THE
BREVIER LEGISLATIVE REPORTS.
VOLUME
NINETEEN.
INDIANA LEGISLATURE.
IN SENATE.
THURSDAY, February 3, 1881--10 a. m.The Lieutenant-Governor not appearing in the chamber promptly on time, Senator Bell was called to the Chair. Prayers were offered by Rev. J. R. Mitchell.
On motion by Mr. VIEHE, the bill [S. 158] authorizing the Board of Revision to employ clerks, with the House amendments allowing instead of the proposed appointments, a detail of engrossing clerks, one from the Senate and one from the House when called for, were read and non-concurred in.
Mr. MENZIES presented a petition from James F. Harney, of Montgomery County, praying for an investigation into his official conduct as Trustee a of the Institution for Feeble-Minded Children, in order to be relieved a charge made on the floor of the Senate at the time of his confirmation, as published in the Indianapolis Journal of July 29 [too personal for publication these reports], which vitally affects his character as a citizen and as an officer of the State an which he knows to be without foundation in fact.
It is as follows:
To the Senate of Indiana now assembled:
Your petitioner would respectfully represent to your honorable body that for more than forty years he has been a citizen of Montgomery Country, Indiana and during that time he has on several occasions been honored by the people of that County with important public offices, and posts, and has heretofore been free from any imputation of corruption in office. And that on the 5th day of November, 1879, he was appointed and commissioned by the Governor of the State as one of the Trustees of the Asylum for Feeble-Minded Children, to fill the unexpired term of B. F. Ibach who had resigned, and that on the 27th day of November, 1879, he took the oath of the office and gave the necessary bond as Treasurer of the Institution and entered upon the dutties of the office: and that upon the 29th day of January, 1881, there appeared an article in the Indianapolis Journal, a paper that is accustomed to report on the proceedings of the Legislature of Indiana The following is a copy:
"By taking advantage of the absence of several Republicans yesterday, the Democrats in the Senate secured a confirmation of the nominations made by ex-Governor Gray for vacancies in the Boards of the various Benevolent Institutions. The action was taken under the 'gag rule,' debate being entirely cut off. When it came to voting for the confirmation of James F. Harney Senators Bundy and Garrigus protested, saying that they were confident that Harney had been corrupt in office, and they did not want to support such a man. The Democrats, led by Senator Brown, fearing the effect of such statements, declined to give the Republicans permission to even explain their votes."
And he believes said copy is a correct report of what was said in the Senate at the time, inasmuch as the same has not been corrected or changed since that time.
And that petitioner feels aggrieved that a charge so vitally affecting his character as a citizen and an officer of the State, which he knows to be without foundation in fact, should be made by such high authority, and so extensively circulated, when he has so far had no opportunity of challenging the truth of the charges, wherefore your petitioner prays the Honorable Senate and the officers presiding over it that you appoint a Committee of your body with full power and authority to investigate and thoroughly search out all the acts of doings of your petitioner as an officer of the Asylum for the Feeble Feeble Minded Children, and report the same to the Senate, that the interest of the State may be protected and that justice be done. And your petitioner will ever pray.
JAMES F. HARNEY.
On motion by Mr. MENZIES, it was referred to he Committee appointed to investigate the affairs of said Institution, with instructions to make a full, true and complete examination into the matters and things complained of in said petition, and report the result of said examination to the two Houses of the General Assembly.
ASSESSMENT FOR TAXATION.
Mr. HART called up the special order, being , his bill [S. 37] to amend Sections 49 and 53 of the act of December 21, 1872, concerning property assessment, with a favorable majority report, which was concurred in.
Mr. HENRY objected to opening up too broad a page: 118[View Page 118] field to defraud the country out of taxes as this ti bill would do, though the principle in the bill is a good one.
Mr. VOYLES offered an amendment requiring a list of the names and residences of all creditors if less than ten, if over ten then ten of the largest.
Mr. LANGDON opposed the amendment because such requirements ought to be simple as can be. It would result in no measure of protection against fraud, and it adds an intricate piece of machinery, which can be of no good.
Mr. BROWN declared the object of the amendment to be to provide against fraudulent representation of indebtedness.
