THE
BREVIER LEGISLATIVE REPORTS.
VOLUME
TWENTY.
INDIANA LEGISLATURE.
SPECIAL SESSION.
IN SENATE.
MONDAY, March 21, 1881--10 a. m.The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR commanded attention while prayer was offered by Rev. J. N. Beard.
Mr. LANGDON offered a resolution referring the bill [S. 325] concerning offices and officers to a Special Committee of one from each of the Standing Committees of Finance, Judiciary, Organization of Courts, Elections, and Fees and Salaries, to the report by bill or otherwise, at the earliest day practicable.
Mr. COMSTOCK was sure all Senators felt an interest in the fair consideration of all bills coming before this body, and did not believe a reference of this bill would facilitate the dispatch of business. The bill has merit in it aside from fixing fees and salaries, after that part of it were stricken out, and it was his intention to make such a motion at the proper time. A very safe way is to go on and consider the bill by sections.
Mr. KRAMER agreed with the remarks just made. It is very questionable whether this Legislature will have time to touch on the subject of fees and salaries during this special session, and it is better to go ahead wi h this bill as has been commenced. When the part referring to fees and salaries comes up it may be referred to the Committee on Fees and Salaries.
Mr. LANGDON regarded the only objection to this resolution is that the Senate is as ready to consider this bill of 139 large printed pages as well without a first reading, and as well without a second reading, as after it shall be considered the Committee proposed in the resolution. That is stretching very far the ability of the Senate, to say it can take up a bill of this kind and consider it, as it were, extemporaneously, and on its first actual reading. While the Senator from Spencer [Mr. Kramer] because of his experience in the discharge of the duties of public office, may consider himself competent to proceed with the bill, it is not safe for the rest to proceed on the rule as the Senator. The people of the State demand a revision of the fees and salaries of officers--there ought to be a fair compensation for such officers, but none of them ought to get rich at public expense. The fees in this bill are in defiance of public opinion, and ought to be wiped out. The subject should be taken hold of fairly, squarely and manfully, so no one should wring from the people sums of money far in excess of the value of services rendered to the public. The action of the people should not be ignored on the Constitutional Amendment recently enacted. The safe and judicious way is to refer this bill to a Committee composed as indicated in the resolution, if it is the intention to go into legislation so comprehensive at this session.
Mr. BRISCOE, if such reference would facilitate business, would not oppose the resolution. But suppose a Special Committee works on this bill from this hour, when it comes back it will have to be reconsidered section by section, and in what way would time be saved? Already over 100 sections of the bill have been considered, and if this plan is continued it will be perfected much sooner than if referred to the Committee. The fees in this bill are the same enacted by the Legislature two years ago, and which probably the author of this resolution voted for. He hoped the resolution would not prevail.
The yeas and nays were demanded on the adoption of the resolution. and being ordered and taken resulted--yeas, 13; nays, 18.
No quorum voting--
A recess was taken till 2 o'clock p. m.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR directed the Secretary t resume the reading of the bill [S. 325] concerning offices and officers, commencing at Section 100.
On motion by Mr. KRAMER, a substitute section was adopted requiring the Secretary of State to send the acts and journals hereafter by express to the persons and Counties entitled to copies thereof.
Mr. BROWN called up the resolution pending at the time of the noon recess.
Mr. SPANN desired to know why the author offered such a resolution at this stage of the reading of the bill.
page: 62[View Page 62]Mr. LANGDON, as a member of the Revision Committee, was not present when this bill was considered in the Committee, and understood it did not receive the attention of a full Committee. Then the bill has not yet been read in the Senate. More matter is incorporated in this bill than relates to the compensation of officers, and a Committee can more quickly and carefully consider the bill than it can be done in the Senate.
Mr. RISTINE offered a substitute for the resolution, that the sections of the bill referring to fees and salaries be referred to the Committee on that subject.
Mr. CHAPMAN opposed the substitute and favored the original resolution. There was an hour when he was willing to bow down before the Board of Codifiers, but that hour has long since passed. He did not think the Board of Codifiers has done any work worthy the consideration of the Senate. If they have done any work worth $4,000 a year, as is proposed in a bill before this General Assembly, he would like to see it, or any portion of it. The work of the codifiers of this bill is a recommendation that we re-enact the Constitution of the State. We sit here like solemn owls, and delibrate on the question whether or not we shall adopt, for instance, Section 82 (relating to the Governor). If it were not adopted, would we have to send out a discoverer to find out where the executive power of the Government is lodged?
