THE
BREVIER LEGISLATIVE REPORTS.
VOLUME
TWENTY.
INDIANA LEGISLATURE.
SPECIAL SESSION.
IN SENATE.
WEDNESDAY, March 23, 1881--10 a. m.SOLDIERS' ORPHANS' HOME.
The report of the Investigating Committee proposing to depose the Superintendent of the Soldiers' Orphans' Home and the Asylum for Feeble Minded Children, was concurred in, by yeas, 29; nays, 14; under the operation of the previous question holding over from the adjournment of Saturday.
Mr. Spann moved to reconsider the vote adopting the report, and to lay that motion on the table. The latter motion was agreed to, by yeas, 23; nays, 17.
CASS SUPERIOR COURT.
Another vote was taken on Mr. Kahlo's bill to abolish the Superior Court in Cass County--it having failed to pass February 28--the result being--yeas, 31; nays, 6; so the bill passed.
BANK CAPITAL STOCK.
Mr. Kramer's bill [S. 278] to amend Section 8 of this act regulating banks of discount and deposit in this State, approved February 7, 1873, so that the capital stock may be reduced, was read the third time and passed, by yeas, 35; nays, 1.
A TURNPIKE COMPANY.
Mr. Comstock's bill [S. 206], concerning the Richmond and Liberty Turnpike Company, was also passed--yeas, 35; nays, 0.
SALE OF STATE PROPERTY.
On motion by Mr. MENZIES, the bill [H. R. 175] to authorize the Auditor of State to sell to Wm. N. McCoy lot No. 77, in Jeffersonville, was passed through the three readings, and finally passed the Senate.
NOTES PAYABLE IN BANK.
Mr. Hefron's bill [S. 83--see page 182 of these Reports] in relation to notes payable in bank in this State, repealing all laws in conflict therewith, and declaring an emergency, was read the third time.
Mr. CHAPMAN said this bill would strike a serious blow at the commercial interest of Indiana. The Judiciary Committee made a recommendation that it be indefinitely postponed. It proposes to let in all defenses aganst a note payable in bank--such a propositfion as we can not afford to make part of the statute law of the State.
Mr. VIEIHE--In this State the law is not as in some others on this subject. In 1818 the law was passed which is substantially the present statute. He did not think the bill would answer the purpose intended, because it can be so easily evaded and opposed its passage for other reasons.
Mr. HEFRON could see no branch of business this bill could injure, were it to become a law. If such fact can be pointed out he was willing to ask leave to withdraw the bill. Its only purpose is to place notes payable in bank on the same footing with ordinary promissory notes. It can only affect the class of persons who go over the country for the purpose of swindling.
Mr. MENZIE--Bank notes perform the office of money only so far as they are kept in vaults or other reserve places till due. This class of paper has been made the cloak for frauds innumerable in this State; and the theory that they perform the office of money has been exploded long ago. If this bill will have but a little tendency to stop the mischief so loudly complained of all over the State following the making and negotiation of bankable notes, let it be passed.
Mr. SPANN opposed the bill, not on the ground of protecting a few verdant greenhorns, for there is plenty of law to punish those who go around forging the names of farmers on such class of paper. He believed every man has the right to make a contract and sign a bankable note, if he wants to do so. We ought not to strike down this class of commercial paper unless some better reason can be shown than to protect persons frequently as dishonest as the sharpers who get the notes.
The bill failed to pass--yeas 22; nays, 17.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
HOUSE BILLS READ THE FIRST TIME.
On motion by Mr. URMSTON, the bill [H. R. 462] to enable railroads to erect and maintain Telegraph Companies, etc., and--
page: 72[View Page 72]On motion by Mr. BUNDY, the bill [H. R. 176] to legalize the incorporation of New Pittsburg and Hoover Turnpike Company
Were severally read the first time and referred to appropriate Committees,
STATIONERY.
Mr. VAN VORHIS offered a concurrent resolution, which was adopted, requiring a report of the value of stationery used during the regular session by the Committees and officers of each House.
ASSESSMENT FOR TAXATION.
Mr. SPANN moved to concur in the report of the Committee of Free Conference on the bill [H. R. 204] concerning assessment for taxation.
Mr. CHAPMAN demanded the previous question, which was seconded, and under its operations the Senate concurred in the report.
OFFICES AND OFFICERS.