Mr. LANGDON insisted the amendment would not relieve the trouble in the original bill. The State has heretofore been defrauded by the listor swearing his indebtedness was equal to all his claims. The whole theory of taxations upon personal property is wrong. Taxes should be fixed upon property that can be seen.
Mr. BELL regarded this amendment as proper--that indebtedness should be deduced from tax on personal property.
Mr. KRAMER insisted the great trouble with the Assessor is concerning personal property. Many pay too much taxes. The principle of this bill is correct, but there ought to be something to show to whom a man is owing money on which he claims reduction. It ought to be stated in amounts of $100 and over. Boards of Equalization are troubled more than anything else by the listing of personal property. Land is never taxed for its full value--in many cases but two-thirds--while personal property is generally taxed at its value. Under this bill indebtedness to the school fund could be deducted. The names of all creditors above $100 should be given in. By this method it could be ascertained whether or not a person did give a true list of his taxable property. The provisions of this bill are intended to bring about an equitable enlistment of taxable property by the real owners. It would help one large class of people who have no credits from which they can deduct their indebtedness and which compels them to pay taxes on property for which they are indebted.
Mr. HENRY moved to amend the amendment by providing that no deduction shall be allowed unless the person listing shall have a deduction only for the creditors named, and the amount specified as due each.
It was agreed to, and the amendment as amended was also agreed to.
Mr. TRAYLOR was satisfied the bill should not tax pass as it stands. He moved to amend so nothing but bonafide indebtedness can be deducted. Where a man is surety he deducts all of the debt he is surety for, upon the supposition that his co-surety is not good. Even where there are three or five securities, the full amount is as often deducted, and they can not be prosecuted for so doing. As this bill is intended to apply to poor persons, his amendment should be adopted.
Mr. CHAPMAN thought all should labor to get in the bill as little obnoxious as possible, and then it ought to be defeated because its tendency will be to increase the burden on the landed interest of the country, which already bear an undue proportion of the taxes of the country. The bill would withdraw from taxation a great proportion of personal property, which, in the main, at this time. is more productive and better able to stand the burden of taxation. He moved that the bill be indefinitely postponed.
Mr. HART hoped that the motion would not prevail. The principle of the bill is to relieve the debtor class, and exempt them from paying tax upon property they do not own. A great many mortgages are held by Eastern capitalists, and if we can not exempt all the debtor class, we should go as far as we can in that direction.
Mr. HEFRON saw but little change in the law of since 1872, and that simply extends the reductions that may be made by a debtor. The trouble is where a man is in debt and nobody owes him he gets no benefits. This bill has another purpose-to prevent double taxation and secure a fair assessment in choses in action. The principle of the bill, as far as it goes. is certainly right. It proposes to secure the State against fraudulent listing of property. If we proceed upon the principle that the people can not be trusted under oath, the statutes had better be destroyed and legislation stopped.
Mr. BELL was of opinion the purposes of the bill are misapprehended, or it would not meet with the opposition shown. The bill certainly takes a long step in te right direction. If there be covering up of taxation, as no doubt there is, it is done principally by persons who loan money, and the provisions of the bill would unearth these gentlemen. He opposed the motion postpone, hoping the bill would be perfected and passed.
Mr. LANGDON proceeded to show where the provisions of the bill would work injustice, giving instances and illustrations.
Mr. WOODS did not desire to see the bill indefinitely postponed, but thought it ought to be recommitted. So much tax has to be raised to carry on the Government,and if tax is taken off personal property it must be assessed on realty.
Mr. CHAPMAN was willing to have the bill recommitted if the author so desired, but as he understood to the contrary, the test vote might just as well come now. The bill would be unjust upon the landed interest of the State should it become a law, for there would be comparatively little personal property listed for taxation; or at least it would cause the withdrawal of millions of personal property from taxation, and to that extent further burthen the rea estate of the estate of the State. To-day real easte in the County is about taxed to its full cash value, and is now yielding but a very small per cent. on the investment. It is out of personal property, largely, that our people are gaining, pecuniarily in these days. No tax law can be an framed which will not in some direction work unequally, and put on some classes of property more or less burden than it ought to bear. The law, which now allows a man to deduct his indebtedness from his credits, works better than the manner proposed in the bill. It will open a wider door for fraud than already exists, and surely throw upon real estate a larger proportion of taxes than it ought in justice to bear.
