HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
MONDAY, Feb. 24,1879-- 9 a. m.The reading of the minutes of Saturday's proceedings was dispensed with.
The following engrossed Senate bills were read the second time, by title only, and referred to appropriate committees, unless otherwise stated:
The bill, [S. 140] to authorize the surrender of city charters; [S. 180] in relation to divorces; [S. 118] to amend the practice act, was passed to the second reading; [S. 338] in relation to plank, macadamized and gravel roads; [S. 353] how lands in cities may be taxed; [S. 382] for a uniform assessment of property; [S. 18] concerning canal lands patents; [S. 27] for the government and discipline of the State prisons; [S. 119] to abolish the superior court in Gass county; [S. 43] to exempt the wages of laborers from garnishment [S. 26] defining embezzlement; [S. 187] for the election and appointment of supervisors; [S. 65] to prevent the publication of libel; [S. 184] to prevent the practice of resorting to distant courts to oppress citizens; [S. 254] providing for the payment of judges and attorneys holding courts in certain cases; [S. 209] authorizing appeals from boards of county commissioners; [S. 47] to enable owners of wet lands to drain the same; [S. 37] to enable county boards to dispose of uncalled for allowances ;[S. 331] to authorize school trustees of cities or towns to pay over special school revenue; [S. 365] for the relief of the Lye Creek Draining association.
House bills introduced and described in these reports of Saturday, numbered 610 to 632, inclusive, were read the second time by title only, and referred to appropriate committees,except the bill [H. R. 629] to repeal the act to provide for township elections, which was ordered to be engrossed.
Mr. Johnson's resolution amending the rules so that on the call of counties for the introduction of new propositions, each member shall have the privilege of calling up for final action one bill, was adopted.
Mr. WORKS moved that the favorable committee report or the bill, [H. R. 118] allowing a circuit court to each county, be concurred, in and the bill ordered engrossed.
Mr. STEVENS said a bill of this kind would disgrace our judicial system, and he would oppose the passage of any such measure. He was therefore opposed to its engrossment.
Mr. WORKS said he only wanted to get the bill in proper shape before the House, in order that their action thereon might be intelligent.
The House concurred in the report of the committee, bat refused to order the bill to the engrossment.
On the motion of Mr. BRIGGS, 500 copies of the codification of the school law [H. R. 620] was ordered printed in pamphlet form.
Mr. EDWINS, chairman of the committee on rights and privileges, returned the bill [H. R. 377] regulating the practice of medicine, with amendments, and when so amended recommend its passage.
The report was concurred in and the bill ordered engrossed,
The committee on insurance reported a resolution, which was adopted, that the auditor of state be requested to make a full and complete report. to this House of all fees, of whatever kind, which have been collected by him from foreign insurance companies doing business in the State during the 12 months ending the 30th of November,1878, specifying the number of statements of such companies, and what disposition has been made of any and all fees so collected by him.
The House took a recess until 2 o'clock.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
The following described bills for acts were introduced, read the first time, and passed to the second reading:
By Mr. OVERMEYER, [H. R. 633] to provide means for the erection of the new State House (three cents on the $100 for 1879; for 1880 four cents.) He also introduced a resolution, which was adopted, that the treasurer inform the House what balance of cash remained in the treasury on November 30, 1878, December 31, 1878, and January 31,1879; also what have been the receipts and disbursements since January 31,1879, and what the balance of cash on hand now is.
By Mr. CONFER, [H. R. 634] to amend section 8 of the subdivision of section 7 of an act to provide for an uniform assessment of taxes, etc.
By Mr. CUNNINGHAM, by request, [H. R. 635] to amend sections 1, 2 and 3 of an act to provide for the running at large of domestic animals.
By Mr. ROBINSON, [H. R. 636] to amend section 15 of an act to regulate elections.
REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES
were concurred in, unless otherwise stated, to wit:
Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart, from the Com-[mittee] page: 188[View Page 188] [Com]-mittee on the Judiciary, returned the bill S. 209 with a recommendation that the bill do pass. Also the following House bills from the same committee: H. R. 268, 214, 328, 539 and 247, which were laid on the table; also H. R. 306, 596, 607, 609, 508, 685, 507, 478, 581, 83, 354, 432, 524, with favorable reports thereon; H. R. 404, 272 and 148, with a recommendation for indefinite postponement.
Mr. Tulley said the bill H. R. 148 was a bill which quite a number of the counties of the State were interested in, and he thought such a bill should be passed. He hoped that the report of the committee would not be concurred in. On his motion the report was laid on the table and the bill ordered engrossed.
