IN SENATE.
FRIDAY, April 8, 1881--9:30 a. m.FARM PROPERTY INSURANCE.
On motion by Mr. LEEPER, his bill [S. 355] authorizing farming property Insurancen Companies to do business in three contiguous Counties was read the third time and passed.
STREET CARS TO INSANE ASYLUM.
On motion by Mr. CHAPMAN, his bill [S. 373] to grant a revokable license to a street railway from the Union Depot to the Insane Hospital was read the second time, and, under a dispensation of the constitutional rule, a third time and passed.
BRIDGES OVER COUNTY LINES.
On motion by Mr. DAVIS, the bill [H. R. 266--see page 70, vol. 20 of these Reports] concerning bridges over streams forming County boundary lines, was read the second time and pressed to the final reading and passed.
GREEN RIVER ISLAND.
On motion by Mr. MENZIES, the bill [S. 281--see yesterday's report] to amend Section 2 of the act of 1877 for the establishing of the State line near Green River Island, was read the third time and passed.
TEMPERANCE LEGISLATION.
The joint resolution [H. R. 7--see pages 103 and 107 of these Reports] proposing an amendment to the Constitution prohibiting the manufacture or sale of intoxicating liquors was read the third time, and, under the operation of the previous question, passed by yeas, 26 nays, 20; as follows:
YEAS--Brown, Bundy, Coffey, Comstock, Davidson, Davis, Garrigus, Graham, Grubbs, Hefron, Henry, Hostetter, Kahlo, Keiser, Langdon, Lockridge, Marvin, Owen, Ristine, Sayre, Shaffer, Smith, Spann, White, Wilson and Vancey--26.
NAYS--Bell, Benz, Bischowski, Briscoe, Chapman, Compton, Foster, Hart, Hutchinson, Kramer, Leeper, Majors, Menzies, Rahm, Traylor, Urmston, Van Vorhis, Viehe, Voyles and Wood--20.
Mr. Brown said: I shall vote for the passage of this joint resolution, but I am not sure that I ought to do so. I regard it very different from the proposition of leaving the liquor traffic in the hands of the Legislature, so that the different localities can settle the matter among themselves whether they will or will not permit the traffic to be engaged in. And if, at the next election, the people express themselves against it I will freely free to so vote in the next General Assembly. In my opinion this is the worst possible move genuine temperance cause. If this proposed amendment is finally submitted to the people it will be voted down, and that will set the temperance cause back at least twenty yeara. But the teperance advocates are clamorous for the opportunity of submitting the question to the people, and I will not stand in the way of the people expressing their opinion upon it.
Mr. COFFEY says: "Without committing myself for or against the resolution, I shall vote for it. The questions involved belong to the people, and I am willing that the same shallbe submitted to them in the form of an amendment to the Constitution for their ratification or rejection. More than 50,000 voters of the State are asking it, and believing their request should be granted, I vote 'aye.'"
Mr. DAVIDSON, understanding that he would have a chance to come in possession and be fully informed as to the views of his constituents before casting his final vote on this resolution two years hence, was willing to vote in favor of the resolution to-day.
Mr. HEFRON says: I shall vote for the adoption of this resolution, not because I indorse the provisions contained in it, but because I desire that the people of the State may have an opportunity of expressing at the ballot-box their wishes upon this much-agitated question. Upon questions of great public concern, affecting their moral or social welfare, the people, in my judgment, ought to be consulted at the earliest possible stage in the proceedings and their desires ascertained, so that their public servants may act intelligently and advisedly therein. I therefore vote "aye."
Mr. RAHM says: I voted against the prohibitory amendment, because I didn't believe in such a page: 149[View Page 149] law, when all the adjoining States can manufacture all they want to do, and sell their products to us. Our faming community would be the losers, especially those raising corn. It is better to pass a strict temperance law than to destroy the business and commerce of our State.
Mr. SMITH says: Without expressing an opinion upon the merits of the amendment, I desire to cast my vote in accordance with a conviction that I have always entertained--that being, that the people are the source of all political power, and whenever they express a desire, by petition or otherwise, to have any great matter of interest submitted to them in the form of a constitutional amendment, the Legislature should, without hesitation, make such submission, and let the voters of the State determine by the ballot, whether such proposed amendment shall become a part of the Constitution or not.
Mr. VOYLES says--I am opposed to this proposition. The resolution ought to be entitle "A resolution to so amend the Constitution that the property of such persons as are engaged in manufacturing beer, ale or other liquors, shall condemned, confiscated and rendered of no value." If this resoluton should go before the people and be adopted, millions of dollars of valuable property would become absolutely worthless in the hands of its owners. I am not in favor of doing ing tending to lead to such a hardship and ch destrucion of values. I do not believe that when the manufacturing of liquors and beer in Indiana shall be stopped by constitutional inhibition that the use of the liquors will cease. The Democratic party never gave indorsement to any such a proposition in this State, either in platform or legislation, I therefore vote "no."