Mr. KRAMER opposed the pending motion to postpone. The bill proposes men shall not be taxed for that which they do not own, and it provides a remedy for the poorer classes-those who have no credits. If we can correct the great wrong perpetrated upon the people of the State, and the injustice of the present law, the sooner it is done the better.
Mr. COMSTOCK saw apparent in this bill a discrimination against real estate. The weight of taxation is most burdensome when imposed upon unproductive property. The bill makes no change in the law, except allows deductions to be made from personal property.
Mr. HENRY would like to see the bill recommitted. The evidence of indebtedness should be taxed, whether in the shape of a note or bond, or other lawful paper-which understood to be the most valuable kind of property at this time. Let real estate as well as personal property be taxed, minus the sum owed on it. He also favored taxing the indebtedness coming into this State from without.
Mr. VAN VORHIS did not see how the foreign class of indebtedness can be reached by taxation, as the evidences thereof are made payable outside eat of this State.
Mr. HART had no objections to this bill being we recommitted, if Senators think it can be made more perfect. The taxing of imaginary property, of course, is not just as is apparent to everybody.
Mr. CHAPMAN would withdraw his motion page: 119[View Page 119] for the purpose of recommittal. But the bill needs more than amendment. It needs reformation. It should address itself to other feature of the exiting law. Being always solicitous that the author shall have an opportunity to perfect his bill as near as possible, he withdrew his motion to indefinitely postpone, and in accord with the wish of the author, moved the reference of the bill to the Committee on Finance.
Messrs. COFFEY and MACARTNEY offered amendments, which they desired should go to the Committee with the bill. It was ordered. And then a recess till 2 o'clock.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
Mr. SAYRE, from the Committee on Elections, reported as to the contest for the seat in the Senate held by Charles L. Henry, that the return certificate of election shows Mr. Henry to be duly elected, and the Committee recommend the contest be dismissed for want of prosecution by the contestor.
THE WHISTLING NUISANCE.
Mr. FOSTER offered a preamble and resolution declaring that the railroad whistling act of March 29, 1879, was so carelessly engrossed and enrolled as to make it ridiculous, and that the author [ex-Senator Cadwallader] was in no way responsible for the stupid blunder.
Mr. HEFRON thought it possible in attempting to rectify one error in haste another might be made. The author of this resolution does not seem to know upon whom the blame should be saddled. He would like to be certain where the error occurred and who is responsible, before voting censure upon the Enrolling and Engrossing Clerks of the last Assembly.
Mr. GARRIGUS had received a letter from the Secretary of State soon after the adjournment of the last General Assembly, stating that the objectionable words were in the original draft of the bill, but a pencil mark has been drawn across the words, whether before or after engrossment is not known.
Mr. VIEHE favored the resolution, but desired and amendment that would exonerate the clerks.
Mr. FOSTER was satisfied Senator Cadwallader was in now way responsible for the error, but was willing the resolution should be so amended as to efface therefrom any imputation upon others.
On motion by Mr. LEEPER the resolution was referred to the Committee on Federal Relations.
INVESTIGATING COMMITTEES.
The House concurrent resolution for the appointment of an Investigating Committee into the management of the Insane Hospital, consisting of three Senators and five Representatives, coming up--
Mr. MENZIES desired a comparative statement of the two systems of management of this Institution, and proposed an amendment requiring the investigation to begin with the 1st of January, 1874.
Mr. LANGDON knew nothing of the foundation of these charges, but saw no necessity for an investigation prior to 1878. At the last session there was an investigation, full and exhaustive, reported by a stenographer, submitted to the General Assembly. Now, why expend more time and more money in going over an old track? A comparison will do no good were either managements good or bad, for it neither will detract from or add to the management for the past two years.
Mr. VAN VORHIS knew of some reasons why this investigation should be made outside of the charges by the public press: it being manifest upon the face of the reports for 1880, that some matters therein should be explained.
He called attention to the mortality rate for the year 1880. The rate for 1880 is nearly 50 per cent. higher than for any other year since 1859: or any year in the history of the Institution. Then the pr cent. of recovery is from 25 to 30 per cent. less than ever in the history of that Institution. It is due to the people that the reasons for this condition of affairs should be inquired into. As has been said, the management of this Hospital has been investigated time and again. He did not desire to avoid investigation at any date. The Senate ought to know the state of faces as they exist now. It makes little difference as to this question whther the reports are true or not, the investigation ought to be had.
