THE
BREVIER LEGISLATIVE REPORTS.
FOURTEENTH VOLUME.
INDIANA LEGISLATURE.
Civil Township School Bonds.---Debate in Continuation.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
WEDNESDAY, January 22, 1873.[CONTINUED FROM PAGE 67 - TOP of SECOND COLUMN.]
[Afternoon Session.]
Mr. WOOLLEN'S bill [H. R. 10] providing for the issue and sale of bonds by civil townships for the purpose of paying any indebtedness incurred in the purchase of school houses, and to authorize taxation for the payment of such bonds, was taken up on the third reading. (It provides for taxation for this purpose not to exceed five per cent. on the hundred dollars of taxables - interest payable annually and the principal in ten years.)
Mr. WOOLLEN, said: It gives to the civil townships the same right that cities and towns now have as to borrowing money for school purposes, if they desire to do so. It has been prepared with a great deal of care - that is if I am able to be careful - and it is guarded with restrictions. It will not be liable to abuse. I hope the bill will pass because I know of some townships that want it.
Mr. BRANHAM. If we (the State) have no right to issue bonds and put them on the market how can we authorize a civil township to do so? The Constitution expressly provides against the State creating any debt and if the Legislature can't do such a thing, how can we authorize the people to do it? - I might as well say at once, that I am opposed to the principle of this bill; and if we propose to fill the State with township bonds we are on the road to financial ruin. I want to say that in my judgment, forty per cent, of the cost of many of the school houses already in the State is a waste of money; and further, if the people want fine school houses, let them pay for them without incurring debts. There is a prevalent system of public extravagance in the construction of school houses, and the result is, that you can drive through the townships of the State and find many vacant school houses. Therefore, I say, if the people want to vote a tax for these purposes, let them vote it and pay it first, but don't allow them to issue bonds.
Mr. BUSKIRK. If this bill become a law, it would empower the Township Trustee to select the districts to be benefited by the erection of school houses. That would be a very extensive power, and liable to abuse; especially as it is to involve the townships in debts by the issuance of bonds. I have not read the bill through; but it seems to me that it is not sufficiently guarded with respect to the power proposed to be lodged with the Township Trustee in locating the school houses, and in taxing the people for the construction thereof. If the author of the bill can satisfy the House that my objection is not well taken, I hope he will do so. - If this bill should become a law it would give to the Trustee the power of involving the townships in large amounts of indebtedness for the erection of school houses at pla- page: 359[View Page 359] ces which, from sinister or other motives of his own, the Trustee might select.
Mr. WOOLLEN. This, sir, is an unfortunate day on which to take up a bill in regard to school matters. The darkness which hangs in the atmosphere to-day must have some effect on us; members here must be in sympathy with the gloomy weather outside. The day is cloudy, there is not much sunshine here; and it may be that we should require a little more light to enable gentlemen to understand this bill. Now, the gentleman from Jefferson [Mr. Branham,] says this bill proceeds upon untenable grounds, and he questions the constitutionality of the act proposed; and yet, it has not been long since the gentleman got through the House a bill conferring the power of taxation upon his own township for the purpose of building a railroad in Kentucky; and the gentleman knows that the Constitution allows the people to build just as much in one township as in another.
Mr. BRANHAM. [interposing.] The law authorizes only a limited amount for the purpose, and the money to be first paid in. I never asked for an issue of bonds especially when there is no precise amount and rate of interest fixed at which the bonds are to be sold.
Mr. WOOLLEN. This bill gives that. But what I was saying was, that the gentleman desired, and got legislation through this House for making a railroad in Kentucky by his people in Madison; and I voted for his bill. But when it comes to voting for a bill for borrowing money to build school houses the gentleman finds a constitutional objection, but I say to him now that effect of the bill is that, when the people of any township want to build a school house, they can petition the County Commissioners, and their petition can be granted as proposed. The bill confines the expenditure of the borrowed money to the one purpose - the building of a school house. There cannot be any abuse of its powers. It would be unheard of for a township trustee to locate a school house and spend the public money on it, at discretion to subserve his own interest. The gentleman from Gibson [Mr. Buskirk,] objects, because the trustee may select the site. But the trustee has the same power in this respect without this bill; and in my judgment it is better that the people should borrow the money specifically to build their school houses and pay their school house debts, than that they should raise the money in the ordinary way and let the trustee have the interest on it; for he may possibly loan out the money, pocket the interest, and so fix it, that the people will be in a worse condition than if they had borrowed it. There are cases in my own county where the school houses have gone down, and they want to build new ones immediately; and this is to give them the ready means. I cannot understand why the gentleman from Jefferson [Mr. Branham,] should say that forty per cent, of all the school houses are idle, and useless. I don't know where the gentleman has been traveling; but I do know this: that we want school houses in many places, and we want precisely this authority to build immediately. And I say further, that there is no objection urged against the bill, which could not be urged against any other public work; as, for schools in cities and towns. And we know that these township trustees are more careful in building their local school houses than are the authorities in the cities and towns ; because those monuments of extravagance are always found in the towns and cities, and we do not find them in the country. I do hope the House will pass this bill.