Mr. WILSON says: The fundamental law of the State should express the will of the people. If there be any doubt as to whether the present Constitution does contain their will, the plain duty of the Legislature is to afford her citizens an opportunity to indicate their will in the way provided therein, without delay or hindrance. No man is worthy to represent a people whom he fears to trust on all questions of public welfare. He voted "aye."
Mr. WOOD says: I am entirely opposed to this proposed amendment. It is extreme and fanatical in its provisions, and will do more injury to the cause it is offered to aid than its authors now contemplate. The people of the State do not want it, and the expense of submiting it to a vote of the people, if ever it be submited, will be money wasted. Such a measure is fraught with danger of property rights. Thousands of dollars of property will become valueless under this pernicious proposition, and no good will come in return. It is a wrong step and will strike down vested rights and ruin much invested capital. It will aid nothing now demanded but be prolific of much detriment to business interest, and I vote "no."
Mr. YANCEY would vote for this resolution because the people petitioned for the right to settle by ballot that question. He believed in the sacred right of petition, and that the Legislature has no right to withhold from the people the right to vote on a proposition to amend the Constitution--the basis on which all our laws are enacted, and by which the people are governed. He voted "aye."
And so the joint resolution [H. R. 8] passed the Senate.
Mr. SHAFFER moved to reconsider the vote by which the joint resolution passed, and to lay that motion on the table.
The latter motion was agreed to.
TERMS OF OFFICERS.
The joint resolution [S. 6] proposing an amendment to the Constitution making the term of office of Secretary, Treasurer and Auditor of State four years instead of two, and disqualifying either from serving two consecutive terms, was read third time and passed by yeas 38; nays, 5.
The joint resolution [S. 7] proposing an amendment to the Constitution, making the term of office of County officers four years--ineligible to two consecutive terms, was read the third time.
Mr. TRAYLOR--This resolution will establish one term and only one for County officers should it become a part of the Constitution. All know that in many cases County officers during their first term electioneer for a second term. Many Treasurers say to tax-payers: You need not pay your taxes yet, wait, I will let it pass; and in one County in 1878, out of a $64,000 tax duplicate, the delinquencies run to $34,000--the Treasurer doing nothing but electioneer for a second term. And it sometimes happens that an Auditor electioneers with men who owe interest to the school fund, so they get behind as much as five years. The one term system will have a tendency to improve the civil service of the State.
The joint resolution [S. 7] passed--yeas 40; nays, 4.
WOMEN SUFFRAGE.
The joint resolution (H. R. 8] proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the State granting the right of suffrage to females having the same qualifications as males was read the third time and passed under the operation of the previous question--yeas, 27; nays, 18--as follows:
YEAS--Brown, Bundy, Comstock, Davis, Garrigus, Graham, Grubbs, Hart, Henry, Hostetter, Hutchinson, Kahlo, Keiser, Langdon, Leeper, Lockridge, Menzies, Owen, Ristine, Sayre, Shaffer, Smith, Spann, Van Vorhis, White, Wilson and Yancy--27.
NAYS--Bell, Benz, Bischowski, Brisoe, Chapman, Compton, Davidson, Foster, Hefron, Kramer, Majors, Marvin, Rahm, Traylor, Urmston, Viehe, Voyles and Wood--18.
Mr. BROWN said: Eary at the last session I brought in a bill for a Constitutional Convention. I was then answered by the Republican members of the Senate that the seven amendments then pending to the Constitution, if adopted, would cure all the ills that were existing in consequence of a defective Constitution; that they would bind up the bruised arms and heal all the wounds of the people. Yet I find that in less than one month after the adoption of the seven amendments eight more are brought in, principally by Republicans, as necessary to cure Constitutional imperfections. I think more is being done to-day than has been done before to hasten the day when the people will call a Convention to interpose in their behalf against this patch-work upon the Constitution and a rectification of this foolishness. And my desire that there shall soon be such a Convention, for such purposes, is the controlling reason why I vote for these amendments.
Mr. HEFRON says: Though I am always willing to submit to the judgment of the people upon questions of all public concern, I can not give the sanction of my vote to a proposition which contaius such unreasonable and such unjust discriminations, as in my judgment, are contained in this resolution. I vote "no."
Mr. RAHM says: I have asked quite a large number of ladies of both parties in Vanderburgh County if they desired to vote, etc., and each and every one answered "No!"with the request for me to vote against all such nonsense. I vote "no."
Mr. WILSON says: "I believe 'all women (equally with men) are born free and equal;' that representation should go with taxation. Why should we refuse equal voice in the Government to the good, the pure, the intelligent citizen because she is a woman, and grant it to the low, vicious and ignorant simply because he is man? I do not believe any man was ever injured by association with the other sex in any legitimate enterprise in life. Why should we fear to share with them political power, and yet trust them with our 'lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor?' At least I am willing to let our page: 150[View Page 150] people direct us, and abide the expression of their will constitutionally expressed."