Mr. WOOLLEN did not wish to discuss any question that may come up on the discussion of the report of this Investigation Committee. When the proper time comes he hoped to be heard on the present management. The State has never had a more accomplished Superintendent than the one now in charge. He objected to such investigations, except upon a sworn affidavit of some responsible party knowing of mismanagement. He referred to the fact that the members of the Committee, on the part of the House, are said to be in the resolution, while but four names are embraced in the message from the House.
Mr. CHAPMAN entered his emphatic dissent from the statement that the ratio of mortality depends upon the kind of patients the physician has, but rather upon the kind of physician attends the patients. What may form the basis of this investigation he knew not, but as the investigation is resolved upon by one House and likely to be by the other, he can not favor dating the investigation back as proposed.
The amendment would involve an expense that could result in no good to either side of the House or to either management.
Mr. LANGDON, since making the statement a few minutes ago that at the last session of the Legislature there was an investigatfon had, a report of which does not appear in the journals, he has had placed in his hands a copy of the Brevier Legislative Reports of the last General Assembly, in which may be found a majority and minority report from a Joint Committee which fully investigated the affairs of the Insane Asylum.
Mr. MENZIES questioned whether the whole thing should not be voted down, or whether if this thing is of sufficient importance to proceed with an investigation taken down by a short-hand reporter. The investigation should not go back so as to make comparison with the former system. If investigations investigate, let us go into this thing as a serious business. If the present or former management is bad, let the seal of condemnation be placed where it belongs.
The amendment was rejected by yeas, 18; nays, 20.
Mr. LANGDON demanded the previous question, and under its operation the concurrent resolution was adopted.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR makes the Committee on the part of the Senate to consist of Messrs. Shaffer, Bell and Sayre: The Committee on the part of the House being Representatives Berryman, Hinton, Wilson, of Morgan, McCormack and Hargrove.
The House concurrent resolution for a Joint Committee, to investigate and report what, if any, legislation is necessary concerning the inspection and sale of mineral oils, was read and adopted.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR appoints as in said Committee on the part of the Senate Messrs. White and Kramer: The Committee on the part of the House being Representatives Taylor, of LaGrange; Robinson, of Decatur; and Cummins.
The House concurrent resolution for a Joint Committee of Investigation into the management of the House of Refuge at Plainfield, was adopted.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR appointed Messrs. Macartney and Howard as such Commit- page: 120[View Page 120] tee on the part of the Senate: The House Committee being Representatives Wright, O'Brien and Cummins.
NEW PROPOSITIONS.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time and referred to appropriate Committees:
By Mr. COFFEY [S. 225]: To prohibit the sale, barter, loan or gift of certain fire arms to persons under the age of fifteen years. [Rifle, musket, pistol, shot-gun, or ball,powder, percussion caps or other articles manufactured for the use in such fire-arms.]
By Mr. Hostetter [S. 226]: To enable the owners of wet lands to drain and reclaim them, when the same can not be done without affecting the lands of others, prescribing the powers and duties of County Commissioners and other officers in the premises, and to provide for the repair and enlargement of such drains, and repealing certain acts therein specified and declaring a emergency.
By Mr. HOSTETTER [S. 227]: Prepared by the Adjutant General of the State, supplemental to the act for the organization and regulation of the Indiana Militia, approved May 11, 1861, providing an exemption from jury duty and poll-tax for members of the active Militia, and for Armories, and for the control and use of such Armories, defining offenses for molesting such Armories, and officers and soldiers while on duty, fixing penalties for such offenses; providing right of way for the State Militia when on duty and parade, prescribing the powers of officers thereof to make arrests, fixing the compensation of the State Militia when called out for duty, the manner of payment and the term of enlistment and discharge of the Militia.
By Mr. KAHLO, by request, [S 228]: To provide a general system for improvement the streets, alleys and sidewalks of the cities of this State, providing the mode of paying for such improvements and for other purposes.
By Mr. KRAMER [S. 229]: To legalize sales made to enforce collections of municipal taxes for the years 1875 to 1881 inclusive. [Inasmuch as there is no express provision in the act approved December 21,1872, that makes the same applicable to incorporate cities and towns, this remedial measure is proposed.]
