THE
BREVIER LEGISLATIVE REPORTS.
FOURTEENTH VOLUME.
INDIANA LEGISLATURE.
Amendments to the Constitution---Judges Salaries.---Debate in Continuation.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
THURSDAY, January 30, 1873.[CONTINUED FROM PAGE 100, MIDDLE OF FIRST COLUMN.]
The SPEAKER. The hour having arrived for the special order, the House will take up the bill (Mr. Mellett's committee bill, H. R. 55) to amend sections 33, 37, 39, and 43 of the Common School act of March 6. 1865, and adding supplemental sections thereto - the question being on the third reading.
Mr. MELLETT. I wish to correct the bill conformably to some amendments which were yesterday recommended by the Committee of the Whole and concurred in by the House, such as these : The County Superintendent shall be a citizen of the county - subscribe to an oath - execute a bond in the penal sum of $4,000 - report as to all school money that may come into his hands, etc.,shall hold at least one public examination in each month for teachers - shall not grant license on private examination - all licenses limited to the county in which they are granted - shall have general superintendence of the schools of his county - visit each Township Institute and each school in the county at least once in each year - encourage Institutes, advocate the standard of teaching, etc.in all legal school controversies his opinion to be sought - thence an appeal in writing to the State Superintendent - shall carry out the instructions of the State Board of Education and constitute a medium between the State Superintendent and the subordinate school officers,cities excepted, etc. I desire that the vote of yesterday by which the bill was ordered to be engrossed should be reconsidered, for the purpose of referring the bill again to the Committee on the Whole. I am satisfied that the Committee on Education desire this bill to be passed, and I make this motion for the purpose of getting it intelligently before the House.
Mr. BRETT submitted a motion [ineffectually] to lay the subject on the table, yeas 40, nays 50.
The motion to reconsider was then agreed to, and the bill was again referred to the Committee of the Whole House. - Mr. Lenfesty in the chair.
Mr. MELLETT. I think it best to have the bill, as amended, read by sections, so that the whole matter may come before the Committee intelligently.
The CHAIRMAN. What is the pleasure of the Committee as to the bill No. 55?
Mr. BILLINGSLEY. I move that we consider it section by section; but on the motion of Mr. HATCH, the Committee determined first to take up section 4, and it was read by the Clerk. It provides that the County Superintendent shall receive not less than $3 nor more than $10 for each day employed in the discharge of his duties.
On the motion of Mr. BILLINGSLEY this was fixed at $4 a day.
page: 396[View Page 396]Mr. GIVAN. I move to strike out these words: 'Provided the number of days so allowed in each year for visiting shall not be less than the whole number of schools in each county.' It is superfluous to give the County Commissioners power to fix the number of days, and then say the Superintendent shall visit every school. It seems to me better to give the discretion wholly to the Commissioners. They should call on him to visit the schools if they desire him to do so; but perhaps there might be no necessity for it.
Mr. WOOLLEN. The object of this provision is, that some person shall be authorized to give his immediate attention to the interests of the schools ; and whilst the section limits the number of days, it also limits the discretion - so that the number of days shall not be less than the number of schools in the county. The House should recollect that the Board of Commissioners may justly consider that anything coming before them should be put down as a part of their duty, which would not be so here if this were left to their discretion. They might forget or fix it so that the Superintendent could not visit the schools at all. - Sir, this one of the provisions of the bill that should be retained : because it is essential to save the County Superintendent from total annihilation, if the Commissioners should be looking only to the saving of expenses.
Mr. GIVAN. The County Superintendent has no control of the city schools---yet he is here entitled to pay for visiting every school in the countythose, as well, over which he has no control.
Mr. WOOLLEN. We provide that the number of days in which he shall visit the schools shall not be less than the number of the schoolsone day to be given by the Superintendent to each school---not less than that. However,the suggestion of the gentleman from Dearborn (Mr. Givan) might be a good one in the shape of an amendment---if the bill should be modified so as to exclude the Superintendent from visiting the city schools; yet I do not see any reason for excluding him from visiting the city schools. I am sure it would be a very considerable benefit to the Superintendant himself.
