THE
BREVIER LEGISLATIVE REPORTS.
VOLUME
TWENTY.
INDIANA LEGISLATURE.
SPECIAL SESSION.
IN SENATE
FRIDAY, April 1, 1881--9 a. m.Mr. BENZ demanded a call of the Senate, which, being taken, discovered thirty-three Senators as present and answering to their names.
On motion by Mr. TRAYLOR the doors were ordered closed, and Doorkeeper instructed, to bring in the absentees. An ineffectual motion was made--yeas, 10; nays, 12--to dispense with further proceedings under the call.
Mr. OWEN moved to dispense with further proceedings under the call.
Mr. PORTER moved to lay that motion on the table.
This motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Mr. LOCKRIDGE moved that further proceed under the call be dispensed with.
This third consecutive motion of the same purport was agreed to.
BILLS FINALLY. PASSED.
The bill [H. R. 237--see page 30, vol. xx] concerning landlord and tenant, heretofore read the third time, was passed with Senate amendments.
The bill [H. R. 462] authorizing Railroad Companies to operate telegraphs for commercial purposes was read the third time and passed.
On motion by Mr. COMSTOCK, his bill [S. 198] legalizing certain acts of Gravel Road Companies purchasing roads at Sheriff's sales, was read the third time and passed.
PLATE GLASS INSURANCE.
Mr. CHAPMAN introduced a bill [S. 368] supplemental to an act to amend Section 1 of an act of December 21, 1865, concerning foreign Insurance Companies doing business in this State, authorizing the incorporation of Companies to insure plate glass. Subsequently, on his further motion, it was passed to the final vote and passed under a dispensation of the constitutional restriction.
RELIEF FOR BONDSMEN.
On motion by Mr. DAVIDSON, the bill [H. R. 306] to revoke the conditions of the bond of a Trustee of Center Township, Marshall County, was read the first time.
Mr. DAVIDSON explained this was not to relieve the Trustee, but his sureties. It is a just measure and ought to pass. He moved to suspend the constitutional rule that the bill may be passed upon now.
Mr. YANCEY opposed the passage of this class of bills.
Mr. BELL explained that public moneys were placed in the hands of a hardware merchant when there was but one bank in town, and that not considered safe. The Trustee is an old man and insolvent. The sureties, who are solvent, have paid their proportion of the deficit.
Mr. FOSTER was assured this measure is proper and right.
Mr. SPANN also believed this bill proposed a mere act of justice.
The motion was agreed to, the bill pressed to the final vote and passed the Senate.
FOREIGN INSURANCE COMPANY SUITS
On motion by Mr. CHAPMAN, the special order was taken up, being his bill [S. 42j to repeal an act of March 15, 1879, touching foreign Insurance Companies, with a favorable majority report from the Insurance Committee and a report from the minority recommending that the bill be indefinitely postponed.
Mr. LANGDON moved to substitute the minority for the majority report.
Mr. CHAPMAN opposed this motion. The bill simply seeks to wipe out that portion of the act rererred to, which provides in some cases that foreign Insurance Companies shall forfeit all right to hold real property, and rights on one side which are not on the other. This bill is in the interest of the people and not in the interest of any Loan Corporation. The passage of this bill would allow our citizens to borrow money from older communities at the lowest price for which money will be lent. Since the passage of this act of 1879 a number of foreign Loan Incorporations have suspended all business in Indiana. The act sought to be repealed acts as a deterrent to those possessing capital from loaning it in this State. This act page: 117[View Page 117] of 1879 forbids the transfer or institution of suits by foreign Corporations in the Federal Courts, and this bill proposes to repeal that clause, leaving it optional whether such cases shall be tried in the Federal Courts or in the local Courts. Our people need cheap money to develop our abundant possibilities. The way to bring capital here is to extend a friendly and just hand to those who have money to lend.
Mr. BROWN favored the substitution of the minority report. If the argument of the Senator is correct, these foreign Insurance Companies lie under the same disadvantages with his amendment as without it, if they obey the law. Not a single valid reason has been advanced why this amendment should be made. The only question is: Shall the Insurance Companies foreclose their mortgages in Indianapolis, or in the County where the mortgaged property is situated? To require the mortgagee living in Counties outside of this to defend his suit in this city would be imposing a burden unnecessary and unjust to the citizens of Indiana. It would be wise to discourage the people from recklessness in making laws. He opposed a high protective tariff that builds a wall around the city of Indianapolis to prevent country lawyers from coming in.
Mr. CHAPMAN insisted the existing law operates as a deterrent to money seeking borrowers coming into this State. If he could have his way he would not rob a County Attorney of a single foreclosure case brought by a foreign Insurance Company. He did not think the Court expenses are very much increased unless it be right at the threshold of the Federal Court, than in local Courts. The act of 1879 covers every contention that can possibly arise--not foreclosures solely. He never would encourage borrowing, but when one believes he can make money by borrowing money, he does not take the contrary advice with much kindness. While many will be reckless, many others in the end are benefited.
The motion was agreed to, and so the bill was indefinitely postponed.
BILLS ON THIRD READING.