Mr. BUTTERWORTH. At the first I thought this bill was right; but discussion has changed my mind. I now take the ground of the gentleman from Jefferson [Mr. Branham.] - We need no such law as this bill proposes in our part of the State. They make their school houses there with sufficient facility, and some of them are elegant structures, as that in my own town. The effect of this bill will be to facilitate the erection of some elegant school house structures, at some favored cross roads, at the public expense, some four or five miles away from the center of the township. Townships you should remember, sir, are six miles square, more or less; and it is not right, by a majority vote, to tax men five miles away to build an elegant school house structure on some forsaken corner. That is the iryusiice of the bill, and I am glad that this discussion has brought it out.
Mr. MELLETT. I agree with the author of this bill when he says, that this is a very unfavorable day for the consideration of a school bill. It is sorrowful to me also that any school bill should come up on a dark day. I think perhaps the best thing we can do with this bill would be to hand it to the committee along with the other. We are going to consider this whole subject on Wednesday and I think it would be well to consider this at the same time. The gentleman from Johnson [Mr. Woollen,] shakes his head. Another gentleman in my eye, the gentleman from St. Joseph [Mr. Butterworth,] seems also to object, but I insist that it shall go over till Wednesday. I think this is a question of sufficient importance to be gravely considered. The gentleman from St. Joseph says that his constituents can make their school houses well enough; and I understand that in his own town they have one of the most superb of these elegant school page: 360[View Page 360] houses. But I know myself of many school houses that are a public disgrace; and if you want education to prosper in Indiana, you must keep pace with the age in this respect. It won't do to be content with sending your children to the log school houses with paper window lights and coon skin hangings. I insist that there is nothing improper in this bill. It allows each township to prescribe and regulate for itself as to what kind of a school house they will have ; and they can't proceed to build unless they can obtain a majority of the freeholders to back the work by petitions. If the people of any township in the State want to build a good school house, and can determine where to build, they have a right to do it. A right that should not be denied by this House. Let the people of the townships decide for themselves in regard to this matter. As far as the question of issuing bonds is concerned it is frequently a matter of necessity to tax the townships to build school houses which are absolutely demanded, and perhaps in most cases they would not impose a tax for bonds which the people could not pay in two years. Delays are dangerous. They can't afford to wait; and if they have not got the money let them issue their bonds; it will be economy in the end. I move that this bill be referred, to the committee of the whole House, and made the special order for Wednesday - next week.
Mr. KIMBALL. In order to accommodate the gentleman from Johnson [Mr. Woollen,] I move to recommit the bill, with instructions to amend so that the bonds shall be sold at not less than ninety cents on the hundred dollars, and shall bear interest at not less than six per cent.
Mr. CAUTHORN. Can we make it a special order if the bill is not printed?
The SPEAKER. That would be no hinderance.
Mr. MELLETT. I would prefer that the bill be recommitted.
Mr. BRANHAM. I hope the motion for the special order will not prevail. I do not think this bill has any connection with the other.
Mr. WOOLLEN. I would prefer for the House to vote on it now, allowing the amendments proposed to be taken by unanimous consent.The amendments were adopted by consent.
Mr. CAUTROHN. I am sorry now to be compelled to dissent from the opinion expressed by the honorable gentleman from Johnson; but I agree entirely with the gentleman from Jefferson in reference to this bill. I am opposed to the credit system? either by States, counties or townships. I think the bill authorizes the exercise of a power which is liable to abuse. I do not believe that there is a member in the House who is not in favor of common schools. Gentlemen who oppose this bill do so, not because they are opposed to schools, but because they are afraid of debts. The trouble about fine school houses in unfitting places, is well enough throw in by way of opposition to this bill. If the people are able to build, let them build without this bill. Our people at home had experience in this matter years ago, of which the reading people of the State have heard ; and we have paid the debt under difficulties according to contract. This bill will raise money to be put into the hands of sharpers, and it will not benefit the common schools. It will be better for the people to build as they get the money.