Mr. MACARTNEY [S. 230]: To legalize the incorporation of the town of Angola and each and every official act of each and every officer thereof.
By Mr. RAHM [S. 231]: To provide payment for expert testimony in the Courts of this State. [Physicians can not be compelled to testify till paid blank dollars.]
By Mr RISTINE[S. 232]: Defining the jurisdiction and powers of, and allowing City Marshals additional fees. [Shall have powers and fees of Constables.]
By Mr. SAYRE, by request [S. 233]: To repeal Section 6 of the act to regulate and license the sale of intoxicating liquors, approved March 7, 1875.
By Mr. VAN VORHIS, by request [S. 234]: To amend the act dividing the State into Judicial Circuits, approved March 6, 1863. [Concerning Monroe, Brown, Lawrence, Martin and Orange Counties.]
By Mr. YANCEY [S. 235]: To Amend Section 119 of the Justices' act, approved June 9, ,1852. [Requiring notice to judgement defendant before issuances of execution.]
By Mr. CHAPMAN [S. 236]: To prevent trespassers on inclosed or uninclosed land of another.
By Mr. COMPTON [S. 237]: To legalize acknowledgment and recording of certain instruments. [By Notaries whose commission had expired or were ineligible, but exercised the functions thereof in good faith.]
Mr. FOSTER made an ineffectual motion to have his bill [S. 7], to establish school libraries in towns of 15,000 inhabitants and over, pressed to, the final vote on its passage.
PASSED TO THE FINAL READING.
The following described bills, heretofore reported from the Joint Committee on Revision were read the second time, and ordered engrossed for the third reading: [S. 152] Concerning contempt of Courts; [S. 153] to amend Section 1 of the act supplemental to the voluntary assignment act of February 1, 1875; [S. 154] concerning Pro Tem Judges; [S. 155] concerning Circuit Courts; [S. 156] concerning the partition of land; [S. 157 and 168] touching the relation of guardian and ward; [S. 169] concerning persons of unsound mind.
Mr. URMSTON entered a motion to reconsider a vote of yesterday ordering engrossed the bill [S. 58] concerning interest on school funds, in order to correct a clerical error.
Mr. Ristine entered a motion to reconsider the vote on an amendment [Mr. Marvin's] to the gravel road bill S. 54.
The Senate adjourned till 10 to-morrow.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
THURSDAY, February 3, 1881--9 a.m.After prayers, the reading of the Clerk's journal was dispensed with.
Mr. GREGORY offered a resolution that the Clerks employed heretofore by the Chief Clerk be retained to the end of the session.
Mr. KENNER hoped the House would not interfere with the business of the Chief Clerk. If he does not employ the proper Clerks, that is his responsibility, and we ought not to interfere with his business any more than that of the Speaker.
The resolution was laid on the table.
INSANE ASYLUM INVESTIGATION.
Mr. BERRYMAN offered a resolution that a Committee of five--three from the Senate--be appointed to investigate charges made against the Hospital for the Insane, with power to send for perosns and papers and inquire into the financial expenditures and condition of matters pertaining to the management thereof.
Mr. SUMNER offered the following substitute: That it is the opinion of this House that no further Investigation Committees be appointed by this House without there first having been some definite and specific charges made by responsible persons in writing, and by them signed.
The substitute was laid on the table.
Mr. NEFF moved to am3end by providing that the investigation shall commence with the year 1875.
The amendment was laid on the table--yeas, 54; nays 36. The original resolution was the adopted.
Mr. MILES made a motion that when bills are printed, the Clerk distribute them among the members.
Mr. MEREDITH moved an amendment that the printed bill a be distributed equally among the members.
The Amendment was agreed to, and the motion as amended was also agreed to.
FREE COUNTY ROADS.
Mr. FLOYD submitted a majority report from the Committee on Roads the bill [H. R. 77] to provided for the purchase of toll roads, recommending the passage of the bill with certain amendments.
A minority reprot was submitted from the same Committee, recommending the indefinite postponement of the bill.