Mr. RUMSEY. This is a matter of too much importance to be lightly disturbed. The gentleman from Johnson (Mr. Woollen) alleged the other day in good terms, that all the children of the State are to be affected by this action for good or for evil. Sir, I have had some little experience in the school business for the past 28 years. I have taught in town and country ; and I believe that if this bill is passed it will elevate the country schools. Gentlemen have alluded to the log school houses as a hobby, which they say is brought into this House. Well, if it be a hobby, I am willing to ride it, for I am greatly indebted to the log school houses, and the energy of the fathers that built them. This amendment I consider as directed against the country schools. It was the tendency of the argument yesterday, that, having already the high schools in successful operation in the cities, we ought to work for the country; and that also is my argument. We want the country schools elevated. Why, sir, we have 900 districts virtually with schools in this State. Then let these Superintendents attend the institutes and the city schools, and hear what is taught and how ; so that he may be qualified to do better than a certain examiner in my mind, whose question to the pupil was this: "What is the first lesson in primary Geography?" And when that examiner asked me how I would examine the pupil, I answered, that I would give him the map of North America and say to him: How would you prove that the world is round?
Mr. OFFUTT [interposing.] Did that occur in Tipton county?
Mr. RUMSEY. It occurred in Tipton county, and I have no doubt that it is as bad in Hancock county. [Laughter.]
Mr. WOOLLEN. Gentlemen ought to keep cool.
Mr. RUMSEY. I say that this amendment will strike down the county examiner.
Mr. GIVAN. I would call the attention of the Committee to the 3d section, which provides that the Superintendant shall visit each school in the county once in each year. The object I have in view is to admit of the number of days being less than the number of the schools. He might visit half a dozen schools in one day.
Mr. RUMSEY. That has been answered. The County Commissioners might cut down the number of the days so that the Superintendent could not get round, because they would not allow him the per diem. I am in favor of the section as it stands.
Mr. SMITH. It seems to me that if this amendment is adopted it will cut off the power of the Superintendent. It would render the office of much less value than the Examiners office is now. It would destroy the bill.
Mr. CLARK proposed to amend the amendment, adding: "Provided the number of days allowed in each year for visiting the schools shall not be less than the whole number of schools over which the Superintendent shall have control."
Mr. MELLETT. I submit a substitute for these. Insert in the 5th line: "He shall receive no compensation except as provided herein."I am glad this discussion has come up. The objections which have been urged are just, and can very easily be reme- page: 397[View Page 397] died. I am aware that it will increase the expenses of the common schools; but, with this amendment, I believe it will make the office of Superintendent what it ought to be. The law at present allows the County Examiner $3 a day for his services. It makes no provision whatever about his perqusites ; and the County Examiners are not perfect. There is a system of fraud and corruption that has grown up out of the Examiners office which has been presented to the Committee on Education, by which the office is somanaged that, while the County Commissioners under the present law give them each $3 a day, and they actually average some five dollars or more per day. They charge three dollars a day for visiting the schools, then they go before the Commissioners for expenses incurred in visiting the schools - the hire of horse and buggy - their hotel expenses, etc. And there is one County Examiner in the State drawing upwards of $1300 a year for his salary - staying in his office the whole time and practicing his profession besides. We want an officer whose duty it shall be to visit the schools, and not draw pay constructively. He should ask questions concerning all local schools, and matters connected with them, as do the city Superintendents. I say again, that there is more than one county in which the Examiner draws pay for every day in the year except Sunday.
Mr. BRETT. Will the gentleman name some of those counties?
Mr. MELLETT. There is a gentleman in my eye who will allow me to say he is my authority.
Mr. JONES. The allusion is to Madison county.
Mr. MELLETT. In the first place, three dollars a day is not enough for this officer to authorize him to take his horse and go out and visit the schools. Four dollars a day will be better. It gives a standard; and if nobody will accept the office there will be no harm done. But because the compensation is too low fraud has sprung up. You must allow to every man a just compensation for the service to be performed, and then you will get honest service; and God knows there in no department in which we need good service more than in the common schools How much do we pay for common schools? More than two millions are annually drawn out of the pockets of the people for school purposes; and will you have schools anc hchool houses, at such a cost, with no man to know or care whether this great publii work is well done or not? If you hire men to work the streets, you will place a man over them ; but here in your business of teaching the children of the State, you allow your men to go to the treasury andd raw their money with none to see whether they are doing their duty or not. You are leaving this to the people at large, and they disregard the work; they have something else to do; they are taking care of their homes and their business. I hope gentlemen will look after this interest intelligently, and be careful all the time (as I propose to be) to consider and vote for the benefit of the common schools. There are many teachers in the rural districts who are not qualified for their position, and you want some man to ferret them out. Now, it has been claimed that under this bill the teacher will draw his pay whether he does his duty or not. But section three requires the Superintendent to visit all the schools once in each year, and as much oftener as necessary to the usefulness of the schools. It is just as necessary that he should know the good teachers as the poor ones, to have them all to respect the law - to hold them to a stringent personal responsibility ; and this is not to prevent the Superintendent from visiting a half dozen in a day, if he wishes to do so. And the modifications in the fourth section leaves it just as in the other case. And then further: "He shall receive not less than $4 a day, and no compensation for expenses on any account except as herein provided." Does not that cut off perquisites? If not, then let us have something that will. You will stop all the leaks there, as it seems to me. Then in regard to the number of schools in the county. It has been urged that you should not allow him pay for visiting the city schools; and I agree to that. I will say, aye to that amendmentand does not this cut off all objection in a pecuniary point to the bill? It allows the Superintendent $4 per day - his account to be verified by his affidavit; he shall be allowed no constructive fees ; and he shall not be allowed for visiting the city schools, nor by construction for traveling or other expenses not herein enumerated. You provide him an office. You provide his duties. You provide his pay - and pay him for nothing else except the superintendance of the public schools.