Mr. YANCEY says: I vote for this resolution because I believe it but right and just.
And so the joint resolution [H. R. 8] passed the Senate.
SUPREME JUDGES.
The joint resolution [S. 15] proposing an amendment to the State Constitution, increasing the number of Supreme Judge to nine, five of whom shall form a quorum, to serve for six years if they so long behave well, was read the third time and rejected by yeas, 18; nays, 23.
THE LEGISLATURE.
The joint resolution [S. 16] proposing to amend the Constitution so the Senate shall be compose of thirty and the House of Representatives of sixty members, was also rejected by yeas, 9; nays, 32.
The joint resolution [S. 17] proposing an amendment to the Constitution of Indiana so that the regular sessions of the General Assembly may continue for 100 days and special, or called, sessions thirty days, was read the third time and passed by yeas, 34; nays, 8.
LOAN OF CITY SINKING FUND.
Mr. BELL introduced a bill [S. 376] to authorize any cities or town having a bonded debt and having a sinking fund created for the liquidation of said debt, to loan the said sinking fund and add the interest to the principal of said fund, which was read the first time.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
PUBLIC OFFENSES.
The Senate returned to the bill S. 393.
Committee amendments to over twenty sections were adopted.
Mr. MARVIN said there are small streams all over the State that dry up in the summer, but have fish in them in November. He moved to amend so as allow a six foot dip net to be used in that month in any creek.
Mr. HENRY objected to this proviso.
Mr. LANGDON was sure the people desired the fish protected. Under such amendments poachers would be on hand and the streams would be depopulated of food fishes. Fishes in the streams of Indiana are almost all gone. It is said one acre of pure water will produce more food product than five acres of land. Let us join hands on the subject of protecting and propagating fishes, and in time more can be taken by hook and line than by seine now. Fish food in Indiana is the rich man's food, because the streams are so depleted that fish are costly, and are imported from other States. He opposed the amendment.
Mr. WILSON also objected to the amendment. Let such amendments be withheld for two years, and he hoped, under the auspices of the Fish Commission, much advantage will be seen from its operation.
Mr. MARVIN withdrew his amendment.
On motion by Mr. LOCKRIDGE, Section 163 was amended so as to prohibit the malicious depositing of any putrid, noisome or offensive substance on any public highway.
INDIANA COAST SURVEY.
On motion by Mr. RISTINE, the bill [H.R. 359--see page 112, vol. 20.] relating to the operation of the United States Court and geodetic survey in the State of Indiana was read the second time by title and the third time by sections under a dispensation of the rules.
Mr. RISTINE said this a measure which costs the State of Indiana nothing, and will result in great benefit to the State. The purpose of this bill is to aid the survey to be made and enable stations to be erected on elevated knobs--perhaps one or more in a County. Another object of the bill is to protect a permanent monument that is to be placed the earth and prevent it from being removed.
The bill passed--yeas, 86; nays, 1.
SALES BY INFANTS.
On motion by Mr. FOSTER, the bill [H. R. 124] relating to sales by infants of real and personal property, providing for disaffirming such sales and recovery of the property, was read the third time.
Mr. BELL--It provides that an infant femme covert can not, after making a conveyance, set it aside without repaying the consideration, and in other cases where an infant falsely represents to be of lawful age, the same requirements follow.
Mr. MENZIES objected to the bill, especially to the second section, which proposes to strike down the shield for infants.
Mr. BELL insisted this bill was in the interest of common honesty, and intended to strike the sword from the hand of infants and not to touch the shield.
Mr. BROWN said: This bill, if passed into a law, would affect past as well as future transaction. Upon principle it is unwise to overturn a law upon the subject of contracts without a saving clause that it shall apply to the future only. This bill leaves a port open by which the greatest kind of frauds could be perpetrated. He gave reasons why the bill should not pass.
Mr. FOSTER advocated the passage of the bill.
Mr. HENRY declared this bill to be in the interest of grossest dishonesty.
Mr. CHAPMAN thought the bill ought to be recommitted. The second section states what the law should be, in his judgment.
On motion by Mr. BUNDY, the bill was referred to a Select Committee of three.
HUSBAND AND WIFE.
On motion by Mr. COMSTOCK, the Senate voted to adhere to its amendments to the bill [H. R. 219] concerning husband and wife, and ask for a Committee of Free Conference.
The Senate took recess till 7:30 o'clock.
NIGHT SESSION.
Mr. Traylor took the Chair, and directed the Clerk to read the bill [H. R. 367] concerning proceedings in criminal cases. After some time--
Came an adjournment till to morrow.
