THE
BREVIER LEGISLATIVE REPORTS.
FOURTEENTH VOLUME.
INDIANA LEGISLATURE.
Stationery---Courts and County Offices.---Debate in Continuation.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
TUESDAY, January 21, 1873.[Morning Session.]
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
Mr. WALKER, from the Committee on the Judiciary reported back, with the recommendation that it pass, Senate Bill 159, to provide for the submission to the qualified electors of the State, for their ratification or rejection, a proposed amendment to the Constitution of Indiana in relation to the debt charged against the Wabash and Erie Canal with an amendment changing the date of the election from the 28th day of January to the 18th day of February.
He recited the origin and history of the bill, and stated one of the objects to be to get the subject out of the hands of the Legislature, in order that there may be opportunity to propose other needed constitutional amendments - referring particularly to the Governor's recommendation for the submission to the people next October, the question of calling a Constitutional Convention.
Mr. WOOLLEN also stated the necessity of an early submission of this question about which there would be no more debate before the people than before the Legislature. They will be unanimous in favor of it.
Mr. HELLER submitted the question on his mind, whether we have the right to make any change in the pending bill, even aa much as to call a special election for the submission to the people.
The report was concurred in adopting the amendment, and the bill was finally passed by the House of Representatives - yeas 86, nays 0.
COUNTY AND TOWNSHIP R. R. AID.
When the House took up the special order - the special order being the consideration of House Bill No. 297, to forbid the collection of railroad taxes from any township or county until the company in whose favor said tax was levied, has located its road -
Mr. BRANHAM asked if there were not certain other bills which were made the special order along with this bill, and was answered by the Speaker that he had no memorandum to that effect, and by Mr. King, Chairman of the Railroad Committee, that this was the only bill. Mr. Branham said the committeee had examined the Senate Railroad Bill, and had unanimously directed that it be reported.
Mr. KING said there were serious defects in the bill, and the committee desired time for further examination.
Mr. BRANHAM rejoined that the committee had unanimously agreed to report the bill. What the defects so recently discovered might be he did not know.
The Speaker cut short the controversy upon the point by declaring nothing was before the House but the special order - the bill H. R. 297.The bill was read the third time and passed - yeas 86, nays 0.
page: 340[View Page 340]STATIONERY - COURTS AND COUNTY OFFICES.
Mr. SHIRLEY, from the Judiciary Committee, returned Mr. Willson of Ripley's bill [H. R. 276] to prohibit the several courts and county boards in this State from making any allowance to county officers for stationary, and providing that such officers shall furnish their own stationary, recommending that the same be laid on the table.
Mr. WILLSON of Ripley. In this bill I provide that the courts and county commissioners shall not hereafter make any allowance to county officers for stationary; except for the record books, and I desire to point out some of the abuses under the present system. And as we are called upon by the people to cut down all abuses, it seems to me that we have a golden opportunity which we ought not to let pass. The State is now paying no less than $300,000 a year for stationary for the county officers, when in contemplation of law, this should be paid by the county officers themselves; and they put in under the head of stationary four-fifths of all the items of supply for their offices. Wherever we find such an abuse of power, we ought to put our hand on it. Let gentlemen go to their county offices and to the records, and under the head of expenses for stationery they will find pens, inkstands, gold pens, erasers, cork-screws and other like things that can not properly come under the head of stationary, such as pocket-knives, memorandum books etc. And this is carried on to such an extent that they even get from the traders a bonus per cent. on their purchases. The County Clerk gets fifty cents for his summons, which he procures at the State's expense; whence he gets not only enough for himself but all his friends. Besides when he retires from his office he takes with him enough of these articles of stationery to last him through the term of his natural life. [Laughter.] And the State of Indiana pays all these bills. Now I say sir, that a connty clerk does not use as much stationery as a respectable lawyer ; yet we find that throughout the State, county clerks are using more than three hundred thousand dollars worth of these articles; and that is an expense sufficient to carry on the State government. In my own county this expense is more than sufficient to keep the paupers of the county. And if you will notice these county officers generally, you will find them living in splendor - you will find the proceeds of this stationery in their pockets. It is therefore manifestly to the interest of the State to require these county officers to purchase their own stationery. To give an instance of how this thing is done by them; it is known that the book-sellers are in the habit of allowing hem fifteen per cent, on all their purchases; and in that way it is to the interest of the county officers to make large purchases; and this per cent. goes into the hands of the county officers. I insist therefore that we cannot do a better work - better to save money to the people - than right now to put a stop to this great abuse.