Mr. WILLSON, of Ripley. I do not want to be understood as being opposed to common schools. I heartily endorse everything that has been said in favor of common schools. But it is my right to get a just understanding of the present bill. This General Assembly can be easily imposed upon, if you simply appeal to the common sympathies of our nature, and so we might vote without knowing the provisions of the bill. This is a bill, which, as it seems to me, will not advance the interest of the common schools, for example: Take this 4th section, which provides that the County Superintendent shall have an office and $4 a day.
page: 398[View Page 398]He shall be allowed actual office expenses. But before the County Commissioners shall allow his account it shall be presented and verified by oath; and he shall not be allowed his per diem for visiting beyond the number of schools in his county. But then this Superintendent has to superintend and overlook the County Auditor and the justices of the peace of the county, and see that they perform their duty; so much has he to do, that it would be impossible for a man to discharge the duties of this office without occupying every one of the 365 days of the year. The object, it seems to me, is simply to make another office. We have now our county Examiners, and I have riot heard any complaint against them. Now, it seems to me that we ought to strike out that which authorizes this County Superintendent to be furnished with an office, and that his expenses shall be paid by the county ; for if we 1st that stand he has just as good a chance for perquisites as the County Clerk, and it will become an office to be sought after by all the small politicians of the county. Taking in all the perquisites it would count up perhaps to not less than $2,000 a year - and to do what? To do just what the Auditor, and the Grand Jury, and the justices of the peace of the county are now by law compelled to do, and what they are paid for doing! I say, sir, it is my candid belief, that this bill has been gotten up by parties already in office, and who want to increase their compensation. Do we suppose that the County Examiners will do their duty more carefully and efficiently under this bill than they do it now? I have before me what the law requires of the Examiners : Not exceeding 100 days in the year, and besides he is to examine the dockets of the justices of the peace. The law knows no part of a day. If ten minutes work is performed it must be paid for as one day. All this officer will have to do is to perform some little service every day and charge it. I say, that the children of the State are not to be benefited by this bill, but the politicians; and to get the place of the proposed Superintendent will become a matter of strife between office seekers. I am in favor of amending the bill in this particular, as to the offices, and 1 am also in favor of providing that their per diem shall be in full for all expenses. I voted for the school bill which passed yesterday [Mr. Woollen's H. R. 410] because I thought it was right. I object to this - especially to the 4th in connection with the seventh section.
Mr. COWGILL. I regard this matter of a County School Superintendent as important, but I have not yet heard an attempt on the part of the friends of this bill to reply to objections. I have listened to the objections of the gentleman from Ripley, but I do not find any material weight in them. It has been found necessary, sir, to have Supertendents of the schools in the cities and towns; and the office has worked well - as well as that of Roadmaster. It is always well enough to have some one to look after the "leaks." And if this has been found to be advantageous in our cities and towns, then the same system should be carried into the country; and the provisions of the bill are to make this matter a little more effective than the law is as it now stands. It is proposed to allow but a bare compensation for the discharge of these duties. I do not say that any wrong can grow up under it in any way. It is proposed by this amendment to cut off all constructive fees, and the Superintendent is to be paid a per diem for visiting every school in the county; - for as many days as there are schools - though he may visit half a dozen in a day. I hope the bill will pass with amendments as proposed to be modified by the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Mellett).Mr. JONES. The statement made by the gentleman from Delaware I received from a Mr. Metcalf, and it is stronger than the gentleman gave it - it was somewhere between $1200 and $1500 a year for the Examiner in our county.
Mr. BUTTERWORTH. In line five it is provided that he shall receive no compensation for expenses except as provided herein. I understand that all constructive charges are to be cut off.