Mr. VAN VORHIS, from the Special Committee thereon, returned Section 250 of the bill [H. R. 325] concerning officers and offices, recommending a substitute section concerning County Physicians to prisoners and paupers.
Mr. SPANN believed this substitute section would make the Health Officer physician of the County, under pay, establishing and creating a new office in each Township. With the Board of Public Health act passed by this Legislature, under th section there will be no end to these kind officers, and no limit to their pay.
Mr. VAN VORHIS explained the substitute simply changed the original section by connecting the Health Officer with the duties of physicians to the poor. It will be a very great addition to the efficiency of the Board of Health act if this section be passed. On moton by Mr. OWEN, the substitute was amended so thaat the County physician shall receive no pay as health officer.
The substitute section was then adopted.
Section 258 authorizing the publicatlon in a newspaper of the largest circulation in each County a list of allowances made at each session of the county Board, being read--
Mr. FOSTER said the rule from time immemorial has been to give public printing to newspapers of general circulation. He moved to insert the word "general" instead of the word "largest" If the section remains as it is it would be productive of strife, which might frequently get into the Courts.
Mr. CHAPMAN said the day has gone by when newspapers having a large circulation desire to conceal it. The paper in accord with the Auditor would be the one selected under the proposed amendment without reference to the question whether the paper has the greatest circulation.
Mr KEISER thought it immaterial which word was used. This printing does not put much money in the printer's pocket--the pay is nominal. This statement ought to be published in two papers in each County. Every County can afford to pay for such publication at the price named.
On motion by Mr. HENRY, a substitute was adopted, providing for the publication in two papers having the largest general circulation representing the two leading parties in the County.
Mr. BROWN, from the special Committee there on, reported a substitute for Section 251, concerning County Attorneys, which was adopted.
Mr. FOSTER made an ineffectual motion to increase the pay for printing from five to eight cents per each allowance.
Mr. FOSTER moved to amend Section 260 so that the publication of uncalled for allowances shall be made in two papers representing the two principal political parties.
Mr. CHAPMAN--The question presenting itself is, if we are to go on and have all public printing done by two papers repreenting the two principal political parties?
The motion was rejected by yeas, 16; nays, 18.
Mr. BUNDY offered an amendment to Section 267 in the interest of temperance, so that no change of venue shall be taken from an order refusing to grant a license to sell intoxicating liquors.
Mr. BROWN thought the amendment ought not to prevail. There is no question in which public opinion will take such strong sides as in cases where resistance is made to an application for license to sell spirituous liquors.
Mr. SPANN favored the amendment. The only question on which Commissioners refuse to grant license generally is on moral character. There is right of appeal to Circuit Court. Then if change of venue is taken, the people in another County have not so much interest in the matter, and wrong may be done to the locality where the license may be issued.
Mr. FOSTER thought the liquor seller should have the same right to change of venue as other citizens.
Mr. MENZIES suggested the inadvisability of adopting this amendment, as it is in conflict with the civil code.
Mr. BELL said the Court would overthrow such an amendment--it would not be valid.
The amendment was rejected by--yeas, 12; nays, 27.
Mr. URMSTON made an ineffectual motion to amend Section 269, so that suits for claims shall be brought directly in the Circuit Court,
Mr. KRAMER moved to strike out Section 273 and 274, authorizing County Boards to contract for stationery. He thought it unwise. These supply firms will go into a collusion, one sending its solicitors in one part of the State, and another in another part.
Mr. FOSTER opposed the motion. It is better to advertise for proposals to furnish stationary needed for the County. Whoever bids the lowest is likely to furnish the articles needed.
The motion to strike out was rejected.
Mr. WOOD moved to amend Section 277 by authorizing County Boards to purchase the Statutes for Justices of the Peace.
Mr. MENZIES opposed authorizing Boards of Commissioners to furnish the Justices with the Statutes. If the bill authorizing the State to furnish them is ever to be heard from again that will cover the case if passed. It has been in Committee a long time, and seems to be asleep. Some one has chloroformed it probably.
Mr. HENRY (in his seat)--We will certainly hear from that bill some time soon in some way.
The motion was rejected.
Mr. BELL moved to amend Section 287 by striking out the word "bridge." This, is an old section, and this word has been the source of much trouble. This will make the Commissioners, in effect, select specifications before hand.
Mr. CHAPMAN said there ought to be a clause providing there shall be bidding for some certain character of structure.