Mr. BARRETT. I am convinced that there ought to be something done in this matter. I think this abuse ought to be and can be stopped. I understand that many of the county officers make those arrangements indicated by the gentleman from Ripley, no that they will sell to the officer at wholesale prices and the officer will charge the State the retail prices. I have been told by those who know that this is the case; so that the people are paying in some cases perhaps double prices. I understand that the county of Marion pays out twelve thousand dollars annually. I think therefore that something out to be done about this thing, and that we ought to make thorough work of it.
Mr. BUSKIRK. It seems to me that the report of the committee on the Judiciary ought to be concurred in which is to lay this bill on the table. The gentleman from Ripley, (Mr. Willson) has given a bold account of the condition of things in his county; and if we are to believe him, not only the county officers of Ripley county but the Board of Commissioners must be a set of thieves. The idea that a lawyer gets a little stationery, including cork-screws and pocket-knives, from the treasury, I am inclined to resent it. In my county the stationery is furnished by contract by the lowest bidder, but if we require the county officers to furnish their own stationery it would deprive them of three-fourths of their emoluments. Why, it is stated here that Marion county alone furnishes twelve thousand dollars worth of stationery annually. Now suppose four thousand dollars worth of that stationery to be used improperly - that would leave eight thousand dollars worth to be used legitimately. Now to require the county clerk of Marion county to pay that sum, would be to take away his salary. It seems to me, sir, that this bill is an effort to deprive the County Commissioners of their discretion in this matter. It seems to me that it is proper that the County Commissioners should have this discretion, for they are immediately responsible to the people; and where the County Commissioners are guilty of this abuse, being immediately responsible to the people, they will be swept out of office. However no such abuses are to be found in my county. I cannot speak for the county of Ripley; but the gentleman himself has spoken for hia own county. All I can say is, that this abuse does not prevail in my county, and the page: 341[View Page 341] passage of this bill would be to deprive the County Commissioners of their proper discretion and control of this matter. The gentleman says that over three hundred thousand dollars are annually expended in the several counties for stationery. I do not know where he gets his figures, but this thing of stationery is for the benefit of the people; and if there are abuses, they ought to be corrected. But it is neither safe nor wise to govern the people too much. The people of each county must themselves look to their own officials, and it seems to me that the people of each county can act for themselves better than we can act for them.
Mr. WALKER. It was not doubted by the Judiciary Committee that there will be abuses of this kind; but it was held that they could not be corrected here. And perhaps I might say that the gentleman's bill has done its work already. It seems to have taken its inspiration from his per diem bill of the last session. It is not doubted that this abuse ought to be corrected; and I would suggest it to the gentleman as a good way to prevent at least the purchase of cork-screws for stationery, to provide a good temperance bill. I think the gentleman had better vote for the proposed temperance bill, and then there would be no need of these cork-screws. But let us consider the effect of this bill. The gentlemen if he were a judge, would have to arm himself with half a quire of paper - with an inkstand in his pocket - and a cork-screw, if necessary, if he went to Ripley county to hold court. But the gentleman further says that it is not right for the county clerk to get fifty cents for the summons he issues, while he gets his printed summons for less money. But now every client has the right to write to the county clerk; and it is the duty of the clerk to furnish information to him about the status of his case - as to whether or not execution has been issued etc. Now for all this the clerk would have to buy his own stationery. I do not doubt, sir, and the committee do not doubt, that this matter ought to be regulated; but we think the gentleman's bill is wrong - that it partakes too much of a principle that is wrong. Suppose a man living in an outer township becomes a candidate for one of these offices, and his neighbors electioneer for him because he is an honest man - upright in his business transactions - but the moment he becomes a candidate "eo instanti" the cry goes out: He is a scoundrel. Now this ought not to be so. And this bill partakes of this principle, by assuming fraudulent intentions on the part of the judges and county officers; and does it not pre-suppose that the County Commissioners cannot regulate this matter? The Commissioners do not purchase these things; but they should make themselves so far acquainted with the matter as to prevent fraud; and the people should hold them to this duty; so that there could be no fraud in the case, unless the board were a party to it. All this can be regulated, bnt this sound discretion should not be prohibibited.
Mr. SHIRLEY. The Committee on the Judiciary have recommended that this bill lie on the table. There is a bill now before the Senate, it is a fee bill - and if that bill should pass I would be in favor of this bill, for in every county where they are living under a fee bill there ought to be such a law as this bill proposes. So when we shall see what will be done with that Senate bill to regulate the fees, then we can understand what should be done with this proposition, for if the county officers are to live on their salaries fixed by law, it will be hard for them to furnish their own stationery.
The House then adjourned until to-morrow morning.
