IN SENATE
THURSDAY, February 17, 1881--10 a. m.The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR called the Senate to order pursuant to adjournment under the rules.
LOCAL OPTION LIQUOR LICENSE.
On motion by Mr. SHAFFER, his bill [S. 30] to regulate the license and sale of intoxicating liquors (similar to the once celebrated "Baxter bill") was made the special order for the consideration of the Senate next Thursday at 10 o'clock a. m.
ILLUMINATING OIL INSPECTION.
On motion by Mr. WHITE, his bill [S. 25] to remodel the law of 1879 for the inspection of mineral or petroleum oil for illuminating purposes, was made the special order for Tuesday at l0 o'clock a. m.
THE CIVIL CODE.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR announced the consideration of the business pending at the adjournment last evening, being the consideration of the Committee on Revisions bill [S. 271] concerning procedure in civil cases: The following sections of the act of June 18, 1852, commonly called the "Civil Code," are, by this bill, proposed to be amended, viz.: 1, 782, 784, 8, 224, 36, 37, 38, 392, 53, 54, 64, 67, 75, 156, 186, 208, 231, 253, 284, 320, 323, 325, 328, 341, 346, 354, 397, 408, 434, 454, 455, 466, 518, 523, 555, 559, 566, 569, 598, 601, 602, 612, 617, 625, 633, 719, 798. The following sections are, by this bill, proposed to be repealed, viz,: 9, 228, 77, 239, 300, 301, 302, 294, 359, 554, 645, 646, 794, 796, 802. The following sections of the bill are proposed as new matter, viz.: 117, 118, 279, 455, 456, 626, 721, 857, 858, 859, 860, 861.
WOMAN SUFFRAGE.
Mr. SPANN moved to postpone the consideration of the Civil Code bill and take up the special order set for this hour, being the bill [S. 186] to extend the elective franchise in the election for choice of Electors for President and Vice President of the United States to every female having the same qualification that would entitle her to vote as if she were a male.
The motion was agreed to by yeas, 30; nays, 18.
On motion by Mr. WILSON, the Senate took a recess for one hour, in order to give ladies representing the Woman's Suffrage Association of Indiana an opportunity to address Senators.
Mrs. Dr. Haggart was first introduced, and her remarks were of similar purport to those delivered by her in the House yesterday. In the course of her dissertation upon the rights of women she took occasion to say that there were more women employed in the manufactory of cotton goods and clothing, and in teaching; that there were more boys than girls in the Reformatories, more men than women in the Penitentiaries, and more men than women addicted to chewing tobacco and drinking whisky.
Mrs. Haggart was followed by Mrs. Helen M. Gougar, and Mrs. Mary Thomas, the latter urging that in view of the fact of the women having their petitions for the ballot before the Legislatures of eleven States this winter, the Indiana General Assembly had a great and glorious opportunity to be the first in the field for the recognition of the rights of women.
A PROTEST.
Mr. BELL submitted the following:
The special order of business on Wednesday, February 16, 1881, being Senate Bill No. 271 being the Civil Code, and the same not being concluded, but being under consideration at adjournment on said day, and after the meeting of the Senate on Thursday morning, February 17, 1881, and the reading of the journal, it was moved and seconded that the order of business be suspended and Senate Bill No. 186 be taken up and at once considered. A majority of the Senate only, and not two-thirds of the Senators present voting in favor of said motion as required by Rule 54, the President declared said motion carried and the order of business suspended over the objection of Senators made. The undersigned do hereby protest against said ruling and action, and ask that this, their protest, be spread upon the journals of the Senate.
G. V. MENZIES,
Senator from Gibson
and Posey.
R. C. BELL,
Senator from Allen
and Whitley.
GEORGE H. CHAPMAN,
Senator
from Marion.
Mr. BELL stated that this protest was filed in order to prevent the decision of the Chair being regarded as a precedent for future action.
page: 195[View Page 195]The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR sustainted his decision by the simple statement that the motion made by the Senator from Rush (Mr. Spann) was to postpone the consideration of one subject and take up another, and was not a motion to suspend the order of business, which latter motion, under Rule 54 of the Senate, requires a two-thirds vote of the Senators present.
WOMEN'S SUFFRAGE
Mr. COMSTOCK moved to postpone the further consideration of the women's suffrage bill [S. 186], and proceed with the consideration of the civil code bill [S. 271].
Mr. OWENS hoped this motion would not prevail as several Committees have postponed a contemplated visit to State Institutions in order to be present to-day when a vote was expected on the woman's suffrage bill.
Mr. CHAPMAN, not particularly desiring to postpone the vote, would prefer the consideration of this bill should be set aside for a time, as he desired to heard on the question, and was not fully prepared to speak, though would do so to-day if the bill was pressed. There seems to be a wonderful degree of zeal on the part of some gallant Senators to push this bill forward just at this time. It involves a grave constitutional question which, it is altogether probable, some of them have not looked into, and if there be a conscientious question in it, it would be well for them to consider it. This question, if meritorious, will not suffer by delay.
The motion to postpone was agreed to by yeas, 28; nays, 21--as follows:
Yeas--Messr. Benz, Bell, Bischowsky, Briscoe, Chapman, Coffey, Compton, Comstock, Davidson, Davis, Garrigus, Hart, Heffron, Henry, Howard, Kramer, Langdon, Leeper, Lockridge, McCartney, Majors, Menzies, Ristine, Shaffer, Urmston, Viehe, Woods and Woollen--28.