On motion by Mr. HENRY, Sections 287, 288, 289 and 290, relating to contracts, were referred to a select Committee, viz: Messrs. Bell and Chapman.
The Senate adjourned till to-morrow.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
WEDNESDAY, March 23, 1881--9 a. m.NEW PROPOSITIONS.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time and referred:
By Mr. HOTTELL [H. R. 484]: Relating to the fees of Jurors.
By Mr. FLOYD [H. R. 485]: To repeal an act for the appointment of Coal Oil Inspectors.
By Mr. LINSDAY [H. R. 486]: Providing for the page: 73[View Page 73] selection of Grand and Petit Jurors by Jury Commissioners.
By Mr. LINSDAY [H. R. 486]: Concerning Grand and Petit Jurors. [The Judge shall appoint two special Jury Commissioners to select Grand and Petit Jurors.]
By Mr. RYAN [H. R. 487]: Concerning the Supreme Court. [Te Supreme Court shall appoint five persons, citizens of the State, to assist the Court in the performance of its duties: salary equal to that of the Judges; term of office three years.]
OHIO RIVER BRIDGE.
The majority report of the Special Committee on the Evansville bridge bill [H. R. 370], recommending its passage as amended, was concurred in.
The bill passed--yeas, 74; nays, 4.
STATE MORTGAGE SALES.
Majority and minority reports were submitted ou the bill [H. R. 109] legalizing the sale of lands mortgaged to the State of Indiana, both recommending its passage with amendments, the minority report seeking to strike out Section 2, which legalizes invalid sales.
Mr. BUSKIRK--I am opposed to the bill because it is objectionable in legal aspects. I understand that the bill was originated in Vigo County, as it is intended to affect certain cases there. When this bill was before the Committee, the gentlemen for and opposed to it appeared before us, and statements make by the opponents of the bill that it would legalize invalid sales in Vigo County; that in one instance, a man's land worth $3,500 was sold for $58; in another case a person's property worth $7,000 was sold for $300. Statements not denied I take to be true. Even in a legal sale where the land goes for one-half its value, for it can not be mortgaged for more than that. It would be an outrage and robbing to legalize an invalid sale where the land has not brought one-tenth of its value. The minority report proposes to strike out the section which legalizes these invalid sales, and recommends the passage of the bill when this is done. The bill in this shape may have the effect to legalize invalid mortgages, and in that respect it is not objectionable, as the rights of parties have not been foreclosed in any way, but it would be wrong to relieve the speculator from the rule of caveat emptor by passing this bill containing the second section, and relieving him from the effects of his own negligence.
Mr. MORGAN--I hope the House will concur in majority report of the Committee. It is a matter of great public importance. The State sent her Common School fund to the Counties to be loaned. The Auditors loaned this money, taking as security mortgages on real estate. Now, it comes to light that many, perhaps thousands, of these mortgages are void on account of the County and State in which said real estate was situated being omitted. The Auditor of Vigo County now holds nearly 100 of these mortgages. To some extent, the same is true in every County in the State. In the Forty-second and Fifty-second Indiana Reports the Supreme Court holds that these mortgages are void, and can not, under the present law be enforced. This implies a loss to the school fund, or the people of the different Counties must be taxed to refund this money to the State. These loans were made years ago. The Auditors making these mortgages are gone, dead, and bankrupt. Their bondsmen are released by the statute deciding in their favor. This Legislature has the power to legalize these mortgages, making the school fund secure against loss, and relieving the Counties from a heavy loss on account of a mistake on the part of County Auditors long out of office. The second section of this bill, which the minority report proposes to strike out, imply proposes that where these sales have been made in good faith, and the law has been substantially complied with, and the money long ago paid, that simply the failure of the Treasurer to make, file, and sign said statement, shall not vitiate said sale. This seems to me to be a just law. Our country has rapidly improved, lands and city property has greatly enhanced in value. The persons who bought these lands deserve the benefit of the advance in the price of their property. I believe the bill is of vital importance to the public, that it will protect the school fund from loss, that it will prevent endless vexations, and costly litigation, and that it is just and fair and for the public good.
Mr. CARTER--I am opposed on principle to legalizing sales--Sheriff sales or otherwise as it not the proper thing to do. If we undertook to legalize all tax sales it would take twenty years do the work. The Legislature ought not to attempt to put life into a thing which has no life. The Supreme Court has decided that mortgages of this kind can be set to right, that this land will not be lost. I think it is wrong to legalize tax sales or sales of any other kind.
