BENTON COUNTY CLAIMS.
The Committee on Claims returned the bill [H. R. 81], providing for the payment of $973.70 to parties in Benton County, for expenses incurred In the prosecution of a murder trial.
Mr. NEFF said the bill provided for extraordinary expenses incurred in the prosecution of some murder trial in Benton County. If we vote a precedent of that kind, half the Counties in the State will bring claims of a similar character, and our special appropriation bill will be loaded down with thousands of dollars. It seems, without further information as to the peculiar circumstances under which this matter has been brought before the House, it is a little dangerous to approve of this report without any further evidence. It is simply appropriating 900 and so many dollars out of State Treasury to go to Benton County for doing what was perhaps the duty of the County officers. There is nothing said about how much went to the Sheriff, whose duty it was to comply with the law without extra charge. I tell you, this matter ought not to be so summarily disposed of. He thought the House was not sufficiently informed to adopt the report.
Mr. CAUTHORNE--In answer to my friend (Mr. Neff), I would direct his attention to a statement published in pamphlet form in regard to that affair. The man who was murdered was not a citizen of Benton County, and expenses were incurred in prosecuting a man who, while traveling through the County, committed the crime. They prosecuted and convicted him, and he is now in the Penitentiary, and, inasmuch as he was not a citizen of it and they have been compelled to prosecute and convict him, they ought to be reimbursed by the State. That is the ground upon which they bring the charge against the State. It presents no claim at all against the State either in law or equity. There is no County in the State but what is compelled to prosecute just such cases as this. There has not been a murder committed in our own town (Vincennes) by our own citizens, but generally by persons traveling through from St. Louis or Cincinnati. We have the same claim against the State that Benton county has to be reimbursed. There is one allowance in this matter of $500 to the attorney. This claim has been time and time again. I do not know if the Commissioners of the County are asking for this appropriation or not, but I do know that heretofore in the history of the State there has been lobbying about this House, and I have heard of such men being here now, and I think it is time for the members of this House to stand on their rights and protect the people and tell those men to go home, and not open the Treasury for their benefit. It would be laying down a precedent that would be dangerous. It has been said that the last Legislature asked the advice of the Governor or some other officer of the Administrative Department. It was a bad precedent that the Legislature of 1879 laid down.
This session we have been trying to fish out the idea from the Supreme Court and Attorney General as to what we should do here. There are three departments of this Government, the Executive, the Legislative and the Judicial. We ought to stand by our rights and investigate these things for ourselves, and not fish for opinions from other people. I think, gentlemen, it is opening a broad door for men to get into the Treasury and get money; therefore I do not think the report ought to be concurred in.
Mr. KENNER thought it wrong to discuss the merits of the case on the report of the Committee, as this was a matter that ought to have a fuller investigation.
The report was rejected.