Mr. COOPER gave it as his opinion that it was dangerous to place into the hands of the County Commissioners a power which they may exercise to the detriment of the people, whether they exercise it or not. We can not tell what they will do. Shelby County alone has over thirty gravel roads, page: 121[View Page 121] which would cost, without any jobs being put up, $200,000 to $300,000. If Counties have any money to invest, let them invest in development of streams, the construction of free roads and building bridges, and not to the improvement of roads that already exist. This bill imposes burdens upon the people that they are not at this time ready to submit to. We are approaching a period when everything shines brightly upon us, and let us not undertake to burden the people unnecessarily withe taxation. He hoped the minority report would prevail.
The minority report was rejected, and the majority report was concurred in.
Mr. WRIGHT made a motion, which was agreed to, that 300 copies of this bill [H. R. 77] be printed for distribution in this House.
Mr. CARTER submitted an amendment to Section 1, so as to insert a proviso "that the County Commissioners shall not purchase any gravel roads, except upon a petition of the majority of the legal voters in the County."
Mr. FALL was of the opinion that every member in the House wants a bill of a similar nature, and was satisfied a resolution report, or amendment, looking toward the killing, or intent to impair, in any way, the features of this bill would not meet with the wishes of our constituents at home.
Mr. FLOYD said he had no objections to an amendment that would improve the bill, but wanted it published and examined fully in all its details. The amendment would have effect to kill the bill; that would be the legitimate result: hence he considered the amendment simply an interception of the proposition before the house. If, after it is printed, anyone wishes I to make amendments, then would be the time, but he wanted the bill to have a chance to live.
The amendment (Mr. Carter's) was adopted. and the bil ordered engrossed for the third reading.
Mr. FLOYD, from the Committee on Roads, submitted a report on the bill [H. R. 88] authorizing the sales of plank, macadamized and other roads under execution, and empowering purchasers to reorganize, etc., recommending its passage, with amendments.
The report was returned to the Committee for signatures.
VIGO COUNTY COURTS.
The Committee on Organization of Courts, to which was referred the bill [H. R. 17] in relation to the establishment of a Superior Court in Vigo County, reported the same back with a recommendation that the bill pass.
A minority report was also submitted recommending that the bill do lie upon the table.
Mr. MORGAN said, as a Representative from Vigo County, he wanted to see the minority report voted down and the majority report concurred in. Ten years ago, there was a bill passed the Legislature providing for a Criminal Court to be established in Vigo County. At that time the population of Terre Haute was about 17,000 and the County, perhaps, 35,000. Since then the population of Terre Hute has increased about 10,000, having now nearly 27,000 inhabitants. There has been a difference of opinion among the people as to whether Vigo County needs another County Court of civil jurisdiction, We all agree upon one point, that is, that the Circuit there is very much behind in its business, and it, perhaps, will never catch up until the County is given another Court of jurisdiction. Men of all parties and members of the Bar insist emphatically on the passage of a bill to establish a Superior Court in that County, and abolish the Criminal Court. In accordance with that wish this bill was drafted and submitted to various lawyers of all political parties, and was brought here thinking it was merely carrying out the wish of the people of that County.
By Mr GIBSON--There is a bill on the calendar to extend to the Criminal Court now in existence, civil jurisdiction concurrent with the Vigo Circuit Court. This bill [H. R. 17] is a bill to abolish the Criminal Court and create a Superior Court. It is my desire in considering these two bills to get at the merits of the provisions. It appears to me that the bill [H. R. 80] extending to the Criminal Court of Vigo County civil jurisdiction, had all the evidences of economy in it, and I verily believe that if every Member of this House could understand these two bill, that the report of the minori ty in this case would prevail. For instance, $800 salary is paid by the State of Indiana to the Judge of the Superior Court. We are here, or ought to be, as watch-dogs of the Treasury. Now, the salary of the Judge and Prosecuting Attorney of the Criminal Court is paid by the County of Vigo. The State of Indiana does not pay $1 for running that Court. If you abolish the Criminal Court and create a Superior Court, the State of Indiana has to pay $800 for the salary of the Judge. I hope the report of the minority will prevail.
By Mr. KENNER: To hitch civil jurisdiction on the Criminal Court, never ought to be done, but we propose by special action to give them civil jurisdiction. By this bill a Circuit Court is created with entire civil jurisdiction, having no criminal jurisdiction whatever, and the criminal jurisdiction is to be transferred to where it belongs and where the statute places it-in the hands of the Circuit Court. He favored the majority report.