Mr. RYAN--This Legislature has already established a bad precedent in this respect. Every Justice of the Peace who failed to properly account for the funds in his hands, or by accident loses them, is here with bill to relieve him of the responsibility--every Notary Public who performed official duties beyond the term of his office, is here by his friend with a legalizing act, seeking to correct any inaccuracy or imperfection that exists. It seems to me the Legislature ought to halt. It is not a Court where the people of the State can rush as a sort of refuge. There is no such a thing as a guarantee or warantee in the judicial sale of this kind. It is a proceeding that comes under the rules of the Court and not the Legislature. These cases arise, as a rule, where the party has taken the chances with a view of speculation. The purchaser finds the deed bad and seeks this means of escape. There is no reason why these men investing in these mortgages should not be subject to the laws, because any business man--it would not require a lawyer--would have known upon the reading of these mortgages, that they were not valid mortgages, and an unsound investment. I hope the minority report will prevail.
Mr. MOODY--I am in favor of the minority report. I think legalizing legislation as a rule is dangerous. Aside from the special limitations of the Constitution, the Legislature can not exercise powers which are in their nature essentially judicial or executive. These are by the Constitution distributed to other departments of the Government. It is only legislative power given to us and not judicial, and we should be very slow to enter the Judicial Department of the Government and attempt to dispose of the legal rights of the citizens of the State. If there is an isolated case of hardship to any citizen of the State to whom the Judicial Department have failed, or one unable to do justice by, let him present the case to the Legislature and I am satisfied the relief wll be awarded him. But should this bill pass, it is general and applies to all cases, and who can say that while we are assisfing and relieving one man we at the same time may not be legalizing colossive robbery against many others.
The minority report was agreed to, and the bill was read the second time and ordered engrosed.
MEDICAL LEGISLATION.
The bill [S. 74 to regulate and improve the practice of medicine in the State of Indiana was read the third time, as amended by the House.
Mr. KENNER said: I am in favor of the of the bill. There are a great many good features about this measure. It will dispose of the imposition of frauds who infest the country. A man should not be permitted to follow a profession page: 74[View Page 74] which he does not fully understand, and especially sp where human life is at stake.
Mr. EDWINS--Gentlemen, this is a compromise measure between the physicians of the House. There was some disposition on the part of some members of the House not to concur in the Senate bill when it came up. The bill was amended, and now that it has reached its present stage, I hope this House will pass the bill.
The bill passed by--yeas, 73; nays ,10; as follows:
Akin, Baker, Barnett, Bartlett, Benham, Bryant, Car of White, Carter, Cauthorne, Chandler, Cooper, Compton, Cotton, Davis, Edwins, Fall, Frazer, Furnace, Gibson, Gillam, Gilman, Gregory, Hammond, Hargrove, Hinton, Hottell, Huff, Huston, Jackson, Johnson, Kain, Kenner, Kerr, Lee, Linsday, Marshall, Mason, McClure, McCormick, McDowell, McIntosh, McSheehy, Melrath, Meredith, Messick, Miles, Moody, Neff, Null, O'Neal, Roberts, Robinson of Decatur, Robinson, of Ripley; Roelker, Ryan, Schwetzer, Shields, Sinclair, Skinner, Stewart, Sulzer, Sumner, Taylor of LaGrange, Taylor of Noble, Thompson, Vawter, Walz, Westfall, Wilson of Montgomery, Wilson of Morgan, Wolfe, Wright and Mr. Speaker.
Nays--Beatty, Cabbage, Floyd, Franklin ,Ham, Lindley, Miller, Mitchell, Weaver and Wheeler.
So the bill passed.
SUPERVISOR OF HIGHWAYS.
The SPEAKER announced the special order for this hour to be the consideration of the bill [H. R. 143--see page 181] to make Township Trustees Superintendent of Public Highways the question being on the amendments pending Monday afternoon.
Mr. GILMAN was opposed to this bill. He said people in towns and cities would probably be willing to pay their tax to have the roads worked, but farmers and people living in the country are strongly opposed to this proviso, and it would work to the detriment of that class of people. He said if his amendment, as proposed the other day, prevails, those living in the country who want to work out their road tax under the same rates and conditions for which help can be employed, can do so, thus obviating the hardship which would often times occur where money must be paid out for this purpose.