Mr. GRAHAM favored the committal of that part of this bill relating to fees and salaries, for the purpose of taking away an infamy that is now before the Senate. He saw no necessity for referring the other portions of the bill.
Mr. GRUBBS opposed recommittal of the bill. If it is intended to kill the bill, kill it right here and now. He would not oppose the substitute; but the Senate should proceed with the consideration of this bill section by section, get it out of the way, and then take up other necessary legislation.
Mr. SPANN saw no necessity for referring this bill to a Committee, except that part referring to fees and salaries. He thought an unwarranted attack has been made on the Codification Committee, believing that Committee has done its work well, and in a creditable manner.
Mr. COMSTOCK opposed the reference of the bill. About four out of five of the remaining sections of the bill are old matter. If this reference was desired, it should have been made earlier. Considering the length of the bill, if it is referred that would be the end of it, because of the length of time required to be given to the reconsideration ofsuch a large amount of matter.
The substitute was adopted by yeas, 20; nays, 19.
Mr. CHAPMAN opposed the amendment. There is a gross injustice in regard to fees and salaries, many officers being paid ten times more than they deserve, and some officers are being paid by way of perquisites far beyond what any persons but these officers themselves may know. He believed in paying liberal salaries. He did not believe the 8heriff or Clerk of this County should be paid as much as the five Judges on the Bench, or three of them for that matter, and looked forward to the time when men in office shall be paid according to that they deserve. Unless we incorporate a change of fees and salaries in this bill, he feared the necessary legislation in that direction would fail.
Mr. BELL favored the reference of the question, of fees and salaries in order that the Committee might arrange a bill in accordance with the recently adopted Constitutional Amendments.
On motion by Mr. LANGODON, the substitute was amended by directing the Committee to report a bill covering the subject of fees and salaries within five days.
The substitute as amended was adopted.
FEEBLE-MINDED ASYLUM.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR directed the roll to be called on the question pending at the adjournment last Saturday--being on concurrence in the report of the Joint Committee of Investigation, on the Soldiers' Orphans' Home, recommending the removal of the Superintendent, etc.
Mr. MENZIES raised the point of order that this matter can not be called up now.
Mr. BELL--The special order of the afternoon sessions, made so by special action of the some days ago is the consideration of the the work presented by the Revision Committee.
Mr. SPANN would like to, know why Senators were so anxious to avoid a vote on this matter.
Mr. BELL desired to get rid of the previous question, and would take advantage of Parliamentary law to do so. Then there are Senators, not confined to his side of the Chamber, who are convinced the action heretofore had on this subject was wrong. And further, he did not want to commit this outrage, and have it go on record, the same day the father is burying his son.
Mr. CHAPMAN thought the point of order well taken. The Senate surely does not want to break down its rule for the sake of carrying any question, no matter what its merits are. He referred to the rules by number and sustained the point of order.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR would have no trouble about this matter were it not for the previous question in operation when the vote was taken on Saturday, which showed no quorum.
Another vote would have been the order of business this morning, before the reading of the journal, had a quorum been present; but the matter was passed by, till the Chair thought it his duty to put the question. He was not anxious about the matter--if the Senate will let it go over he was willing.
Mr. SPANN moved that this matter be postponed till Wednesday afternoon.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR would not entertain any motion, but it may be passed over by consent till that time.
Mr. MENZIES entered a motion to reconsider the vote of Saturday, rejecting a motion to refer to a Special Committee the report of the Orphan Asylum Investigating Committee.
OFFICES AND OFFICERS.
The Senate resumed the consideration of the bill [S. 325].
Mr. CHAPMAN moved to strike out 1,600, and insert l,000 as the number of copies of the Senate and House and documentary journals to be printed. It is pretty useless printing any how.
The motion was agreed to.
On motion by Mr. GRAHAM, the clause was stricken out of Section 128, authorizing the State Auditor to employ counsel to prosecute suits instituted at his instance on behalf of the State.
Mr. MARVIN said Section 143 refers to an officer he had never heard of before--the Commissioner of the Michigan Road. He had lived on that road over thirty-six years, and had never yet heard of such an officer.
Mr. BUNDY (in his seat.) That officer resigned in 1837. [Laughter.]
Mr. MARVIN moved to strike that section the bill.