On motion by Mr. OWEN, another vote was taken on the passage of the general appropriation bill [H. R. 422] which failed to pass on yesterday. The bill again failed to pass--yeas, 24; nays, 16--for want of the constitutional majority of twenty-six.
On motion by Mr. SAYRE, his bill [S. 349] to legalize the incorporation of Lagro, Wabash County, and all official acts of the Trustees thereof was passed through the two last readings under a suspension of the constitutional rules and passed the Senate.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
DECEDENT'S ESTATES.
The Lieutenant Governor announced the special order being the bill [S. 351] providing for the settlement and distribution decedents' estates, which was read for amendment in such portions as new matter is proposed.
Mr. KRAMER moved to strike out Section 4--looking to the creation of a Probate Court--which would be more expensive to estates. The Circuit Judge is better qualified to look after the reports of guardians and administrators than Master Commissioners. Enough is paid to the Judiciary.
Mr. SPANN hoped the section would stand, as Master Commissioners are provided for in the civil code bill already passed. This section rerelates to matters that will be litigated so as to relieve the Court of that class of business.
The motion to strike out was rejected.
On motion by Mr. SPANN, the Master Commissioner was allowed $5 a day
Mr. BUNDY moved to strike out Sections 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9, authorizing the Court to appoint one or more public administrators. The idea of a general administrator on dead men's estates looks like the business of the County might be thrown into the hands of two or three in each County.
Mr. GRUBBS favored the motion. He said there was no necessity for such officials. Such a proposition ought not to be grafted on the statute book.
The motion to strike out was agreed to.
On motion by Mr. HEFRON, the section prohibiting a married woman from taking letters testamentary without her husband's consent in writing filed with the County Clerk, was stricken out.
PAUPER CHILDREN.
On motion by Mr. SPANN, the Senate concurred in the House amendment to his bill [S. 130--see pages 66 and 152 of these Reports] to provide for the care of pauper children.
INSANE ASYLUM INVESTIGATION.
On motion by Mr. SAYRE, the Hose concurrent resolution, authorizing the Investigating Committee on the management of the Insane Asylum to employ a short hand reporter, was concurred in.
GENERAL APPROPRIATION BILL.
i On motion by Mr. BROWN, the vote of this morning, by which the bill [H. R. 422] making general appropriations for the years 1882 and 1883 was reconsidered.
The bill then passed the Senate--yeas, 30; nays, 12.
Pending the roll call--
Mr. BROWN said: "I have voted twice against the bill. Many of its provisions I do not approve, and many of its appropriations I think unnecessarily large. But I fear that if I continue to vote against it, that it will necessitate the calling of another extra session of the Legislature, which I think would be a worse calamity than the passage of the bill. From what has occurred in Committee in reference to it, I think a recommitment of it would only make it more extravagant than it is. I, therefore, vote 'aye.'"
Mr. BUNDY said: The appropriation bill was considered by the Senate during my absence and I have not had the opportunity to examine the same as carefully as I should desire. There are several provisions in it which do not meet my approval and for which I can not vote. I think several of the appropriations made in the bill are in excess of the amounts necessary, and I therefore vote "no."
Mr. FOSTER said: Twice I have voted against the general appropriation, because, in my opinion, it appropriates money that ought not to be appropriated. But seeing no way to remedy the matter, and believing that it is better to pass the bill than to waste any more time wrangling over it, I vote "aye."
Mr. GRAHAM said: I vote against the bill for the reason that it makes an appropriation to Prosecuting Attorneys at the rate of $700 per year, when the law only allows them $500. This I regard as a flagrant abuse of an appropriation act. The appropriation for the Hospital for the Insane is largely in excess of the amount required, according to the best information I can get. The Finance Committee shows that the State Treasurer is largely paid by the interest which he receives upon the public funds, and the appropriation for his salary should have been reduced. In short, I oppose the bill from the fact that I regard it as very imperfect, there being ample time to revise it yet before the close of the session. I vote "no."
Mr. HART said: I vote against the bill for the reason it appropriates money that the law does not justify. We have no right, in my judgment, to appropriate money that the law on fees and salaries does not provide for. It makes extra appropriation above what the law provides for: to the Governor's messager, $750, also for the Governor's office expenses, $300; extra for contin- page: 118[View Page 118] gent fund, $1,000; for the Auditor's deputy and clerk, $1,500, and so on through the bill. I think the people demand a reduction in fees and salaries, instead of an increase as this bill provides for. The Republican party urged that the Constitutional Amendments should be re-submitted, that they might regulate fees and salaries, but the legislation here seems to be in the interest of office-holders. We should have the tax-payers' interest in view as well as the office-holders'.
Mr. KEISER said: I voted against this bill because I deemed the appropriations, in some items, too large; in a word, increased the appropriations, in my estimation, too largely; but believing that we have honest men in office, both for the State and for our Benevolent, Charitable and Penal Institutions, and that they will honestly and economically administer the affairs of their respective offices, and cover any surplus into the Treasury, if any there be; and for fear that at this late date in the session the final passage of an appropriation bill may be endangered, and thus do an incalculable damage and injury to the State and her Institutions, and be more expensive to the tax-payers than this bill will be, I enter my protest, but vote "aye."