Mr. MELLETT'S substitute was adopted.
Mr. BUTTERWORTH proposed to amend further in section four by inserting in line seven after the word "account" these words: "Giving the date, specifying the character of the service and the length of time thereof." The object of this is to provide against the objection of the gentleman from Ripley.
The amendment was adopted.
Mr. KING proposed further to amend section four by striking out the words "not less than three nor more than ten."
Mr. WOOLLEN suggested that, (while he was opposed to all these amendments), if the section was made to read not less than $4 a day he would be satisfied; but he would not leave it to the discretion of the Commissioners if they should desire to abolish the office by reducing the pay to 50 cents a day.
Mr. MELLETT. While I believe that in nine tenths of the counties the pay would be $4 per day, still there are some counties which are wealthy and able to bring better talents into the service of the schools than $4 a day would command. We do not limit the compensation which the cities may be willing to pay to their School Superintend- page: 399[View Page 399] ents, and why deprive these counties of thes privileges which we accord to the cities. Some of the counties might want to pay more if it were left with the Commissioners and the people. I say then let them regulate it for themselves so as not to pay less than $4 a day, because that is as low as we can possibly procure the work which we desire.
Mr. GIVAN proposed a substitute for the amendment of Mr. King : Striking out the words "not less than three nor more than ten," and inserting in lieu "not more than four."
The substitute was adopted.
Mr. WILLSON (of Ripley) proposed to amend by sriking out the first sentence in section four: "the County Superintendent shall have an office furnished him by the County Commissioners at the county seat."Mr. WOOLLEN. My friend from Ripley in opposed to the bill and wants to get that upon it which will carry it down; and I think his amendment would carry it down most effectually - to say that this Superintendent shall have neither a "local habitation nor a name."
Mr. WILLSON of Ripley. The object of this bill is to make that office a good thing. Why should we furnish him with an office when he don't need it ?
Mr. MELLETT. I should not now perhaps be surprised at any amendment that may be offered to this bill, since we understand now what this amendment means. The object is to make this Superintendent's office a responsible one - to specify his duties and oblige him to perform them. He is obliged to keep certain records - it is just as proper that he should have an office as any other county officer. But in everything that pertains to the jurisprudence and the courts - the judges, clerks, sheriffs, auditors, treasurers, and the recorders - the people must dance up and keep all these in fine offices - in everything that pertains to money the officer can have what he wants, but when it comes to the men having the care of the common schools there is no attention to be paid to them - nothing to be done for iheir convenience; and I wish I could say that this is not altogether the fault of the educators themselves, for they have not the faculty - the power to carry the needed legislation of the State which the lawyers can command. I wish they had.
Mr. BUTTERWORTH. How many days in the year would the Superintendent have to be in his office?
Mr. MELLETT. I can't tell that.
Mr. WILLSON of Ripley. The more I see of this bill the more I find that the entire object of it is to create a magnificent office.
Mr. BARRETT. It does look a little singular to me to hear men say that they are friends of education and the common schools, and whenever a movement is made to better the condition of the schools, they are opposed to it. Now, we have perhaps the largest school fund of any State in the Union, and yet we are behind some of our neighboring States as to schools. We spend our two millions a year for the schools, and yet there is not a State in the Union where the schools are in a worse condition. There are 121,000 inhabitants of the State over 10 years of age that can neither read nor write; and there are 30,000 voters dictating as to who shall make the laws for the people just in the same condition. Think of it! And yet gentlemen are offering everything that would better the condition of the schools. I look upon this bill, sir, as a move in the right direction. I am heartly in favor of it. I do not know what our County Examiner thinks of it, but I know he is a man, a friend of education, and that he visits all the schools in the county. I am willing to be taxed for it; and I do not inquire into the expense of this thing. The gentleman from Ripley has come out frankly and confessed that he is opposed to this bill; and yet he comes in with an amendment. I hope it will not prevail, for I would suspect him of anything else sooner than that he would offer a good amendment here. But if it were something in the interest of the lawyers the gentleman would doubtless support it. I want gentlemen on this floor to consider their duty to the children of the State.
Mr. WILLSON of Ripley. How would it benefit the children to furnish an office for the County Superintendent?
Mr. BARRETT. We would have a place for the examination.
Mr. BUTTERWORTH. Should he be always in his office?
Mr. BARRETT. Always ; so that when a man wants a teacher or to be certified as one, he will not have to run all over town to find the Superintendent. As it is now, they have to run round to the store to find the School Examiner.