Mr. VAN VORHIS knew nothing of the duties of the Agent of the town of Indianapolis, referred to in the same section.
Mr. GRAHAM thought it better to retain the section; there may be some part of the old Michigan road still belonging to the Government.
Mr. MARVIN said the Michigan road in Marion and Boone Counties has been given to the Counties and the Counties have transferred it to the Gravel Road Companies. If it is thought best to keep it in, he would withdraw the motion to strike out this section.
Mr. VIEHE moved to strke out the clause in page: 63[View Page 63] Section 154 requiring monthly statements of the State Treasurer to be published.
The motion was agree to.
Mr. KRAMER moved to strike out the clause requiring a annual publication of the condition of the State Treasury in two Indianapolis papers, and provide in lieu for the publication of 500 copies in pamphlet form to be distributed in the several Counties.
Mr. VOYLES moved to strike out the section.
Mr. MARVIN--The Senator from Washington [Mr. Voyles] the other day offered an amendment to the tax bill, which was adopted, that the delinquent list should not be published. Now, the same Senator moves to strike out Section 155, so as to prevent the publication of a statement of the condition of the State Treasury once a month. He opposed it, believing in the fullest publication of all acts of public officials, that the people may be advised of what is being done by their public servants. He hoped the Senate would vote the motion down.
Mr. LOCKRIDGE suggested a portion of this section should not be stricken out--that portion which requires a report to the General Assembly. That is information necessary to the intelligent framing of revenue, appropriation and other bills.
The motion to strike out was rejected.
The amendment was also rejected.
Mr. CHAPMAN moved to amend so this monthly statement shall be printed in but one paper.
Mr. BUNDY offered a substitute, striking out all relating to printing.
Mr. MARVIN was not here the advocate of any newspaper, but favored publishing the acts of all public servants, so the people may know what they are doing. These statements should be published in a paper of general circulation of each of the two political parties in the city of Indianapolis. It is not paying to these newspapers a subsidy, but it is paying a duty we owe to the people to inform them of the acts of their public servants. What do we have published the acts of the general Legislature for, if we don't want the people to know what we are doing here? He opposed the amendments, and hoped the Senate would not pass them.
Mr. GARRIGUS thought the papers would publish such matters as items of news. Why publish in two papers in this city, and not in papers in other parts of the State?
Mr. BUNDY saw no good to result from the publication of these statements in two papers in this city. The people of the State generally do not see these papers, and it is a useless expense.
The substitute was rejected.
Mr. SHAFFER moved to amend the amendment so that the publication shall be made in some newspaper of general circulation in each County in the State.
Mr. SPANN opposed the amendment on the ground of economy, if no other. It would amount to the sum of $3,000, and it is unnecessary and not what ought to be done.
The amendment to the amendment was rejected by--yeas, 1; nays, 35.
The amendment was rejected by-yeas, 7; nays, 28.
Mr. BENZ explained his negative vote when his name was called, by saying: "As I am not able to take two newspapers, as I am a Democrat, I take the Sentinel, and the State being Republican these statements will be printed in the Journal. I Note 'no.'"
So the amendment was rejected.
Mr. CHAPMAN moved to amend by striking out the words "at Indianapolis," and inserting, in lieu thereof, the words, "of opposite political parties. He said: "We are proposing to vote a subsidy to our own party organs. There is no disguising that fact. There is no use in assuming that by this clause we want to disseminate knowledge. All we want to do is to contribute to the support of our party organ. This amendment will bring the thing down squarely and strip off the thin disguise. There is no attempt to assume any false colors--no putting on of a mask, or any clothing that don't belong to us. All we want to do is to attempt to make the public do that which the political parties failed to do--to support their respective party organs." In order to give Senators an opportunity to vote for what they are in favor of, and what he is against, he offered this amendment.
