THE BREVIER LEGISLATIVE REPORTS.
VOLUME SEVENTEEN.
INDIANA LEGISLATURE.
SENATE.
WEDNESDAY, Feb. 5,1879-- 10 o'clock a. m.Prayer by Rev. W. B. F. TREAT, senator for the counties of Monroe and Lawrence.
The reading of the minutes of yesterday's proceedings was dispensed with.
On motion of Mr. MENZIES the House concurrent resolution, for a joint convention at 10 o'clock to-day, to elect a State librarian and directors of the State Prisons north and south, was taken up, amended by changing the hour to 2 o'clock p. m., and passed the Senate without a division.
Mr. REEVE, rising to a question of privilege, stated that early in the session he introduced a bill at the instance of the Superintendent of Public Instruction, which was read the first time, and referred to the Committee on Education, but there is not a trace of it to be found in any of she records of the Senate, nor is it on the calendar, nor has it received a number. He claimed the right to have an exact copy of the bill placed on the calendar as having been passed the first reading early in the session, given a half number, and referred to the Committee on Education. There being no objection the bill was numbered S. 137 1/2 for an act to prohibit the disclosures of school examiners' papers prepared for teachers; and, without reading, it was placed on the files as referred to the Committee on Education.
RAILROAD COMBINATIONS.
On motion of Mr. STREIGHT, his joint resolution for instruction and request of Indiana congressmen to favor the passage of the bill passed by the lower House of the national legislature, to regulate inter-state commerce was taken up, with a committee report recommending its indefinite postponement.
Mr. STREIGHT spoke against concurrence in the committee report. It is understood by all parties that organized capital has a powerful lobby wherever legislation by that class is desired, but no plan can be brought about by which legislators can properly understand the wishes of the people on any given question. Unless the people can successfully strike against this great monopoly--this pooling--no man can ship surplus produce without bowing in submission to its iron rule. In this city, in one day, this pool caused our shippers to lose $40,000. Under these pool arrangements it la impossible to have competition.
Mr. BRISCOE heartily joined the senator from Marion [Mr. Streight] in hoping the report would not be concurred in. There can come no harm from such a resolution as this.
Mr. HEFRON had a war to make in favor of right, and should continue such fight as long as he had a vote to cast. The combinations of these immense corporations practice great injustice upon the people, and, if Congress has the power so to do, the people should be protected against such a monopoly. He hoped the report would not be concurred in.
Mr. REEVE, as one of the committee who made the report, gave reasons for the action of the committee. It could see no good reason for passing the resolution,as the United States Senate is already advised of the wishes of the people by the action of the United States House of Representatives. The notion is in the direction desired by the resolution, and is unnecessary in the particular stage in which the subject now stands in the national legislature. He should sustain the action of the committee.
Mr. FOWLER: Whenever important measures are pending affecting the money power they find many supporters; but when the people desire action their measures are not so well supported. This Senate ought to pass this resolution, and he desired to urge congressmen to regulate railroad corporations so they shall be compelled to do justice to the people.
Mr. TRUSLER heartily concurred in the remarks made in opposition to concurring in this report from the judiciary committee. The agricultural community only ask simple justice--that, a living rate be established for railroad transportation.
Mr. HARRIS thought the step proposed to be taken was worthy of grave consideration. He was not willing to concede the power to Congress of legislating on our State tariffs. It is only where a railroad corporation run in or through one or more States that Congress has the power to interfere under the federal consti-[tution] page: 110[View Page 110][consti]-tution. It is competition which brings about just results. He seriously doubted whether the bill pending in Congress was in accord with the federal constitution. He opposed the resolution and favored concurrence in the committee' report. Railroad companies sometimes make unjust discrimination and business men sometimes takes unjust advantage of their opportunities. In every avenue of life ought the principle of competition to reule, and it is to the interest of every one to keep transportation routes open for competition. When, by some short-sighted view, we attempt to indorse the principles contained in the bill before Congress, we are treading on dangerous ground. When the right of congressional interferences is once recognized to confine or restrict to certain bounds, the right to regulate and dictate rates of transportation will soon follow; and he was surprised to see State rights men on this floor advocating the passage of the resolution offered by his colleague (Mr. Streight). This is too serious a question to give our adherence to after a short 30 minutes' debate.
Mr. MENZIES favored concurrence in the committee reports, because believing in the reserving inviolate the rights of States, he was fearful of any power looking to a centralization of power. This resolution presents a most serious problem, viz: How to handle this great monopoly,Give such power to Congress and the railroad combination would own Congress in less than six months--body, soul, and breeches. He would rather pin his faith to the several Legislatures; the railroads might buy two or three but they have not enough to go all round. Some of these great corporations have more wealth than the Roman empire, and it will require master statesmanship to protect the people against these encroachments. It is unnecessary to ask the Senate, after the immature consideration afforded by a 40 minutes' debate, to act upon so important a measure.
Mr. WOOD wanted exact justice as between the railroad and the people. He resolution does not contemplate the regulating of railroad freights in Indiana, but to favor a general freight bill for all the States. He was surprised senators would intimate to the contrary. Legislatures made the railroad companies, and it is a hard proposition to say we can not unmake or regulate them.
Mr. REEVE compared this debate to a dispute between two Irishmen as to whether one was digging a hole or only pulling out the dirt while the hole dug itself. He made in effectual demand for the previous question.
Mr. VIEHE, while opposed to this resolution, did not desire to be understood as opposing the principle in it. He was not strongly in favor of instructing or requesting congressmen at any time or on any occasion. Railroads have conferred on this country almost inestimable blessings, and he would like to see competing lines everywhere and anywhere, all over this land. We can not expect freights to be the same throughout the entire line of the road.