Also the bills H. R. 57, 287,352, 441, 440, 434, 360, 170, 105, 274, 293, 232, 490, 165, 204, 523, 341, 474, 186 and 95, with a recommendation that they be indefinitely postponed--except the bill H. R. 95, which was ordered engrossed: also H. R. 416, 541, 50, 309, 308, 196, 579, 178, 248, 517, 13 and 600, with a recommendation that they lie on the table.
On the motion of Mr. Major the report of the committee on the bill H. R. 600 was laid on the table.
Mr. OVERMEYER said the consideration of the report of the committee on his bill [H. R. 13] brought out the question whether we shall reduce the number of jurymen to six. The judiciary committee recommend that the bill lie on the table. The constitution does not mention the number of jurors, and there is nothing that does fix the number unless we go back to the old English law. He introduced the bill for the purpose of saving the State at least $150,000 per annum. He demanded the yeas and nays upon concurring in the report.
Mr. GORDON thought we had no right to cut down the number of jurors below the number that was required by the common law when the constitution was made.
Mr. 0SBORNE of Elkhart could not support the bill because he believed it was unconstitutional. If it could be done constitutionally he would support such a measure.
The House refused to concur in the report--yeas 33, nays 53. The bill was ordered engrossed.
Mr. BRIGGS, chairman of the committee on organization of courts, returned the bills [H. R. 276, 371 and 602] recommending their indefinite postponement.
Mr. CAMPBELL hoped the report of the committee on the bill [H. R. 462] to abolish the superior court of Cass county would not be concurred in. He had a resolution from the three political parties asking that the superior court be abolished. He was instructed to work for its repeal, and he hoped the bill would pass.
Mr. SCHOLL had not a word of objection to abolishing the superior court in Cass county, but this bill goes further and asks for the reconstruction of the Thirty-ninth Judicial Circuit, and asks that Caps county be made a judicial chair of itself. He thought the report of the committee ought to be concurred in.
Mr. DAILEY was a member of that committee, and insisted that the resolutions of the political parties were for buncomb, with the view of catching votes. He understood that the courts were already overloaded with business. He was opposed to abolishing cozrts to gratify whims.
Mr. GORDON could see no objection to laying the report upon the table and let the bill come before the House, and as Cass county has demanded the abolishment of the superior court it ought to be done. Let us amend the bill and harmonize all parties.
Mr. Briggs held in his hands several petitions from heavy tax-payers asking that the superior court be continued, and protesting against repealing the law that organized the court. He urged that the House sustain the report of the committee.
Mr. Campbell said if they could get rid of Pulaski county in the judicial circuit they could do without the superior court. He said these petitions were signed under a misapprehension. There was no party in it whatever; it was a mere matter of economy. He made an ineffectual motion that the committee report be laid on the table.
The House then concurred in the report of the committee by--yeas 56, nays 29.
On the motion of Mr. HANDY, the bill, [H. R. 371] and report was laid on the table.
Mr. KESTER, from the committee on banks returned the bill [H. R. 519] for the incorporation of banks, with a recommendation that it be indefinitely postponed. The report was concurred in.
Mr. MIERS, from the committee on education, returned the bills, [H. R. 382, 418 and 491] with favorable recommendations; also, [H. R. 394. 484, 314, 538, 429, 437 and 302] recommending indefinite postponement. Also, [H. R. 287, 361, 282 and 51], recommending that they lie on the table.
Mr. STUCKER said he hoped the report of the committee on the bill [H. R. 51] would not be concurred in. This bill is of great importance to the people of the State. It abolishes the office of county school superintendent and creates the office of school examiner, thereby saving to the people of the State at least $75,000 per annum. The school examiner can and will do all that is necessary to be done, and not cost the people one-tenth of what we now pay. The people demand that this surplus office shall be abolished and save that extra expense that is now enforced upon them. It is a settled fact that we have too many officers and we ought to curtail all that can be dispensed with. This is one that can be lopped off with good results, and our schools not impaired in the least.
Mr. DRAK said it was an outrage upon the dignity of the State to suppose that you could get a man qualified to discharge the duties of school superintendent for the pitiful sum of $2 a day.
Mr. TAYLOR,of Davis, said no one gloried more in the school facilities of Indiana than he did, but he thought this Legislature ought to do something to relieve the people of this incubus that rests upon this branch of the school department. It was to correct an abuse which prompted him to support a measure that would limit the time of service of this officer.
Mr. ALLEN, of Putnam, moved that the bill [H. R. 51] be recommitted to a special committee of five.
Mr. OSBORNE, of Elkhart, offered an amendment, which Mr. Edwins moved to lay on the table.
And then the House adjourned.