Nays--Messrs. Bundy, Foster, Graham, Grubbs, Hostetter, Hutchinson, Kahlo, Keiser, Marvin, Owne, Poindexter, Rahm, Sayre, Smith, Spann, Traylor, Van Vorhis, Voyles, White, Wilson and Yancey--21.
So the motion to postpone was agreed to.
Subsequently, on motion by Mr. Spann, the woman's suffrage bill [S. 186] was made a special order for Friday week at 10 o'clock a. m.
THE CIVIL CODE.
The Senate resumed the consideration of the bill [S. 171], concerning procedure in civil cases, the Clerk reading as on yesterday only such sections are proposedto be amended by the Committee on Revision in its report.
Mr. URMSTON moved to amend Section 328 relating to a jury view, by striking out the words "with the consentof all parties." He cited instances in which these words would be productive of mischief.
Mr. VIEHE favored the amendment.
Mr. HENRY opposed the amendment, thinking the section, as in the bill, proposes a proper and just amendment to the present law.
Mr. TRAYLOR referred to cases where the amendment would work hardship. He hoped it would not be adopted.
Mr. URMSTON considered the Senator last upon the floor did not have justice given to the case he described. The party that has committed the trespass will always object, and it is better to leave it with the Court to decide, as has been the custom for many years. Observation will teach more in five minutes than three hours of testimony.
The amendment was agreed to--yeas, 30; nays, 10.
GREEN HILL SEMINARY.
On motion by Mr. OWEN, he obtained leave to return the bill (H. R. 295] to legalize the incorporation of Green Hill Seminary, in Warren County, from the Committee on Corporations.
Mr. OWEN explained it only legalizes the incorporation of this Institution, which is imperfect on account of a failure to strictly comply with the provisions of existing laws.
On his further motion the bill was read the second time by title only; the third time by sections, and under a dispensation of the constitutional restriction--yeas, 45; nays, 0--finally passed the Senate by yeas, 45; nays, 0.
Then came a recess till 2 o'clock.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
THE CVIL CODE.
When Section 1 of the acts of 1853, p. 92, was read, authorizing the appointment of Master Commissioners in each County--
Mr. URMSTON entered his protest against the adoption of this section. The work we are now engaged in is one proposed to take the place of the old practice act, so that we may have in force a practice act codified and revised in such a form that the people may know exactly what the statute is. This practice act should cover every emergency made necessary by the statutes. This bill leaves out many features that should be embraced.
Mr. COMSTOCK assured the Senator the law of 1853 was in this bill, and this section is one proposed to be amended by the Revision Committee.
Mr. URMSTON insisted the proper officer to apply for restraining orders and injunctions was the Judge and not the Master Commissionres. Cases where such writs are desired where the Judge is absent or unable to attend to business are rare, and there would be less expense attending an application to the Judge of an adjoining County than to appoint a member of the Bar in every County seat, clothed with such power. Competent attorneys will not accept the appointment under the surrounding circumstances.
On motion by Mr. SPANN the section was amended so as to require that the Master Commissioner shall be a resident of the County seat.
Mr. GARRIGUS moved to further amend by leaving it discretionary with the Judge, whether to appoint or not.
Mr. VIEHE preferred it should remain mandatory as in the section.
The amendment was rejected.
Mr. VIEHE moved to insert at the beginning of Section 8 the words "when the office of Judge shall be vacant or absent, the Master Commissioner shall possess power to grant restraining orders, etc."
Mr. WILSON moved to strike out Section 8, believing that there is too much of the spirit of jealousy among members of the Bar to place such power in the hands of any one of them.
Mr. VIEHE insisted upon the importance of this provision--it only grants temporary power.
Mr. URMSTON was sure this section does not meet with the consideration it deserves. He referred to a difficulty which would arise in a County where there are Judges of Superior Courts.
Mr. VIEHE replied the whole controversy would end in a few days, on the arrival of the Judge. Or the Judge has it in his power to dissolve injunctions.
The motion to strike out was rejected.
The amendment [Mr. Viehe's] was adopted.
Sections 538, in relation to validity of executors' or guardians' sales, being read--
Mr. BUNDY moved to amend by adding to the second subdivision these words: "Or has accounted for the proceeds of such sale." Whether he gave bond or not the sale ought not to be invalid, he said.
Mr. LANGDON opposed the amndment.
Mr. VIEHE could see no harm to arise from it, if he understood the amendment.
Mr. MENZIES reminded the Senators that the Supreme Court has decided as the amendment proposes, so why cumber the statute with it?
page: 196[View Page 196]The amendment was agreed to.
When Section 565, relating to orders for supercedeas was being read--
Mr. HENRY preferred the section as in the present law and moved to substitute the words, "a certified copy," for the words, "a certificate."
Mr. WILSON reminded the Senators that the present law simply lncreases the expense that would be obviated by the amendment proposed by the Revision Committee.
When Section 1, acts of 1879, relating to instructions of the Court and Jury trials, was read--
Mr. VOYLES moved to sitrke out the proviso allowing the Court to give other instructions at the close of the argument. The section seems to be sufficient without the proviso. It goes far enough after giving opportunity to attorneys the right to present their case. To let the Court give other instructions would defeat the instructions upon which the argument was based. The law should be left as it was submitted to the attorneys.
Mr. CHAPMAN was in accord with the amendment. But there is a limit to endurance, and inasmauch as some members of this body have to give their time to night work on Committees--it was nearly 12 o'clock last night when the Judiciary Committee adjourned--and inasmuch as the Senate is not in a fit condition to consider these matters as they should be considered, he moved that the Senate do now adjourn.
The motion was agreed to.
And so the Senate adjourned.