Then the Senate adjourned till to-morrow.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
MONDAY, March 21, 1881--9 a. m.The Committee on Roads recommended that the bill [H. R. 449] regulating tolls on public highways be laid on the table, but the House refused to concur in the report, and ordered the bill engrossed for the third reading, after the following remarks by--
Mr. FLOYD--This bill has been before the Legislature several times, and is known as General Streight's bill. The object of this bill is to reach cases in this County, but what effect it will have on other Counties is a matter to be considered also. This bill proposes to allow 10 per cent. dividend over and above expense for repairs, etc. It is claimed that the original value of the stock in this County is a very nominal one, and that the toll would be reduced by the operation of this bill. In some Counties this stock has been bartered, and the parties owning the stock are innocent purchasers--in some instances they are widow women--and the probabilities are that this bill would depreciate this stock very largely. If the parties did obtain this stock at a nominal figure it was their good fortune, and as all principles of justice and equity are involved in this case the same as any other case where stock is bought and sold, these cases ought to come under the general laws now in force upon that subject. I am positively in favor of free gravel roads, a system to which we must come sooner or later. I would urge to the Members of this House as the proper method by which all these difficulties may be overcome, what we need more than anything else is to build as many free roads as possible, so as to depreciate the stock of plank roads, so tha they will fall in with the system of free grave roads.
REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES.
Favorable Committee reports were presented on the bills: [H. R. 305] allowing owners to petition for improvement of highways; [H. R. 233 concerning gaming contracts; [H. R. 374] to prevent adulteration of food; [H. R. 398] to encourage the destruction of wood-chucks.
The above were ordered engrossed for the thir reading, as were also the bills [H. R. 135] to le bridge contracts; [H. R. 394] concerning publi printing; [H. R. 409] to pay the War loan; [H. R. 424] Vernon incorporation act; [H. R. 450] concerning decedent estates.
Reports from Committees recommended tha the following described bills lie on the table: [H. R. 225] authorizing the construction of gravel and other roads; [H. R. 22] concerning fisheries; [H. R. 203] to amend Section 253 of the practice act; [H. R. 287] concerning married women; [H. R. 365] regarding the solemnization of marriages; [H. R. 373] in relation of gravel roads; [H. R. 385] for appointment of State examiners; [H. R. 368] concerning weights and measures; [H. R. 288 reimbursing Township aid to Railroad Companies.
The bill heretofore reported [H. R. 323] concerning the inspection and sale of petroleum oil was also laid on the table.
BILLS INDEFINITELY POSTPONED.
The bills [H. R. 240) defining certain mimeanors; [H. R. 419] prohibiting the receiving page: 64[View Page 64] applications for life insurance on the tontine line, were indefinitely postponed.
SENATE BILLS READ THE FIRST TIME.
The bills [ . 110] to license and regulate the business of pawn brokers; [S. 75] enabling the owners of wet lands to drain the same; [S. 119] legalizing acts of the Board of Trustees of Monroeville; [S. 82] touching guardian and ward; [S. 142] regarding the adoption of heirs; [S. 103] to protect the property of Public Libraries; [S. 161] authorizing the appointment of short-hand reporters in Courts; [S. 183] authorizing the issuance of military stores to certain Colleges; [S. 179] legalizing the employment of persons to discover unassessed property.
Were severally read the first time,
The bill [S. 271] concerning proceedings in civil cases was read the first time by title only and made a special order for to-morrow morning.
The bill [S. 214] concerning drainage; [S. 2] to repeal the whistling law of March 29, 1879: [S.97] to appropriate real estate for school purposes,
Were severally read the first time.
SENATE BILLS READ THE SECOND TIME.
The bill [S. 209] to legalize the acts of notaries public whose commissions have expired; [S. 156] to amend the partition law; [S. 162] amending Section 3 of the Voluntary Association act; [S. 333] amending Section 3 of an act for the protection of fish,
Were severally read the second time.
The bill [S. 42] relating to unexpended 3 per cent. fund, was reported back favorably from the Committee having it in charge.
Mr. Cauthorne's bill [H. R. 407] to provide a reserve to complete the State House building, was read the second time, and made a special order for Wednesday, March 23, 1881, at 2 p. m.
On motion by Mr. BUSKIRK, the vote on the bill [H. R. 160] defining the jurisdiction of Grand Juries, was reconsidered, and the bill was ordered engrossed.
NEW PROPOSITIONS.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time and severally referred:
By Mr. SINCLAIR [H. R. 466]: To fix the term of office of Prosecuting Attorneys of Criminal Courts [four years].
By Mr. HUSTON [H. R. 467]: To provide for the care, custody and maintenance of children whose parents, or either of them, are deceased. [Any reliable family having adopted a child or children one year can not be deprived of the same.
By Mr. MILLS [H. R. 468]: To legalize the incorporation of the Central Normal College, of Danville, Ind.
By Mr. BARTLETT [H. R. 469]: To legalize the elation of the Board of Trustees and other officers of the town of Spiceland, Henry County, Indiana.
