CRUELTY TO BEASTS.
The bill [H. R. 32] defining cruelty to animals and to prevent the same, was read the second time, with amendments proposed by the Committee.
Mr. GRUBBS moved to refer this bill to the Judiciary Committee.
Mr. FOSTER believed this one of the most humane and one of the best bills that has been before this Legislature. One need not go a block in this city to see animals mistreated.
Mr. CHAPMAN saw no necessity for recommitting this bill. It is not a novel measure, though novel to the Indiana Legislature. The bill was carefully drawn by a lawyer; was considered by a Committee of the other branch of the General Assembly. Its only intention is to prevent cruelty to animals.
Mr. GRUBBS withdrew his motion, having no desire to antagonize the bill; on the contrary, he favored it.
Mr. MARVIN opposed the reference to the Committee named, which is composed of lawyers. He objected to making that Committee the graveyard for this bill.
Mr. HEFRON thought this bill ought to have further Committee consideration. There is am existing law which he conceived to be sufficient.
Mr. LOUGHRIDGE renewed the motion to refer not because he was opposed to the bill. He was page: 265[View Page 265] heartly in favor of it, but desired an amendment to protect stock in transit.
Mr. COMSTOCK said the bill was considered by the House Judiciary Committee. The Committee on Benevolent Institutions of the Senate have also carefully considered it. Therefore he hoped the motion would not prevail.
The motion was rejected.
On motion by Mr. VAN VORHIS, the constitutional restriction was set aside after two votes by yeas and nays--the first 33 to 9, the last 36 to 9--and the bill was read the third time.
Mr. KRAMER would favor the bill did he not think it would be productive of many malicious prosecutions.
The bill passed by yeas, 32; nays, 13.