Mr. SINCLAIR, being one of the members of that Committee, said: We acted with a view of carrying out a policy, one that I think should be carried out, and that is, not to pass any laws or repeal any, without strong reasons. At the time we acted we had just two bills before us. One was to prevent, as my colleague says, the extension of the jurisdiction, and the other was for the purpose of establishing a new office or new Court and abolishing the other one. At the time we acted, we had before us a petition from some of the best lawyers in the County of Vigo, asking to extend the Criminal Court jurisdiction. Among the number was our present United States Senator. The names of Mr. Voorhees, Mr. Carleton and some sixteen Republicans were on that petition. After that, inasmuch as the people of Vigo County, two years ago, by their choice elected two men to fill the offices of that Court, respect ought to be given to the voice of the people.
The gentleman from Vigo, who advocates the abolition of the Criminal Court and the establishment of a Superior Court, was elected to the place he holds here by that same people. Now, what I want to know is, do the majority of the people of Vigo County demand this? For my part, I do not favor the abolishment of a Court without strong reasons, Where there is an opportunity given to the citizens of the County to be relieved in any be other way, I think it is not the policy of the law to legislate men out of office and legislate others in. My friend across the way always mixes up politics, and sometimes talks about the Democratic party being legislated into Heaven; but that is no reason why Democratic officers of Vigo County should be legislated out of office and Republicans legislated in. I do not think that is our purpose here, and these are the reasons which actuated the minority of that Committee.
Mr. MORGAN--These fact are well known: That the salary of the Judge will be $800, and that amount will be paid out of the State Treasury; but you must bear in mind also that the Prosecutor whom we abolish will not receive his salary, and there is $500 in our favor, so that will only be $300 out of the State Treasury. I want to know gentlemen, if the citizens of Vigo County need this Court In the interest of justice, I want to know if it is economy to prevent the people of that County from hav- page: 122[View Page 122] ing judgment speedily and without delay on account of $300, when other Counties in this State have Superior Courts? I have not made this a party question, but ask every one here to put aside politics and vote for the majority report.
The yeas and nays were demanded by Messrs. Cauthorne and Cole, and the vote on the adoption of the minority report was--yeas, 33; nays, 54. So the minority report was rejected.
The majority report was concurred in, and the bill was ordered engrossed.
Mr. LINDLEY submitted a report from the majority of the Committee on the Organization of Courts on the bill [H. R. 80] in relation to civil jurisdiction of the Criminal Court of Vigo County, and recommended that it do lie on the table.
Mr. GIBSON submitted a report from the minority of the same Committee, recommending the passage of the bill.
The minority report was laid on the tably by--yeas, 55; nays, 30.
The majority report was concurred in.
Mr. GIBSON, from the Committee on Organization of Courts, submitted a report on the bill [H. R. 107] establishing a Superior Court in the County of Vanderburgh, with a recommendation that the bill pass.
The report was concurred in, the bill read the second time and ordered engrossed.
The bill [H. R. 66] to legalize the incorporation, etc., and ordinance for issuing bonds of the town of Chauncey, was read the third time, and passed by yeas, 83; nays, 2.
The bill [H. R. 199] to amend an act prescribing who may make a will, the effect thereof, what may be devised, regulating the admission to probate, revocation and contest, etc., was read the second time.
Mr. SINCLAIR--Inasmuch as the House took a recess of ten minutes to shake hands with Senator Voorhees a short time ago, I move that we take a recess of ten minutes now to shake hands with Ben Harrison, United States Senator-elect.
The motion was agreed to.
When the SPEAKER had commanded order--
Mr. McDowell filed a motion to reconsider the vote of yesterday on the resolution to appoint a Committee to investigate the propriety and expediency of establishing a new State Educational Institution.
The bill [H. R. 141] regulating the sale of brass, iron or other worn or scrap metal by railroad officials was read the second time.
Mr. KENNER said this was to remedy a wrong so prevalent at our large railroad shops. After night there are poor children running loose, picking up iron scraps, which they sell to junk dealers. You can not arrest these little children and confine them in Jail. This provision strike directly at the dealers to whom these commodities are sold. Prohibiting the sale of those articles puts an end to the stealing.
The House adjourned till to-morrow morning at 9 a.m.