By Mr. CARTER [H. R. 470]: Defining cruelty to animals.
By Mr. COLE f. R, 471]: In relation to good behavior of persons confined in State Prisons.
By Mr. COLE [H. R. 472]: To amend an act in relation to the charge of public highways, approved March 11, 1869. [May be done upon a petition of the landowners where such road exists.]
By Mr, GILMORE the bill [H. R. 473]: To authorize the County Surveyor of Jasper County to make a survey of certain unsurveyed swamp lands in Jasper County.
By Mr, CARTER the bill [H. R. 474]: To prevent the pollution of water in canals and streams. [It is unlawful to render impure canals or streams running by cities out of which water is used for drinking purposes.]
On motion of Mr. COLE, Mr. Fancher's bill [H. R. 148], concerning the construction of fences, gates, farm crossings, etc., was made a special order for Thursday, at 2 p. m.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
The Judiciary Committee reported on the bill [H. R. 300] in relation to the issuance of marriage licenses, recommending a substitute for the bill.
The report was concurred in, the bill was read the second time and ordered engrossed.
MUSTER ROLLS.
Mr. SCHWEITZER offered a joint resolution that the Adjutant General of the State of Indiana be and is hereby authorized and empowered to hear evidence in all cases where claim is made of having served in the Indiana Militia, and to that end is authorized to administer oaths to claimants and witnesses, examine them as to the claim, and if he is satisfied as to the justness of the claim of the party as to being in such service, their names shall be entered upon the roll of their respective Companies and Regiments, and payment for such services shall be made in the manner now provided. He said: We have passed a bill here to pay the Indiana Legion, and I find that every day we get applications from persons whose names are not enrolled. This resolution merely provides that their names should be enrolled so they can get their money the same as those now enrolled.
The resolution was referred to the Committee on Military Affairs.
STATE ASYLUM SEWERS.
Mr. CAUTHORNE'S bill [H. R. 436], for making a contract with the city of Indianapolis for constructing a sewer to the Institutions for the Education of the Deaf and Dumb and Prison and Reformatory for Women and Girls, was read the third time and failed to pass--yeas, 49; nays, 21--for the want of a constitutional majority.
WHIPPING POST.
Mr. Cummins' bill [H. R. 302], to provide for the punishment of certain assaults and batteries committed by the husband upon his wife, was read the third time.
Mr. COMPTON was in favor of the bill because, in an indirect way, it was in the interest of temperance. When a man gets drunk he usually whips his wife, thereby imposing a penalty upon him.
The bill failed to pass--yeas, 35 nays, 34--for the want of a constitutional majority.
ROAD SUPERVISOR.
Mr. Vawter's bill [H. R. 143-see page 181 of these reports] making the Township Trustee of each civil Township Superintendent of Roads and Highways in his Township, and fixing the computation on road tax, was read the third time.
Mr. COTTON called the attention of the House to the fact that by this bill in 1882 Commissioners are elected, thus leaving the State one year without a road tax, as the bill provides that the tax shall be levied in 1882 by the Road Superintendent, with the concurrence of the County Commissioners, and that tax not being collected until one year afterward, would leave the State one year without a road tax.
Mr. THOMPSON moved to amend the bill by adding thereto, "The Superintendent of Roads shall cause all roads in his District to be mowed twice a-year, to-wit: during the months of June and August, to the end that all noxious weeds and thistles are destroyed."
The amendment, by unanimous consent, was adopted.
By unanimous consent, it was agreed that amendments may be offered.
Mr. GILMAN moved to amend the bill by adding to Section 27 the words "Provided, That nothing in this act shall take from the owner or owners of property the right to work out their road tax, under the rules and regulations as prescribed in Section 16 of this act."
Mr. MEREDITH said under the provisions of page: 65[View Page 65] this bill a Road Superintendent could have as many teams of his own as he liked and charge it up with the rest. It would be one of the grossest frauds ever committed upon the people of Indiana to pass that law.
Mr. MARSHALL-The present system of road working is unfair to the young man just beginning in life, who, in May and June work, has to put in his two or four days along with the wealthy man. The poor man who carries his flour home on his shoulder is called on to labor on the roads as much as the man who hauls off his thousand bushels of wheat.