Mr. BUSKIRK. I think our opposition here is in behalf of the school interests of the State, and I look upon my friend who opposes this bill as not an enemy to education. It seems to me if this bill becomes a law, that its practical effect will be to throw firebrands into every civil township of the State in regard to school matters. But few townships can afford those elegant school houses contemplated by this bill. A majority of the townships will find themselves able to build but perhaps two or three school houses. All the people of the township are taxed for the construction of these school houses, and perhaps many of them reside five or six miles distant, and receive not their advantages. More than that; the bill provides that the petition shall be signed by a majority of the inhabitants of the township; and I ask if there is not, right there the entering of firebrands? It will create needless bickerings in every school district in regard to school matters. It seems to me that, instead of that harmony in regard to the school interests which ought to obtain in the administration of the school law, this bill would promote the contrary. It seems to me also, that the credit system is all wrong. It had been said by the author of the bill, that a similar act is already on the statute books in regard to cities and towns. But that is not a parallel case. Suppose a town goes on and locates a school house; there can be no firebrand there in regard to its location ; but the case is far different in regard to the location in the township, for, if a school house is located in one corner, most of the people do not receive equal benefit from it. Besides this placing so much power in the hands of the trustees, who may be supposed to be under the control of the majority of the freeholders perhaps, instead of promoting the general cause of education will hinder it; and that is the principal reason why I feel opposed to the passage of the bill.
Mr. MILLER. I will say with the gentleman from Johnson [Mr. Woollen,] that I page: 361[View Page 361] have been surprised at the opposition to this bill. As far as the form of the bill is concerned I think it is perhaps as carefully drawn - as carefully guarded against extravagance and fraud - as any bill we have passed upon. It requires, before the township trustee can locate, that there shall be a petition for the location. That is the first step; it does not respect the style of a house they shall build. The next step is, the trustee shall get the consent of the Commissioners of the County. Here are a set of men disinterested - living perhaps entirely out of the neighborhood - to decide whether it is proper that the consent should be given. In the next place, the petition must come from a majority of the freeholders. Now sir, if the people of the rural districts were in the habit of bankrupting themselves by going into debt, perhaps we might hesitate; but we have not hesitated to give this power to the towns and cities who have so often taxed themselves severely for railroads and other purposes; but I have yet to hear of a single town that has incurred a burdensome debt by taxing themselves for education ; and if there is a set of men in the world more careful than the farmers about assuming any kind of indebtedness I have not met them. I believe that this consideration alone is sufficient to authorize us to trust this bill. Moreover, we have already a law by which the people of the cities and towns have a right to tax themselves for these purposes. It was approved the 8th of December, 1865, and the amendment of it the 11th of March, 1867 ; and in all the time that has elasped since, I have not heard of an objection to this law. Then why is it that a man who happens to live at some cross roads, could be suspected of undue influence with those who are certainly competent to decide upon the question of the location, and of the taxing of themselves for a school house? Why compel the the farmers to send their children to the log school house because the Legislature is afraid to trust them with the power to tax themselves to build a school house? On page 39 of the report of the Superintendent of Public Instruction, that officer says: In 1871 there were 513 log school houses in Indiana. And these are not disappearing. It would be first rate if we could make a law against building them. In 1872 I find 547 of them. Then these log school houses are on the increase instead of decreasing. Instead of building the kind of school houses the gentleman from St. Joseph speaks of they have been building log school houses.
Mr. BUSKIRK. [interposing.] You say for four years log school houses have been on the increase?
Mr. MILLER. That was under the operation of a law passed six or seven years I ago. But as to these negotiable bonds bankrupting the townships, there is a provision in this bill that the amount of the debt shall not exceed five per cent. of the taxables. Practically, these bonds would not go out of the neighborhood. There are always in every community, old farmers that have money, and those bonds will be sought out by them. Commonly, I say, they will be absorbed right in the neighborhood. People that want to build School houses will never premit these bonds to go abroad. I can see no reason why we should not allow the majority of the people to tax themselves for the purpose of Education.