Mr. KENT also favored concurrence in the committee report. The State of Indiana can well afford to let this resolution alone. He doubted the power of Congress to pass such a bill as the resolution refers to. At least was willing to leave it in the hands of Indiana' representative in Congress.
Mr. Langdon falls to see any legal reason why the committee should have brought in such a report on this resolution. The only question is whether it is for the interests of our people that we should vote the instruction contemplated by the pending resolution, and of that we are the sole judges. The people of this State are interested in inter-state commerce, and why should they not express their opinions on this subject through their representatives here? There ought to be something done in this direction. We have the indorsement of the Lower House of Congress, and now we only ask to instruct our senators to aid in cutting down a great abuse at as early a day as possible. WE should not sit silent and allow a few men to fix arbitrary rates for freight and put an iron heel on competition. He saw no judicial reason to sustain the report, and many why it should be rejected.
Mr. REEVE, as far as the question of railroad is concerned, this Senate or any other may talk till Gabriel blows his last trumpet and nothing will be accomplished. It is not worth while to argue about matters of fact--principles may be discussed. To-day there are nearly $300,000,000 of foreign capital invested in railroads in this country that does not pay a cent of interest on the investment, while paying heavy taxes that relieve the burden of the resident tax payer and brings to this door every facility for getting surplus products to market, near and far away from this own door. While railroads have a corporate existence they are but individuals; they operate these companies for the purpose of making money out of them. The resolution goes so far as the say that congress may dictate to these companies what they shall charge for transportation of freights. Some senators doubt this right; there is not doubt about it; Congress has no right to regulate this matter; it would lead to imperialism, and this Senate surely is not prepared to vote against this committee report and thus place itself in such a position.
Mr. TRUSLER came here to legislate for the people. The Jeffersonian principle is against all monopolies. He hoped the resolution would be adopted.
Mr. STREIGHT replied to some of the arguments made by the senator in favor of the committee report. This subject affects the interest of more people than any bill that will come before this body. He believed any senator opposing this resolution would oppose measures favorable to the people and leaning toward the interests of the railroads. This bill does not seek to legislate so as to fix the prices of transportation of freight. He protested against unfair representation in this debate, and urged the rejection of the committee report and the passage of his resolution.
The committee report was rejected by--yeas, 15, nays 32.
Mr. HARRIS moved to amend by adding to the preamble a declaration that it is wrong for any railroad to carry freight and passengers for less than cost, with a reasonable profit added.
Mr. BURRELL moved to lay it on the table.
The yeas were demanded on the motion to lay on the table, pending which came the recess to 2 o'p.m.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
Mr. BURRELL withdrew his motion to lay on the table.
Mr. STREIGHT demanded the previous question, which was seconded by the Senate--yeas 41, nays 8--and under its operation the amendment was being voted on, when a committee from the House of Representatives appeared to escort the Senate to the hall of the House for a joint convention, as provided for by amendment resolution, for the election of State librarian and prison directors. Senators left the chamber in charge of the House committee.
When senators returned the amendment [Mr. Harris'] was rejected by--yeas 38, nays 9; and the resolution was adopted by--yeas 34, nays 13.
Pending the roll call--
page: 111[View Page 111]The bill to which the resolution refers was read for information.
Mr. GARRIGUS, in explanation of his vote, when his name was called, said: It seemed to be worse than playing blindfold for this Senate to say to members in Congress that they shall vote for that bill. He did not believe a half dozen Senators understood the provisions of the bill now, not even enough to say that our members of Congress ought to vote for it. And not believing it to be within the province of Congress to come in to the State of Indiana to regulate matters here, he should vote " no. "
Mr. GRUBBS, when his name was called, said he believed senators and representatives in Congress were as immediate representatives of the people as we, and that they will vote properly upon the bill before them. He was in favor of regulating this matter as comprehended in the joint resolution, and if it were calling attention to the unjust discriminations practiced by railroad monopolies generally and asking Congress to legislate so as to regulate that matter, he would favor it; but as has been intimated by the senator from Howard (Mr. Garrigus) he was not sufficiently acquainted with the provisions of the bill to know whether it is wise to pass it or not. Therefore he would vote " no. "
Mr. HEILMAN, when his name was called in explanation of his vote said: Believing as I do that this bill is a high handed outrage on men who have invested money in railroads. I am compelled to vote " no.".
Mr. MENZIES, in explanation of his vote said as he understood this bill he took it to be in violation of a cardinal doctrine of the Democratic party--a violation of the rights of States--and he should oppose anything that would wantonly violate the rights of States; therefore he voted " no. ".
Mr. REEVE, when his name was called, said: Knowing this bill to be unconstitutional; believing it to be class legislation; that such action taken by this body would be dangerous in character and tend to disrupt the public peace, and interfere with the rules and laws of trade--a thing that ought to be condemned--and believing that no good can grow out of it, he desired to express his protest against it, first last, and all the time, and do what little he could to defend it. Therefore, he voted in the negative.
Mr. SHAFFER,in explanation of his vote when his name was called, said, while he held the opinion, as expressed by other senators, that railroad transportation should be regulated in some way, yet, at the same time, he had always been very slow to attempt to instruct senators in Congress, or any person who knows more about any particular matter than himself, and therefore he voted "no."
Mr. TREAT, when his name was called, was understood to say that, as he believed congressmen would cast their votes without regard to any remonstrances or instructions from us, he would vote "no."
The result was announced as above recorded; so the resolution was adopted.
And then the Senate adjourned.