Mr. MITCHELL, after consulting with his constituents, considered the amendment to the bill a good one, allowing those who so desire to work out their own tax.
The amendment to the amendment and the amendment were adopted.
Mr. SKINNER--Under our present road system we have about 9,000 Supervisors, who are authorized to collect road money, put it in their pockets, and give no security whatever. Under this law we have a Supervisor to meet these cases.
The bill passed--yeas, 53; nays, 28--as follows:
Yeas--Messrs. Baker, Bartlett, Cabbage, Carter, Cauthorne, Chandler, Cole, Cooper, Compton, Cotton, Davis, Floyd, Frazer, Gibson, Gillam, Gregory, Hargrove, Hinton, Huff, Huston, Johnson, Kenner, Lee, Lindsay, Marshall, Mason, Melrath, Meredith, Messick, Mitchell, Moody, Morgan, Murray, O'Neal, Robinson of Decatur, Robinson of Ripley, Roelker, Schweitzer, Shields, Skinner, Stewart, Sulzer, Sumner, Taylor of La Grange, Taylor of Noble, Thompson, Vawter, Walz, Westfall, Wheeler, Wilson of Montgomery, Wright and Mr. Speaker--53.
Nays--Messrs. Akin, Barnett, Benham, Bryant, Buskirk, Carr of White, Edwins, Franklin, Fuller, Gilman, Ham, Hammond, Hottell, Jackson, Kain, Kerr, Lindley, McClure, McCormick, McIntosh, Miles, Miller, Null, Roberts, Sinclair, Weaver, Wilson of Morgan and Wolfe-28.
So the bill passed.
STATE FISH COMMISSIONER.
Senator Wilson's bill [S. 24] authorizing the appointment of a Fish Commissioner for the State of Indiana, defining his duties and making appropriations to defray the expense thereof. [The Governor to appoint the Commissioner, who serves for two years. Salary, $300 and $2,000 for expenses] was read the third time.
Mr. KENNER regarded this bill as one of the most important to the people of the whole State. He said the United States Fish Commission refused to do anything in that direction for the State, for the simple reason that there was no State official to second the efforts of the Government in that direction. It will be a source of wealth to the State, therefore he favored its passage.
Mr. SCHWEITZER said the bill would accomplish many good results at a cost so small as to only amount to about one cent on each inhabitant of the State. He favored its passage.
Mr. CARR, of White, said: I am heartily in favor of this bill. There are many small lakes, ponds and streams in the State that never had any fish in them. By the passage of this bill these streams, in the course of a few years, will be abundantly supplied with fish, which would be a source of wealth to the State.
The bill passed.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
The Commitee on Military Affairs reported on the joint resolution [H. R. 10] for the enrollment of members of the Indiana Legion not yet enrolled, recommending its adoption.
The resolution passed--yeas, 67; nays, 7.
The report was concurred in.
NEW PROPOSITIONS.
The following described bills were read the first time and referred:
By Mr. COOPER [H. R. 488]: To assist the Assessors of different Townships in the valuation of additional improvements upon real estate, providing compensation for the services of the County Auditor (the County Auditors are to furnish Assessors with a list of the assessment as made the year previous).
By Mr. HINTON [H. R. 489]: To amend Section 34 of an act fixing fees to be taxed in offices therein named (fees of Grand Jurors shall be $2 per day while in actual attendance, and ten cents per mile for going and coming).
On motion by Mr. HINTON, the constitutional rule was suspended--yeas 80; nays, 0--and the bill was read the second time by title, third time by sections, and put upon its passage.
The bill was read the second time by title.
Mr. MILES moved an amendment, which was adopted, that the mileage be fixed at "five" cents instead of "ten."
The bill was read the third time by sections and passed--yeas, 80; nays, 0.
SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT.
Mr. COLE moved to reconsider the vote (12) by which the bill [H.R. 451] regulating the Courts of the Second Judicial District was passed.
Mr. CABBAGE--I want to represent the people, and not the attorneys any more than any other set of citizens. The people have the expenses of the Courts to pay, and four terms of Court will cost the people considerably more than three terms. I do not think our people demand this change. I hope the Members of this House will vote this bill down. We have a good Judge and good attorneys in my County, and they have not demanded this of me. This came up yesterday, and I only had time to vote and no time for explanation. I think the Members of this House voted then without an understanding of the matter.