Mr. COBB. Mr. Chairman, I did not propose to take any part in this debate. The Chairman of the Committee on Education has made an ingenious report; but he has made a very unkind thrust at those who differ from him as to the propriety of adopting this bill. Had it not been for that I should not take any part in this debate. As far as my county is concerned, we are in favor of education. We have secured good school houses, and care for them, so that when the children are not in them they are not occupied by the swine. Yet my people do not want this bill. And yet further---as far page: 400[View Page 400] as the proposition of the gentleman from Ripley is concerned, I am opposed to that. We furnish our Examiner with an office, and he has an arm chair in it. And even if you pass this bill, though the School Examiner for us now may be changed, he will not discharge his duties any better,and he is satisfied with his pay.
Mr. BRANHAM. Does he get as good pay as the man in Madison county?
Mr. COBB. I do not know. He discharges his duties well; and this bill will only change the name of his office. He is a friend of mine, and I will expose the fact that he got his position for his political services. He is considerable of an educational man for our part of the State. I do not know whether he has a certificate of qualifications to teach school ; but I think he has the qualifications that would get for him a State certificate. This bill, sir, commences at the wrong end; it commences with the Superintendent - so far away from the people that it will never get to them. If we are going to create an officer whose duties should be discharged by the township trustees, then I would say, let us do it with becoming dignity, let us give the incumbent an office to go in to, and to invite his friends, and of course the counties will pay the expenses. A gentleman here says: why provide him with an office when he will not be in it? Because I think he will be in it - on rainy days,and if not inclined piously, he can keep open on Sundays. It will be a good place for somebody. If we are going to adopt this swindle, let us do it in good style. I am opposed to the amendment of the gentleman from Ripley.
Mr. MELLETT. I want to answer an honest man frankly.
Mr. HELLER, I object, he has been hurling his speeches in my ears until my head aches.
Mr. MELLETT, In response to the gentleman from Ripley, I will ask him whether his present Examiner is Superintendent of the county or town?
Mr. WILLSON. I do not know.
Mr. MELLETT. Then I undertake to say that there is a wrong here; that the Examiner of his county is the Superintendent of public schools at his county seat. I have been so informed, and judging from the warmth which the gentleman manifests, and the blandness with which he pointed it yesterday, I would as soon think his County Examiner has a personal interest in this bill as his member on this floor.
Mr. WOOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I submit that the gentleman is out of order.
Mr. MELLETT (continuing). An attempt has been made to ridicule this bill by the gentleman from Huntington (Mr. Cobb). This opposition comes from counties where they have never had an Examiner, or where they can reward men for political services with an office that implies no labor. If gentlemen see fit to pander to political feeling in this matter I shall hold them to it. But some gentlemen do not forget the public interest, and I belong there. I shall never forget the interest of the toiling masses, and no clique, no ring can ever divert me from that position. The gentleman says he came here pledged to a certain measure. - Thank God, I am not pledged to any measure. I shall vote my principles upon all subjects. It comes with a bad grace from any gentleman to charge another with personal motives who himself comes here pledged to a person. I do not crawl, I stand erect here, and shall vote for what I conceive to be the interest of the people. But he says: so far as that is concerned he would have kept his seat considerately if I had not attacked the legal profession. I care not whether he keeps his seat or takes the floor - as far as I am concerned, when he wants to keep his seat let him keep it, and when be wants to take the floor, let him take it [laughter]. I want to provide for the country schools in the State of Indiana. I care not about his officers. This bill was drawn by the State Superintendant of public Instruction, whose duty and heart are in this great interest, who is conversant with every township trustee in the State, who knows their wants, and who has the integrity and the ready and requisite intelligence to recommend here what is for the good of the people; and it is my pleasure to honor him for it, aside from all political considerations. Though I am as bitterly opposed to the democratic party as any member on this floor, if a democratic Superintendent takes the lead on this question I will join him and support him, because I believe it is the most important question that can come before the General Assembly. Let the gentleman oppose the bill from political considerations, as he likes. But he insinuated that I attacked the legal profession. I did no such thing. Such a thing should be far from me, because I believe the leading members of the legal profession here are in favor of this bill. I said they had the talent, the power of getting their measures through the Legislature, and I wished that the educators of the State had the. same power. If that is attacking the legal profession, let him make the most of it. So far as this amendment is concerned, I simply ask the House to use its own sound discretion. It may not be a material point whether the County Superintendent have an office furnished him. It was recommended by the State Superintendent. But if it costs too much money, strike it out. The people are page: 401[View Page 401] sovereign, and their will is law with the party to which I belong. They have always stood foremost in action upon this principle. In Connecticut they have Township Superintendents; in Pennsylvania the same; and their school system is in advance of ours, as it is shown by our 125,000 illiterates.