Mr. KIMBALL. I dislike to oppose any thing which my friend from Johnson brings in, but I shall oppose this bill, not because I am opposed to Education, but because it seems to me that the people are becoming a little wild on the subject of taxation - and when the end is to be I do not know. The credit system has been alluded to in this debate, and I am willing to say that this system of extravagance has been carried too far. If a township wishes to build a better school house, let them do it. It has occured to me that the people of Indiana have been unjustly attacked in the mattter of the lack of schools; for they have even carried the building of school houses to an extravagance. My remark is drawn out by the remark of the gentleman from Deleware [Mr. Mellett.] He says it is necessary to build fine school houses in order to draw the children of those who live in palatial residences. In the same manner we may be called upon to compel the children of all classes to attend the schools, and it is not the needy and worthy portion that are to be benefitted by this bill any way. It does seem to me that the people of Indiana should be content to let well enough alone that they should educate their children as they should be educated - that they should take some of the money with which they would build extravagant school houses and employ qualified teachers. Here are the railroad aid taxes, and the tax to procure tuition in the schools, and then comes this fine school house tax. But when the tax comes to be paid, then it is that the people will begin to inquire into this matter. - Why sir, during the campaign the cry was that the people are dragged down with taxes; and now I think is is time to stop this taxing in every unnecessary particular.
Mr. RENO. I believe the people of the townships can determine what is economical and safe for themselves better than we can; and, if I understand the bill, it leaves the matter altogether with them. I know that where it is left to the people this matter will be taken care of. It is a well known fact page: 362[View Page 362] that the farmers of Indiana have to furnish the States, money; and can't we safely leave to them the question whether they will tax themselves or not? They are men of economy, and if they want a school house they should instruct their trustees to build it. I see nothing in this bill that can create alarm.
Mr. THOMHSON of Elkhart. The gentleman from Decatur [Mr. Miller,] compliments the honest farmer. I can tell that gentleman that the farmer is no more honest than other men. Now here is the interested Trustee desiring and dictating the site for a new school house, and he goes into another part of the township and they all accommodate him by signing his petition to go before the County Commissioners; and so half dozen school houses in the same township are to be built in one year. That would be the resultoin many cases the inevitable working if the bill of the gentleman from Johnson.
Mr. MELLETT. I wish to make an explanation, in annwer to the assertion of the gentleman from Marion, [Mr. Kimball,] that ''it is not the most worthy portion of the people that are to be effected by this bill anyway"; and he has called up Delaware county prominently before the house. I will now say to him, that, in one of the outer Town- of that County, there is a place, that, from the top of a certain building, you can count six school houses, and all these school houses what are they worth? - they would not bring 25 cents a piece at public auction. They have all gone down. The hogs could creep into them when the doors are closed - the little hogs, I mean. I am giving the gentleman a true account of some of the school houses in the country.
Mr. BUTTERWORTH. [in his seat.] Which is thus! [Laughter.]
Mr. MELLETT. It is thus for this reason; in answer to the question: It is simply because the attempt to rebuild any of these school houses would be the political death of any township trustee. The trustee is elected by the people. He has the discretionery power to levy the tax or not - no need of getting the voice of the people in the matter. He takes all the responsibility of building the house; it is his house; and the hue-and-cry that would be raised against him would defeat him next time for the office. But in this bill you provide that he shall receive his instructions from the people; he is only the creature of their will in the matter; and I think that is the right way to proceed. There ought to be some way provided, so that when the people want a school house they may have it; that they may be allowed to build it with their own money. I can say again, that its not the wealthy gentry that are to be benefitted; they can send their children to the colleges to be educated. There is no occasion for concern about them. Its the poorer classes, that can't send their children abroad, that is to be benefitted by this bill.
Mr. WILLARD demanded the previous question, and under its operation the votw was taken on the passage of the bill and reported - yeas 31, nays 60 - as follows:
YEAS - Messrs. Barrett, Billingsley, Ellsworth, Eward, Glazebrook, Gronendyke, Hardesty, Jones, Kirkpatrick, Martin, Mellett, Miller, North, Ogden, Reno, Richardson, Riggs, Satterwhite, Shutt, Stanley, Strange, Teeter, Thayer, Thompson, of Spencer, Troutman, Walker, Wolflin, Wood, Woollen, Wynn, and Mr. Speaker.31.
NAYS. - Messrs. Anderson, Baker, Baxter, Blocher, Bowser, Branham, Brett, Broadus, Buskirk, Butterworth, Butts, Cauthorn, Clark, Claypool, Cobb, Coffman, Cole, Cowgill, Crumpacker, Dial, Durham, Eaton, Edwards of Lawrence, Gifford, Givan, Glasgow, Goble, Goudie, Hatch, Hedrick, Heller, Henderson, Hollingsworth, Johnson, Kimball, King, Lenfestey, Lent, McConnell, McKinney, Odle, Peed, Pfrimmer, Prentiss, Reeves, Rudder, Schmuck, Scott, Smith, Spellman, Tingley, Thompson of Elkhart, Tulley, Whitworth, Willard, Wilson of Blackford, Willson of Ripley, and Woodard. - 60
So the bill was rejected.