Mr. SULZER--I do not understand why the Senators from my District should come in here to-day and ask to reconsider the vote on my Court bill, except they do not wish to antagonize it page: 75[View Page 75] openly in the Senate. Two years ago they changed the law, and passed it through the Assembly without the knowledge and consent of the lawyers and people of my County. They had no warning that the bill was pending until after its passage. Every effort was made to have the Governor to veto the bill, but failed. I introduced this bill at the request of my people, especially the lawyers, and I know it is what Spencer and Perry Counties want. The Judge of this Circuit lives in Warrick County, and he is opposed to this bill because it interferes somewhat with his fishing arrangements. At least it is so understood in my County. You will notice we have no Court in Perry for six months--f0rom May to November. During this time we mut hold all criminals in Jail, and feed them at the expense of the County. I hold that it is nothing but simple justice that I ask for my County. I hope my motion, to lay the motion of the gentleman of Miami on the table, will prevail.
The motion to reconsider was rejected.
THE NEW STATE HOUSE.
The SPEAKER announced the special order for this hour to be the consideration of the bill [H. R. 407] to provide a reserve fund to complete the State House building; the pending amendment [Mr. Cauthorne's], to levy a tax of two cents on the $100 for the years 1881 and 1882 on the taxable property, which shall be placed to the credit of the new State House fund [see page 249 of these Reports], being read--
Mr. CAUTHORNE said; "This amendment is virtually a new bill--the old one being stricken out after the enacting clause. The object of imposing this tax is to avoid the interest on the loan, where the bonds are issued."
Mr. RYAN favored the principles of economy in reference to this matter, and was opposed to the making of a loan, as is contemplated in the bill. He thought the proper mode of raising funds to continue the construction of the State House was to levy a tax, as contemplated by Mr. Cauthorne's amendment.
Mr. MITCHELL said: "For one, I will not vote for a single measure that would cause the State of Indiana to pay more than $2,000,000 for the erection of the State House."
Mr. MOODY--There is no authority given the Legislature to enact such a law as the State House Commissioners recommend us to pass. The Legislature has no authority except that conferred on it by the Constitution, and I call the attention of the House to Section 3 of Article 10 of the Constitution. Now, sir, this bill does not propose an appropriation to complete the State House, but it provides that if a deficiency of revenue shall occur, the Governor, Auditor and Treasurer of State in the name and on the faith of the State, borrow money, and for the money so borrowed said officers shall issue coupon bonds of the State, payable at the State Treasury in ten years from date. I am satisfied there is no such authority given to the Legislature by the Constitution of the State.
Mr. CAUTHORNE moved to amend the amendment by increasing the appropriation $100,000.
The amendment to the amendment and the amendment as amended was adopted.
Mr. BUSKIRK said: "While the State House is not to cost but $2,000.000 under the existing statute, by passing this bill we do away with the law and open the field for further expenditure. I am opposed, at this time, to giving any more money to the State House Commissioners than was contemplated by the bill for its erection."
Mr. CAUTHORNE moved to amend by adding: Provided that it shall also be lawful for the State House Commissioners to apply for current use the 20 per centum tax levy of each year, heretofore required to be retained, and no contract or expenditure shall be made for any amount greater than the amounts provided for by the General Assembly.
The amendment was adopted, and the bill was ordered engrossed.
STATIONERY.
Mr. THOMPSON moved to take up the Senate concurrent resolution requesting the clerk of the Committee on Public Printing to report forthwith to both Houses the value of stationary used during the regular session.
The resolution was adopted.
DRAINAGE OF WET LANDS.
Mr Taylor's (of Lagrange) bill [H. R. 147], enabling the owners of wet lands to reclaim the same when it can not be done without affecting the lands of others was read the third time.
On motion, the bill was referred to a Special Committee of two.
REPORTS FROM THE WAYS AND MEANS
COM-
MITTEE.
On the bill [S. 217] amending Section 2 for the repair of free gravel roads, recommending its passage.
The report was concurred in. The bill waw read the second time, and
On the bill [H. R. 463] authorizing County Commissioners to purchase gravel roads, recommending its passage with amendments.
The report was concurred in, the bill was read the second time and ordered engrossed.
On the bill [S. 79] concerning the purchase of toll roads, recommending its passage with amendments.
The report was concurred in, the bill was read the second time.
Then the House adjourned.