Mr. GIVAN. It seems to me that the temper of the House is getting to be such that debate had better be postponed.
Mr. BLOCHER. I move that the House adjourn.
Mr. CHAIRMAN. That motion is out of order in Committee of the Whole.
Mr. BRANHAM. I move that the Committee rise.
Mr. WOOLLEN. I propose to amend the motion by adding these words: "and ask leave to set again at two o'clock this P. M."
Mr. WILLSON of Ripley. I propose to amend the amendment so as as to make the motion this: that the Committee rise, report the bill to the House, and recommend its indefinite postponement.
The CHAIRMAN. The amendment to the amendment is out of order.
Mr. WOOLLEN'S modification was then adopted; whereupon the Committee rose and -
The CHAIRMAN reported progress, and asked and obtained leave to set again at two o'clock P. M.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
According to previous order, the House again resolved itself into Committee of the Whole - Mr. Lenfesty in the Chair - and took up again the consideration of Mr. Mellett's bill [H. R. 55] to amend Sections 33, 37, 39, 43 of the Common School act of March 6, 1865, and adding supplemental sections thereto.
Mr. COBB rose to a privilege question occasioned by the remarks of Mr. Mellett this morning, not that he wished to reply to the gentleman from Delaware, but he felt unwilling to let the matter go without explanation to the House. He said: The gentleman was calling in question something I said with reference to the Rail Road Bill in which I said I was pledged to vote in a certain way. I wish to explain what I meant by saying I was pledged. It was not necessary that I should make pledges to secure the nomination for the Legislature. My pledges were all voluntary - that I would support certain measures. One of them was that I would be in favor of restricting the Rail Road Companies. Another was, that I would be in favor of paying the Garrett bonds: and still further, that I would vote squareley with my party upon all political issues, and as between the interests of the people and of the cliques I would vote in favor of the interests of the people; and as far as the temperance question is concerned, I would vote for the most radical bill that could be got through the Legislature and executed by the people. I give these simply as my views, and I do not think it was dishonorable in me to make these pledges.I desire only to say to the House this further: that I got 24 votes more than there were Republican voters in my county.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the adoption of the amendment, of the gentleman from Ripley, (Mr. Willson,) to strike out the words from the fourth section "The County Superintendent shall have an office furnished him at the County seat."
The amendment was rejected.
Mr. WOOLLEN. I move that the fourth section be now adopted as a whole.
Mr. BRETT. Several gentlemen here don't understand the question.
The CHAIRMAN, the question is on the adoption of section four as a whole.
The motion was rejected on a division affirmative 31, negative 37.
The CHAIRMAN. I understand that the section is still open to amendment.
Mr. WILLSON, of Ripley, proposed now to amend the section by striking out these words: "He shall be allowed his actual office expenses," etc.
Mr. BRETT. It seems to me that if the friends of this bill desire its passage they ought not to load it down with their office and office expenses. We know that the expense of keeping an office the year round is considerable; and if the office must be opened the Superintendent must be paid for every day in the year; and it is alleged that one of the objects of the bill is to enable the Superintendent to get pay for every day. - The question for us to consider is, whether it is necessary for such an office to be kept open every day, or whether it is necessary to have an office at all. I was an officer of my county for fifteen years, and I had the care of the school funds, and I gave them as much care as possible. I have seen the folly of wasting the school money unnecessarily in getting the pay to the teachers; because the object is to get as much pay as possible for the teachers, and if we do not get the money to the teachers we do not give satisfaction. I once drew up a petition asking the Legislature to abolish the provision for three Commissioners. I saw that the pay of the Commissioners was a waste of money. At that time these officers were paid out of the school fund page: 402[View Page 402] now they are paid out of the County revenue. But it all comes out of the pockets of the people; and it makes but little difference whether it is from the right hand or left hand pocket. - There is no necessity in my mind for this Superintendent so great that there should be an office furnished for him, to be kept open the year round, with office fixtures, furniture and expenses. I think there is no necessity for any thing of the kind. Whenever he desires to hold a school meting of any kind there will be no difficulty about finding a place in the Court House.
Mr THAYER proposed this modification ; that the salary of the County Superintendent in Counties of fifty thousand inhabitants and over shall be $1,500 ; in Counties of less than fifty thousand and more than thirty thousand inhabitants the salary shall be one thousand dollars; and in Counties of less than thirty thousand eight hundred dollars.
