think the Treasury of Indiana stands at present in any great danger. I have not heard of one dollar being taken out of the Treasury improperly since the public attention was directed to the abuses in the printer's office; and I verily believe that the public Treasury would be as well protected under the present law as it would be by any action we could pass now. I hardly think that pledges of conventions made for votes ought to be regarded here. It seems to me that we might disregard such pledges if it were necessary to give us a better law. I can see no reason why we should repeal this law unless it were to make men virtuous. But where is the necessity of repealing this bill before Thursday ? There is a motion for making these bills number 9 and number 31, and the bill of the gentleman from Marion the special order for Thursday. That will give time for reflection; and we can determine then what we will do. If we reject the plan of the gentleman from Marion, we will turn to the bill of the gentleman from Morgan and Johnson. I think there would be a sufficient length of time to consider all these bills before the expiration of the office of public printer.
Mr. COBB. I desire in the first place to thank the gentleman. (Mr. Kimball,) for the information he has given us in regard to the contract system as it operates in the neighboring States. Now, as we are all pledged to repeal this office; and as I belong to a party that always keep their pledges, I think we shall be able to repeal the present system of doing the public printing. But I desire to have all the light we can get upon this subject; and as I have a little more confidence in my own judgment than I have in that of any other person I have ever been acquainted with, I will move that all three of these bills be printed and made the special order for Friday morning immediately after the reading of the journal.
Mr. WALKER recognized himself as a member of the Committee on Printing but never having met with it was not aware of its action till it was reported to the House.
The SPEAKER. There are three bills. The first motion is to make them all the special order for Thursday. But the first question will be on the motion [Mr. Givan's,] to print the bill No. 31, to provide for the printing by contract with the lowest responsible bidder.
The motion was adopted.
The next question was on Mr. Billingsley's motion to print his bill [H. R, 290;] and it was also adopted.
The SPEAKER. The question now recurs on refering these bills to the committee of the whole House, and making them the special order for Thursday.
Mr. BRANHAM. I move to amend the motion so as to make the special order for Thursday two o'clock - without the reference to the committee of the whole.
Mr. BAKER preferred Monday; but Mr. Branham's amendment was accepted and adopted.
The SPEAKER. The question still recurs on some disposition of the bill No. 9.
Mr. WOOLLEN. I move that it be considered now.
The SPEAKER. It is is now a substitute bill, and has not yet been read the second time.
Mr. WOOLEN. Then I move to suspend the Constitutional restriction that it may be read the second time, and referred with the other bills.
Mr. BRANHAM. It can be referred or postponed as well at its present stage. I move to postpone and make it the special order with the other bills.
The motion was adopted.
