AFTERNOON SESSION
Mr. VAN VORHIS and Mr. COMSTOCK opposed the passage of the bill and favored concurrence in the report of the Committee.
Mr. CHAPMAN could see no objection to the bill that goes to its merits.
Mr. SPANN understood both gentlemen speaking against this bill are members of the Committee submitting the unfavorable report, and are conscious that the general features of the bill are correct on principles of justice and right.
Mr. COMSTOCK said when an attorney fails in a suit he has two remedies--he can go down to the tavern and curse the Court or take an appeal. This bill is bad in its provisions, though the framer of the bill no doubt had a good object in view. Reduced to a simple proposition, the only question contained in the third section of this bill is whether there shall be an absolute divorcement between the parent and child because of abandonment for one year. That is what he objected to. In many instances it would be an absolute outrage to carry out the provisions of this bill, which contains elements of outrage not embraced in any bill yet presented to this body.
Mr. BROWN believed this bill ought not to pass. He opposed any species of legislation that looks after the natural and domestic rights of people. He thought it dangerous by legislation to prohibit either parent from association with their offspring.
Mr. GRAHAM believed the Members of the House had not given the bill proper consideration. It provides for the care of children abandoned, which implies actual suffering for want of care. The bill does not go as far as the law on the subject of divorce does in reference to the custody of children under wich the Court can actually forbid visits from the parent to the child.
Mr. VAN VORHIS thought it unnecessary to discuss the question as to whether these children should be provided for; but the question is simply will the bill accomplish the purpose for which it is intended?
Mr. CHAPMAN insisted there would be no difficulty in eliminating any injudicious provisions in the bill. He moved to amend the report of the Committee by subsistuting a recommendation that the bill do pass.
The motion was rejected--yeas, 12; nays, 25--and then the report of the Committee was concurred in.
STATE PRISON MANAGEMENT.
The LIEUTENENT GOVERNOR announced the special order, being Mr. Chapman's bill [S. 4] for the government of the State Prisons.
On motion by Mr. COFFEY--yeas, 19; nays, 17--the enacting clause was stricken out.
Mr. MENZIES moved to reconsider the vote just taken and to lay this motion on the table.
The latter motion was agreed to by yeas, 20; nays, 18.
CORNER STONE OF THE NEW CAPITOL.
Mr. Spann's concurrent resolution for a memorial in the new Capitol building to the memory of the services of the soldiers of the State, in the late war, coming up with a Committee report, substituting new matter therefor--
Mr. SPANN offered the following as a substitute for the resolution reported by the Committee:
Resolved, By the Senate, the House concurring therein, that justice to the memory of those who gave their services and lives, and a fair and
page: 184[View Page 184]just recognition of the services of the soldiers of this State demands that in some way a memento be placed in said building. Therefore the State House Commissioners are hereby instructed to remove the present corner-stone of the new State House, and after depositing therein some suitable record or memorial, to commemmorate the part taken by the State of Indiana in the late War and the Mexican War, and a suitable record of the various regiments which went from this State in aid and defense of their country in said wars, then to re-lay the same with such appropriate ceremonies as would be fitting to the memory of these brave men.
On Motion by Mr. GRUBBS, the further consideration of this subject was postponed and made a special order for Wednesday week at 2 o'clock p. m.
BILLS READ THE SECOND TIME
Mr. Foster's bill [S. 139] to allow Supervisors $1.00 a day, was read the second time and ordered engrossed.
Mr. Wilson's bill [S. 185] unless Prosecuting or District Attorneys be informed, no proceedings before Justices shall be valid, was read the second time with a Committee report recommending that the bill be indefinitely postponed.
Mr. WILSON did not draft the bill, but introduced it at the instance of some attorneys in his District, its object being to require notice to be given the District or Prosecuting Attorney that such a suit has been instituted. He was not prepared to say he favored its entire provision, but would prefer to see it lie on the table, and moved to so amend the Committee report.
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. Van Vorhis' bill [S. 18] supplemental to the general city incorporation law, being read the second time---
Mr. VAN VORHIS explained this bill so arranges that as soon as the number of votes in any Ward becomes 800, the Ward must be divided, the terms of Councilmen are extended two years, the election to be held in the off year between the general elections. It applies to no other city in the State except Indianapolis, by reason of the limit fixed as regards population.
The bill was ordered engrossed.
Mr. Yancy's bill [S. 74] to regulate the practice of medicine--the Governor to appoint a Board of Examiners from each School of Medicine in nine Districts--was read the second time.
Mr. YANCY moved the consideration of this bill be made the special order for Monday at 2 o'clock.
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. Coffey's bill [S. 206] to amend Section 22 of the divorce law (see page 106 of these reports) was read the second time.
Mr. COFFEY did not know whether it is worth while to attack the deliberations of the Judiciary Committee, nor did he feel disposed so to do. One objection urged against the bill in Committee was it gave the Court discretionary power to devote proceeds of the judgment from the natural channel under the law of descent. If that objection be tenable, the bill might have been so amended that the Court could have no discretion in this matter. Injuries have resulted from the operation of the law as it now stands. The object of alimony is to give the divorced wife a means of support. He feared the Committee had not given the bill the attention its importance demands. He moved it e referred to the Committee on Organization of Courts.
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. Compton's bill [S. 5] to amend Section 17 and 18 of the mining act--concerning the inspection of mines--was read the second time and ordered engrossed.
And then the Senate adjourned.