Mr. BUTTERWORTH. Mr. Speaker, I believe that it is in the interest of the friends of this bill that the motion of the gentleman from Ripley (Mr. Willson,) should prevail. I think that we can do very well without the office for the Superintendent, and I will move to reconsider the vote by which that motion was rejected.
Mr. MELLETT. I am perfectly willing to accede to the suggestion of the gentleman on my left (Mr. Butterworth.) I consider it immaterial as to whether the office is furnished or not - the Superintendent can do as the examiner has done in that regard. What we want is Superintendence. In regard to the motion just made by the gentleman from Kosciusko (Mr. Thayer,) I am satisfied that it is impracticable. His figures are too high, there is not a teacher in the country getting eight hundred dollars, and that is the lowest allowance in his figures.
Mr. THAYER. I am opposed to any pay per diem with perquisites.
Mr. WOOLLEN submitted the point of order that, as an amendment to the amendment pending, the proposition of the gentleman from Kosciusko (Mr. Thayer,) has no relation to the subject matter pending, and is out of order. It might be submitted as an amendment to the bill itself.
Mr. THAYER. I think it is not out of order. The amendment cannot be perfected without it, according to my views, as to a fixed salary. We know very well what it is when we have a certain amount per diem, and the scale upon which it is regulated by County Commissioners.
The CHAIRMAN. The point of order raised by the gentleman from Johnson (Mr. Woollen,) the Chair believer to be well taken - that the amendment might be offered to the main bill but not to the amendment.
Mr. THAYER. Then I withdraw it.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the adoption of the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Ripley (Mr. Willson.)
Mr. BRETT submitted this amendment to the amendment: Strike out from section four these words "Shall have an office furnished him by the Board of County Commissioners at the county seat."
Mr. WILLSON of Ripley. I am willing to accept that.
Mr. FURNAS. As I understand it, the motion of the gentleman from Daviess (Mr. Brett) has been before the Committe once, and is therefore out of order.
The CHAIRMAN. The chair is of the opinion that the point of order is well taken. The proper way to reach this matter would be by a reconsideration of the vote by which the amendment of the gentleman from Ripley was lost.
On the motion of Mr. BILLINGSLEY, that vote was then reconsidered, and the question recurred again on striking out these words from the first sentence of section 4: "Shall have an office furnished him by the County Commissioners at the county seat."
Mr. WOOLLEN. As I understand the motion in its present shape is it to strike out all of the section which relates to an office and office expenses,
The amendment was adopted.
Mr. BARRETT. I now move the adoption of the section as amended.
Mr. MELLETT. As I understand the section now, it is $4 per day, and no perquisites.
Mr. WOOLLEN. I will ask leave to amend the motion by substituting this for the section: "Section 4. The County Superintendent shall keep an office at the county seat, and shall receive $4 per day for every day actually employed in the discharge of his duties under this act, his account to be presented and verified by affidavit, to the effect that the account is just and true. The County Auditor shall draw his warrant on the County Treasurer for the amount allowed by the County Board in favor of said Superintendent, and the Treasurer shall pay the said warrant out of the ordinary county revenue; provided the number of days so allowed in each year for visiting the schools shall not be less than the whole number of schools in such county." The substitute compels the Superintendent to have an office at the county seat, but at his own expense
page: 403[View Page 403]Mr. BRETT. It seems to me that the whole question of an office is upon us again. By this substitute you compel the Superintendent to keep an office; and it would be very unjust to compel him to keep an office and not compensate him for it.
Mr. WOOLLEN. I hope gentlemen will not provide so that this officer shall have no office. [A laugh.]
Mr. BRETT. Certainly - this question has been once settled that he shall have no office.
Mr. WOOLLEN. It was not put so rediculously, that he shall have no office, but that the county shall not pay for it.
Mr. HELLER. I conceive that this would cut out a certain class of men from holding this office. It might be desirable to put men into these places who are capable but poor, and unable to go to the county seat and keep an office. It would crowd out the poor man into the cold. The mere bookworm - impracticables are always liable to get into these places and crowd out the practicable men, and unless this be put into better form I shall be compelled to vote against it. This burdening of the bill with things that are arbitrary and contrary to the institutions of our country, I stand here to oppose.
Mr. BRETT. I desired to amend by striking out all that relates to keeping an office at the county seat.
The motion was rejected. Mr. Thayer's amendment was also rejected.
Mr. OFFUTT moved ineffectually to amend the bill by striking out the fourth section as amended.
Mr. BAKER proposed to amend the substitute by striking out the words "at the county seat" and inserting in lieu these words; "At his residence."
