POLICE JUDGE FOR INDIANAPOLIS.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR announced the order of business to be the consideration of the Police Judge bill [H. R. 34] pending yesterday at the time of taking the recess for dinner.
Mr. COMSTOCK moved to amend the Committee report by stiking out the clause fixing the salary of Mayor.
Mr. CHAPMAN referred to the two remonstrances against the passage of this bill--one signed by nearly the entire Bar of the city, and the other by a large number of merchants. If the bill were so amended as to leave it optional with the City whether it will create such an officer, it would not be so objectionable. There are comparatively a small number of the citizens of Indianapolis desiring the passage of such a bill as this. He was induced to modify his objections upon condition that the maximum of the salaries shall be indicated in the bill, and that is the purpose of the amendments proposed by the Committee report--the Mayor $2,000, and the Police Judge $1,800--and if the Senate see fit to adopt the pending amendment, which he did not urge, then he shall ask for an amendment leaving it discretionary with the city whether it shall have such an officer or not. He could not believe the Legislature should establish this officer peremptorily. He feared, if the bill were passed without the amendment, the salaries would be allowed to run up too high in figure.
Mr. HEFRON objected to the bill because it takes away from the city the power to say whether it wants a City Judge or not. He favored Home rule--and the bill was against sound policy in that it proposes members of this Legislature from every part of the State shall dictate what the city of Indianapolis shall do. This city has a Legislature of her own, and he had yet to hear a good solid reason why such a peremptory measure should pass. The existing law provides for all necessary machinery to run the city government, and this bill proposes to take from the city authorities the power to avoid the expense of this new office, if it should not desire such an officer: or, if under this act the city should desire to dispense with this officer, it could not.
Mr. COMSTOCK thought the late of the bill should be determined by the wishes of the immediate representatives of the city, but it should be left to the city to say what compensation should be paid to its officers. The amendment should be adopted--on principle. Whether the bill is voted up or down he cared not.
Mr. VAN VORHIS believed a necessity exists for a Police Judge in this city. The Mayor has more to do than any one man can properly perform. He had more confidence in the City Council than his colleague (Mr. Chapman), and was willing to trust that body with the responsibility of fixing the salary of all public oficers. He was not so wedded to this measure as to be heart-broken if it be defeated, but he believed a majority of the people desired the bill to pass, and knew of but one or two parties now opposed to it, who have heretofore interested themselves against this bill.
The amendment was agreed to.
The Committee report as amended was adopted.
On motion, by Mr. CHAPMAN, the bill was amended so as to leave it discretionary with the Common Council and Board of Aldermen whether the city shall have a Police Judge or not.
The amendments were ordered engrossed.
