AFTERNOON SESSION.
Mr. SPANN thought unjust charges were made against the Committee--not directly, but indirectly in the petition of the Superintendent of these Institutions, which were untrue and unjust. That gentleman went with the Committee through every one of the rooms; and the books were gone through in his presence by experts. He had full and ample opportunity to state all he might have desired to. The bookkeeper even not understand the accounts and could not explain them. Under the law, the Trustees do not visit the Institution but once in a month. The Superintendent allowed purchases made by a number of parties who had no authority to expend the State's money: and for that reason, if no no other, it is high time that Institution was placed in other hands. The Superintendent's prejudice against the soldiers orphans' branch of of the Institution incapacitates him from being the Superintendent of the other branch. Mr. S. opposed the motion to refer this matter to another Committee, and favored concurrence in the report of the Joint Investigating Committee.
The bills of fare showed that the 165 healthy children every night were called to a long table in a dark room and given only oat meal, molasses and tea in battered tin cups for 365 days in the year. The officers eat off of dishes as fine as can be found in this city, probably, filled with nice food, in a room finely carpeted and lighted. There was not a single clean bed in all the rooms where the orphan children slept, and the straw was changed not oftener than once in three months, as the testimony showed. Money was taken out of the Orphan Asylum fund to buy comforts for the feeble-minded children, and luxuries for the officers. One-third of the building only is set apart for 165 orphan children of the dead soldiers of Indiana, while two-thirds of the building is given up to sixty-three feeble-minded children. This can not be made a question of politics. Any man that will allow an Institution to be run as page: 57[View Page 57] that has been run, ought to be unceremoniously removed and kicked out of good society.
Mr. URMSTON favored the motion to refer. The report of the Committee came down to one proposition, viz: Nobody is to be condemned but the Superintendent. One thing is certain, this Committee has been looking after affairs out there, and have condemned a party without giving him an opportunity of bringing forward witnesses to controvert what it has heard. The law provides that the Trustees shall control and direct matters out there, and how can any Senator say the Superintendent is to blame for all the matters condemned in this report.
Mr. BROWN--If the debate had not departed from the members of the Committee would have remained silent. The two Senators speaking against the report seem to have taken the course usually pursued by criminal lawyers who have a bad case; they seem to charge the Committee with adjudging against the Superintendent without allowing that officer to bring witness in his behalf. The duty of the Committee by the terms of the resolution was to report the truth derived from such information as they might employ. No one denies that but there has been gross mis-management of the Institution, but the desire is to remove or shift the responsibility. In his judgment, the report of the Committee should be sustained unless better reasons are given than have been yet shown. It is begging the question to say the Superintendent had not the power to furnish these children with clean instead of filthy beds, and with tea instead of battered tin cups; and for the dereliction he deserves condemenation.
Mr. WOOLLEN felt it a duty to state reasons why he supports the motion to refer. It has been a rule of his life to censure no man and to smirch no man's character until he shall have a chance to prove his innocence. He was astonished to see members of the Bar advocating a course that may destroy the character of a citizen of Indiana without giving him a chance for defense. If such a course were pursued by those not acquainted with the laws of the Courts, it would not be a matter of so much astonishment, but to see lawyers favor such a thing was truly astounding. He would cast no reflections upon any member of the Committee, but they should have gone to Mr. Ibach and told him they saw delinquencies and asked him to bring evidence to explain his conduct before presenting their report to the General Assembly. Now, justice requires that this report shall be recommitted, with instructions to inquire further into the matter. Mr. W. cared nothing about the political aspect of this case. His course has shown that the question of politics has not influenced his votes. Let justice be done to every one. As one of the representatives of the people he never will cast a vote of censure on any man until he has been heard in his own defense.
Mr. BELL declared that his motion casts no reflection on the Committee, nor does it contemplate all that Mr. Ibach prays for in the petition. The report establishes the fact that abuses do exist in this Institution, and all he desired to know was where to fix the responsibility. The report strikes a blow at a subordinate officer, who asserts he is not responsible, and that is not fair. This officer states that he had no opportunity to show that fact to this Committee, and that it is within his power to show the responsibility rests with his superiors. Mr. B., continuing, said:
I make the charge as a Senator on this floor, based on the speeches of the Senator from Rush (Mr. Spann) and the Senator from Henry (Mr. Bundy) and the Senator from Washington (Mr. Voyles), and you can't afford not to investigate it--that if these gross abuses exist, they exist with the knowledge and by the consent of the Board of Trustees, who could have removed that Superintendent at any moment. I make this charge--now let us have a full investigation. How does it happen that there is no censure attached to the Board of Trustees? If one-half the charges made by the Senator from Rush as to the management of that Institution are true, every single one of these persons ought to be kicked out.
I am not saying that this report is unfair except in this: That these other persons ought to be held responsible, as well as the Superintendent. Don't censure the creature and let the creator go. If this report goes out to the world it will look very much like this Committee had been hoodwinked, or that the Trustees, to shield themselves, have made a scapegoat of the Superintendent, or, by some strange fatality, this thing has been brought about. Or is there something behind all this? Will you declare that these Trustees are not to blame, condemn the Superintendent, and then let Governor Porter remove them, because they kept a Superintendent there who, as shown by the records of the Senate, failed to do his duty? I do not believe it; but it is open to all these charges. I think, Senators, that you can not afford to go on record in that sort of shape.
In order to shield these Trustees, I ask Senators on this floor if they will condemn Mr. Ibath by concurring in this report before giving him a hearing, when he is here upon the floor of the Senate with a written statement, saying that it is not true? Let us give these Trustees an opportunity to show what the real facts are, that is not much to ask, and it will not take long. I have a right to ask it, and to insist upon it for myself as a Senator, aside from Mr. Ibach's petition praying for this simple act of justice. We have charges made in a substantial form. The Committee do not tell us who is responsible. The Superintendent says: "If you will give me an opportuity, I will show it was not I." I think this examination was directed by persons outside (unconsciously to the Committee) who had sinister purposes to subserve, and I think it my duty to insist that Mr. Ibach shall have an opportuntity to be heard before his character is smirched in a place which he can not reach.
The Courts can not reach our acts, because they are privileged; and that one fact, if no other, ought to increase our care and caution before we do anything that may injure the character of the humblest citizen, as because of the position we occupy we can escape a punishment that would be just.
The motion to refer was rejected by yeas, 12; nays, 20--two present and not voting because paired--Mr. Bell stating that Mr. Brown, before leaving the Chamber, expressed a desire to be excused from voting on this subject because of his relationship to one of the Trustees.
Mr. BELL made an ineffectual motion to strike out the last clause of the report--recommending the removal of the Superintendent.
Mr. CHAPMAN demanded the previous question, and under its operation a vote was taken on concurrence in the report of the Committee, which resulted--yeas, 21: nays, 8--three Senators not voting because paired.
Pending the vote--
Mr. COFFEY, when his name was called, in explanation of his vote, said: This report shows great and gross mismanagement of that Instituiion. Believing others are to blame as well as the Superintendent, he voted to refer this matter to another Committee, that there might be a thorough and complete investigation. Believing, also, that the Superintendent has not discharged the duties of that position, Mr. C. voted in favor of concurring in the report of the Committee.
The result was then announced as above.
No quorum voting--
The Senate adjourned.
