THE BREVIER LEGISLATIVE REPORTS.
VOLUME SEVENTEEN.
INDIANA LEGISLATURE.
IN SENATE.
FRIDAY, February 28,1879-- 9 o'clock a. m.Prayer by Rev. URBAN C. BREWER.
On motion by Mr. HARRIS the reading of the minutes was dispensed, with and the House amendments to his prisoner's work bill [S. 68] were read and concurred in.
On motion by Mr. DICE the Senate proceeded to the consideration of Senate bills on the third reading.
The non-resident garnishee bill [S. 56--Mr. Kahlo's, fully described in these reports February 24, a. m.] was read the third time and passed the Senate by yeas 39, nays 1.
The bill [S. 57--Mr. Harris'] authorizing county commissioners to erect workhouses, was read the third time, and passed by yeas 47, nays 1.
The bill [S. 61--Mr. Coffey's--see these reports February 24, p. m.] concerning deputy sheriffs, was read the third time, and passed by yeas 43, nays 3.
Mr. REEVE explaining his negative vote by declaring this bill would increase the number of bailiff's, which in almost every court are now too numerous.
The bill [S. 94--Mr. Wood's] limiting the height of hedge fences to six feet was read the third time.
Mr. STKEIGHT regarded it as very detrimental to compel the cutting down of hedges in some cases, especially on the west side of fields in exposed places and on the prairies.
Mr. WOOD explained the shade from these high hedges kept the roads in bad condition by excluding the sun's rays, and that these high fences obstructed the view of the country.
Mr. KRAMER favored the bill regarding it an imposition on the people to allow hedges to grow higher than six feet.
The bill failed by yeas 20, nays 23.
The bill [S. 122--Mr. Shaffer's] to provide for repairs on free turnpike roads was read the third time.
Mr. SHAFFER explained that the important provisions of this bill embrace regulations for the repair of free gravel roads, and unless some such measures are passed thousands of dollars expended on such roads by the tax payers residing thereon will be lost.
The bill passed by yeas 33, nays 10.
The bill [S. 21--Mr. Davenport's] for the establishment of courts in cities of 6,000 inhabitants, was read the second time and ordered engrossed.
The bill [S. 169--Mr. Hart's] prohibiting the secreting, etc., of mortgaged goods was read the third time and passed by yeas 38, nays 4.
The bill [S. 175--Mr. Sarnighausen's--see these reports Feb. 21, p. m.] for the appointment of county superintendents of schools by the township trustees was read the third time.
Mr. SARNIGHAUSEN declared this bill would make the office more efficient, and that some senators who were opposed to it on the second reading were now in favor of its beneficent provisions.
Mr. BENZ was in favor of abolishing the office of county school superintendent altogether; the State got along well enough under the old law, which was a very good one, and therefore he opposed this bill.
The bill passed the Senate by yeas 33, nays 7.
The bill [S. 176--Mr. Traylor's] to legalize the acts of the trustees of the town of Jasper was read the third time and passed by yeas 36, nays 1.
The bill [S. 258--Mr. Sarnighausen's] to legalize the acts of local authorities in annexing certain territory to Fort Wayne was read the third time and passed by yeas 36, nays 2.
The bill [S. 271--Mr. Comstock's; see these reports of February 22, a. m.] to enlarge the jurisdiction or mayors of cities and justices of the peace, was read the third time.
Mr. COMSTOCK explained the bill was to economize the time of criminal and circuit courts by doing away with the necessity of a trial in said courts of causes which may be punished by imprisonment in the county jail.
Mr. KENT opposed the bill. It would be unsafe to place such power in the hands of justices of the peace. The jury has the benefit of argument by learned counsel, and also instructions of the court, thus educating their minds so as properly to apply the law to the facts. Among a liberty-loving people we can not page: 206[View Page 206] allow the rights of a citizen to be jeopardized by authorizing such trials before justices of the peace. Even for the purposes of economy no such measure should be tolerated for a moment.
Mr. REEVE also opposed the bill, Mr. TRAYLOR believed it only a measure to allow justices of the peace to fill our jails with poor men.
Mr. KRAMER thought it a good bill and a measure of economy.
Mr. OLDS regarded this bill as against the interests of reform and economy. It would create a greater expense than under the present practice. It is not right to talk about economy when liberty is at stake. The bill is so unjust it ought not to receive any where near a majority of votes favorable to its passage.
Mr. COMSTOCK: Senators have not carefully considered this bill, or they have forgotten some of the principles of the law. The purpose of the bill is not to deprive any one of a fair and impartial trial, either by the justice, or by a jury. As a matter of dollars and cents, this bill was not urged; that would be too trivial an argument where liberty of the person is involved.
Mr. GRUBBS believed the bill wrong in principle. No felony is, or can be trivial. This crime is an important one, and one involving as many principles of law as the higher offences. This bill proposed to place such cases before a court in 99 cases out of 100 utterly in- c6mpetent, and having no ability to comprehend the case in its proper bearings.
Mr. FOWLER at first favored this bill, but after examination he could not vote for it while containing the provision allowing justices jurisdiction over felony cases.
Mr. TRAYLOR was well satisfied this bill would prove a denial of justice to many parties charged with crime.
The bill passed the Senate by--yeas 27, nays 19.
The bill [S. 267--Mr. Olds'] to amend section 1 of the act of March 14,1867, amending section 561 of the general practice act, was read the third time.
Mr. OLDS explained: The bill provides that appeals, when taken to the supreme court, in cases where the amount in controversy is under $50,the law of 1867 shall not apply where the validity of any city ordinances is involved.
The bill passed by--yeas 39, nays 5.
Mr. MENZIES offered a resolution authorizing the governor to appoint some competent person to codify the insurance laws, at a cost not to exceed $100, which was referred to the committee on insurance.