It was rejected.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the adoption of the substitute of the gentleman from Johnson, which the Clerk will read.
It was accordingly again read by the Clerk.
Mr. WOOLLEN. That's the perfect section ; and when we adopt that, we adopt all that we have voted into the section.
Mr. OGDEN. By the amendment of the gentleman from Ripley (Mr. Willson) the office of the Superintendent at the county seat was stricken out, and by another amendment the office expenses were stricken out.
Mr. WOOLLEN. The substance of the amendment of the gentleman from Ripley was to strike out the provision that the expenses of the office shall be paid by the county. I insist that the substitute before the committee is the substance of all the amendments we have adopted.
Mr. MELLETT. In order that the committee may understand the difference between the substitute and the section, as amended, I will simply recite the amendments: First, we struck from section 4 the provision that he shall have an office furnished by by the County Commissioners. Secondly, we struck out "not less than three nor more than ten," and inserted "four" in lieu. Then we struck out "he shall be allowed his actual office expenses," then after the words "per diem" we struck out "and office expenses." Then, in line 7, we struck out the words "giving the date, specifying the character of the service and the length thereof," and inserted these words: "He shall not be allowed for services except as herein expressly provided." The substitute does not give all the counts. What I wonted was the County Superintendents.
Mr. WILLSON of Ripley. If we vote in this substitute, we vote in simply what we voted out; for we voted that he shall not heve an office at the county seat. If we vote that he shall have an office at the county seat we virtually vote that it shall be provided for hire; I propose to amend further
Mr. WOOLLEN raised the point of order, (which was sustained,) that further amendments are not in order until the vote shall be had on the substitute.
Mr. BRETT. It seems to me that the object of the gentleman's substitute amendment is to restore the section to what it originally was. There is nothing said about expenses to be sure ; but if the Superintendent must keep an office he must be there himself. All the objections that can be made to the original section apply to this amendment; therefore I move to lay it on the table.
The CHAIRMAN. The motion is out of order. There is no table in Committee of the Whole House. The question is on the adoption of the substitute.
It was rejected.
Mr. WOODARD. I move that the Committee rise, report the bill to the House, and recommend its reference to a special Committeee.
Mr. WALKER. If this bill has a friend in the State of Indiana he ought to second that motion. We have now advanced to the fourth section, and have expended perhaps 800 dollars worth of time. And the enemies of this bill ought to be satisfied with the stabbing which it has received here. I don't think this Committee can sit half an hour longer in justice to themselves. The final decision of this matter does not rest up on the action of this Committeee. I intend to vote against this bill, and I desire that the Committee rise, so that I may meet the question fairly and squarely.
page: 404[View Page 404]Mr. MELLETT. As to that motion, I differ with the gentleman from Wayne (Mr. Walker). I think we have passed over the chief difficulty, but there are questions in it yet which demand the deliberate consideration of members ; and I believe the best way to come to an agreement, is the course we have taken. I think we have satisfied the enemies of this bill in this section.
Mr. WOODARD. I insist upon my motion : to report the bill to the House and recommend its reference to a special Committee of five members.
Mr. WOOLLEN. I will move to amend the gentleman's motion by making it: that the Committee rise and report the bill back to the House without recommendation and without amendment.
Mr. OFFUTT. It seems to me that the motion of the gentleman from Parke (Mr. Woodward) ought to prevail. It is certainly apparent to every gentleman that if there are not defects in the bill - gentlemen think there are; and if it is referred to the select Committee and comes back with amendments, it may, in all probability, pass. The action on the bill in this Committee has resulted in no practical good, and if the bill goes through in its present shape and finally passes the House, in my judgment it will not be worth the paper on which it may be written. Now if there is any merit in the bill (and I am not here to deny that there is) let its friends refer it to a special Committee for amendment, if it needs amendment, and let it have further consideration at another time. I think that the motion of the gentleman from Johnson (Mr. Woollen) ought not to prevail.
Mr. WOOLLEN'S amendment was rejected and the question recurred on the motion of Mr. Woodard that the Committee rise, etc.
Mr. GLASGOW proposed to amend the motion by making the recommendation of reference to a Committee of one from each Congressional district.
It was rejected ; and then Mr. Woodard's motion was agreed to. Whereupon, the Committee rose, and the Chairman reported the bill to the House with the recommendation that it be referred to a special Committee of five members.
The report was concurred in, and the bill was referred to the special Committee which the Speaker makes to consist of Messrs. Mellett, Woollen, Lenfesty, Givan and Branham.