The ad valorem system is the true one; it has given other States good roads, and, when properly applied, will give us good roads in Indiana. The people are demanding a better system of road working, and we need better roads. Let the roads be let out by contract, as this bill provides, and in ten years we will have good roads. There is another good feature in this bill, and that is this: Men who own the land, men who have the good farms and men who have to use the roads most are the very men whom a good road benefits. Make a good, smooth road along by the side of a farm, and that farm is worth more money than if it had a poor road. Then is it not fair that the man who owns the farm should do more labor or pay more money to make that a good road than the hired hand? Then again, if a man has 160 acres of land, and his next neighbor eighty acres, is it not fair that the man owning the 160 acres should do as much again work on the roads provided their value is the same per acre?
Mr. ROBERTS said a large number of people would find it difficult to pay tax. On the other hand, under the present law, they can work it out, thereby giving an equivalent. He was opposed to this measure as too radical a one to force upon the people at this time.
Mr. WALZ--The people where I live demand a change of our present road law. There is no question about it. If you adopt that feature as an amendment, we had better retain the old law as it stands, because what the amendment seeks to accomplish is to destroy this new feature. The advantage of this bill is that the tax-payer pays his money to have the work done to the Supervisor, who lets the work out by contracts where the money does the most good. The tax-payer has an opportunity equally with any one else to take these contracts. I want a road law that works to the interest of the roads, not the tax-payer. If the road system is advanced the tax-payer is also advanced.
Mr. MOODY--I am in favor of the best system of road work that can be adopted, but I am opposed to this bill, and I want the peopie of my County to know that I not only voted against this unfair and, to my mind, unjust law, but that I solemnly and earnestly protest against it. There are many poor men who can not pay this tax, but who can do an honest day's work on the highways and who will be absolutely deprived of the opportunity of doing this work, if the amendment is lost and this bill becomes a law. It may all be well for soft-handed lawyers and doctors to theorize on this law, and the fine roads which are to stretch themselves magic-like all over our country, but I can not forget the large number of men in my own County that it will work a great hardship to, despite their beautiful theory. I do trust that the good sense of the majority of this House will not pass the bill, but will adopt the amendment, I know that if you put this money in the hands of any man and authorize him to hire the work done, that many hard-working, honest laborers will not get any of it to do, but a few of the friends of this new-fledged officer will get the pap and the officer take the cow of some other man to pay for the work his friend has done. I believe that this is unfair and eminently unjust.
Mr. MORGAN--I hope the amendment will not prevail. The bill will be to the advantage of the poor man as well as the rich man. If this measure passes, the rich man with his five or six hundred acres of land, will work out his own road tax instead of the poor man, as is the case now. At the present time a man owning no property is compelled to work as much as one owning his hundreds of acres. If you allow this amendment to prevail you had better let the old law stand.
Mr. STEWART moved to amend the amendment as follows: Provided the person owing tax shall apply to the Superintendent to do such work, and will do the same at such time and places as the Superintendent may direct.
Mr. CARTER was in favor of the bill as it stood. He did not consider the existing law required the poor man to work the same number of days as the rich one. Under this law they would not have to work at all. There are many good features in this bill. These contracts are supposed to be let out to the citizens in the immediate vicinity where the roads are being worked.
Mr. THOMPSON said there were thousands of dollars expended in Elkhart County every year on the roads, and scarcely anything to show for it. The people demand a good road system. I am willing to vote for a radical change in the road system. My friend from Steuben [Mr. Roberts] says the old system is good enough. Probably it is good enough for the people of Steuben County, but the people of Elkhart County demand a better system. Under this bill, we have a Road Trustee, who can repair the roads and collect the taxes, and make a good road out of a bad one.
Mr. COMPTON said the field was open for all to get to do his work by contracting with the Road Superintendent; that there was nothing unjust, as the bill gave the land-owner the same chance to do the work and get the same allowance as anybody else. He appealed to the members above all other things to give the State of Indiana a good road law.
Mr. NEFF considered this bill most too radical a change to undergo at the present time. There is a bill prepared by the Revision Committee he considered more applicable to the State of Indiana.
Mr. SMELZER--The people are taxed for roads, and I think under this bill we would get exactly what we want. It would do away with this miscellaneous working of roads. I hope the bill will pass.
Mr. FULLER thought the bill insufficient. The tax imposed would not half meet the demands as specified in this bill, therefore he would oppose it.
On motion by Mr. BUSKIRK the further consideration of this bill was postponed till Wednesday at 10 a'clock a. m.
The House adjourned till to-morrow.