And then came the recess till 2 o'clock.
AFTERNOON SESSION,
The bill [S. 196--Mr. Streight's--see these reports, Feb. 21, p. m.] regulating tolls on roads located on beds ceded by the United States to this State, was read the third time.
Mr. STREIGHT gave a history of the building of the roads affected by his bill: They were originally constructed in every particular by the general Government and ceded to this State; costing the present owners but a very small sum, and they should be compelled to desist from bleeding the people as shamefully as they do, by the restrictions in this bill which allows them 10 per cent. profit on their vestments, over and above the necessary repairs and cost of collecting toll.
Mr. REEVE: This bill seems to apply to one road and to no other. It allows pay for expenses, but does not allow anything for services of the owner or for the capital invested. He could not see where any advantage would accrue by the crippling of a little undertaking of this kind, nor why there should be $400 an hour spent to consider such a bill as this, when important legislation is awaiting action.
Mr. TRUSLER thought this bill should not pass. Where war is made against such roads it is generally made by those living on them. He was satisfied this bill is intended for but one particular road, and insisted that such kind of legislation is radically wrong.
Mr. HEFRON could see no injustice in the provisions of this bill. He favored its passage.
Mr. FOWLER regarded this bill as impracticable, and a very doubtful piece of legislation.
Mr. VIEHE also objected to the passage of the bill.
Mr. COMSTOOK gave reasons why he thought this bill ought not to pass.
Mr. BURRELL characterized this bill as proposing a species of class legislation that would transcend the constitutional limit.
The bill passed by--yeas 28, nays 17.
The bill [S. 297--Mr. Hefron's] to abolish the office of State geologist was read the third time.
Mr. REEVE: The State geologist has developed millions of dollars of property in this State that, but for this department, would be now unknown. It is about the only branch of the government that has been productive. By it wealth has been called here, and the attention of men of brains has been directed to the vast resources of the State. That which goes from the hands of the scientific department of the State receives respectful attention; where any other publication of the kind would be looked upon as a simple advertising venture. He trusted the State would save its credit by refusing to pass this bill.
Mr. STREIGHT: The development of our coal mines is largely due to the efforts of tho State geologist. Tile for floors had never been manufactured anywhere in the United States till it was commenced in this city, and this is due to the efforts of Prof. Cox; and we are not at the end of the investigations into the resources of the State. He opposed the passage of the bill.
Mr. KRAMER did not question but that the State geological department has achieved much for this State, but in these times he thought it imprudent to keep up this expense. It does not pay in the present depressed state of business and considering the heavy burden of taxation now oppressing the people of this State, he should vote for the abolishment of this expensive department.
Mr. SHAFFER thought this looked too much like legislating on a man's estate before his death. This office has not yet outlived its usefulness; and there is as much necessity for it in the 10 years to come as there has been in the 10 years past. He hoped this bill would not become a law.
Mr. WILSON was not much in love with this bill, nor would he object to such a geological department as senators opposed to the bill have pictured. This office has not met public expectation in developing the agricultural interests of the State. The geological reconnoisance of his own county was notoriously imperfect. He felt disposed to consent to the abolishment, for the time being, of this department which is doing so little good at present, and therefore would support the bill under consideration, though much preferring to see the property belonging to this office transferred, to Purdue University, than to see it go in the direction indicated in this bill.
Mr. TREAT did not desire the abolishment of this department: It has been the means of bringing capital to the State, which has laid the foundation for her future prosperity. When attention is called to the existence of coal mines or stone quarries, or other under- page: 207[View Page 207] lying wealth, just because the times are a little hard at the present, although immediate advantage may not be taken of such discoveries, it does not follow that in future it will not be productive of vast benefit to the State. He opposed the passage of the bill.
Mr. HEFRON did not maintain that the geological department has not been of great benefit to the State, but contended that, aside from the survey, the benefits have not been so very large. We are in possession of that survey, made in l873-4 or 5; but there having been no reports made since then, of what benefit has the office been to the people? All the good that has been derived from this office has already been secured, and it is now but a useless expense.
The bill failed to pass--yeas 23, nays 22.
The bill [S. 308--Mr. Kramer's--See these reports Feb. 22, p. m. ] to fix the rate for printing the delinquent tax list, was read the third time, and passed the Senate by yeas 34, nays 10.
The bill [S. 325--Mr. Heilman's] to amend the charter of the town of Evansville, was read the third time and passed by--yeas 40, nays 3.
Mr. HEILMAN explaining it was to authorize Evansville to aid in the construction of a bridge across the Ohio river.
The bill [S. 381--Mr. Traylor's--to provide for the publication of legal and official matters in newspapers, was read the third time and passed by--yeas 38, nays 1.
Mr. TRAYLOR explaining it was to allow the publication of legal notices in papers using patent outsides or insides, or where printed partly in German and partly in English.
The bill [S. 390--Mr. Reeve 's--see these reports of Feb. 25, a. m.] to prevent certain live stock from running at large, was read the third time and failed to pass by--yeas 17, nays 23.
Mr. DICE and Mr. FOSTER thought the present law, if properly enforced, would afford ample protection.
On motion by Mr. STREIGHT, the bill [H. R. 637] appropriating $700,000 for the building of the new State House, to be drawn in installments of $100,000, levying a tax of 2 per cent. for a State House fund, authorizing the issuing of State House bonds, etc., was read the first time and referred to the committee on finance.
On motion by Mr. BRISCOE, his fee and salary bill [S. 424] was read the first time.
On motion by Mr. KENT, the bill [H. R. 55] to legalize certain acts of the Board of Commissioners of Clinton county, was read the second time.
And then the Senate adjourned.