Mr. RAHM says: I wanted the bill referred to a Committee, with instructions to reduce salaries of Prosecuting Attorney from $700 to $500, as the law now stands. The extra fees that a Prosecutor now makes, in addition to the regular salary, is sufficient for all purposes. I vote "no."
Mr. SAYRE had twice voted against this bill. He objected to it for the reason that it increases the pay of Prosecuting Attorneys to $700, and saw no reason why that should done. In hopes this may be amended in the House of Representatives, he voted "aye."
Mr. TRAYLOR had voted twice for this bill, and one reason he voted for it two times is that it increases the pay of Prosecuting Attoneys. In justice to Prosecutors now in office, he thought they ought to get $700 a year. He voted "aye."
Mr. VOYLES said: I am not willing to vote for the bill because the amount appropriated by the terms of the bill exceeds the amount of compensation allowed by law as to some of the public officers. I see no use of any law regulating the compensation of officers, if when the General Assembly meets it may appropriate money as if the law reads: "Public officers shall have such compensation as may be appropriated when the question of appropriations comes up."
Mr. WHITE--I would say that I am very sorry that I can not support this bill. I am in favor of reasonable salaries, but this bill raises quite a number of salaries, so I can not support the bill; and it further appropriates more money for our Benevolent Institutions than I think is necessary; therefore I vote "no."
Mr. WOOLLEN also has voted twice against this bill, for the reason it appropriates moneys to State officers' assistants contrary to the provisions of the fee and salary bill. All appropriations should be made in accordance with the fee and salary bill. As he did not desire to see this bill defeated, he would vote 'aye.'
The vote was announced as above recorded--
So the bill passed the Senate.
NEW PROPOSITIONS.
Mr. SAYRE introduced a bill [S. 369] to provide fees and salaries for certain officers therein named, prescribing certain of their duties, and providing penalties for violation of certain of its provisions, which was read by title only, under dispensation, and 200 copies ordered printed.
Sheriffs, Clerks, Auditors, and Treasurers will be paid fixed salaries instead of by fees, as now provided by law. These salaries will be graded according to population. Sheriffs, Auditors, and Clerks will be paid $200 per 1,000 for the first 5,000 of population, $150 per 1,000 for each of the second 5,000 of population, then $100 for each 1,000 of population over 10,000 up to 25,000, Over the, last mentioned figure they are to get $150 a thousand up to 50,000, when it changes again to $100 per 1,000 for all over 50,000. The object of these last apparently contradictory allowances is to meet the requirements in the few Counties of very large population. The Committee reasons that in such Counties the business in theh County offices is much larger proportionately to population that in the smaller Counties, statistics showing that the business in these larger Counties increases beyond the increase in population. The County Treasurers' compensation is to be slightly different from that of the three other officiers mentioned above. They are to receive only $150 per 1,000 for the first 5,000 of population, and after that figure $100 per 1,000, clear on up to the highest population in any County. The various officers above mentioned get some extra "pickings" in addition to their regular salaries.
The Sheriff will be allowed fifty cents per day for the board of each prisoner, and thirty cents per mile for the distance traveled in taking convicts to the Penitentiary and insane people to the Asylum.
Clerks will be allowed pay in fixed fees for acknowledgment of deeds, for marriage licenses, and for taking and certifying depositions.
The Auditors get extra fees for the transfer of lands for taxation; also, for liquor licenses. These latter are now fixed at $1 each, but the Auditors generally get more from the liquor-sellers. The fee is one of the "constructive" kind, which stretches all the way from $1 to $4, according to the ability and disposition of the applicant to "bleed."
Under the bill the County Recorders, Coroners and Surveyors will be compensated pretty much as they are now, viz.: by fees; the graded salary system described in the foregoing not applying to these cases. The salaries of the Sheriff, Treasurer, Clerk, and Auditor, or the "Big Four" of the County officers, as they are called, are to be paid out of a general fund accumulated in the Treasurer's office as follows: All fees are to be collected from litigants and others just as now provided by law, but instead of going to the various officers collecting them they are to be turned over to the County, and from them the salaries are paid.
The Sheriff will be required to make a quarterly report of his collections to the County Commissioners, with reasons for those fees not collected. If he turns over sufficient fees to pay his salary, as provided for by law, he gets it out of the same money. If this fund is not sufficient for the purpose, his compensation is shortened to the extent of the deficiency. In other words, he can not receive in salary more than he collects in fees. This is also the case with the clerks, who do not get their salaries if the receipts of their offices will not pay them. There will be an average reduction of about 20 per cent. on the amount of all fees as compared with those at present allowed by law, which, of course, will redound to the interests of the general public and not to those of the County officials.
Mr. MARVIN introduced a bill [S. 370] to legalize the acts of Kevlin corporation, Clinton County.
THE CRIMINAL CODE.
Mr. COMSTOCK, from the Select Committee thereon, returned the bill [H. R. 367] concerning proceedings in criminal cases with sundry amendments.
On motion by Mr. BROWN, the reading of the report was dispensed with. The constitutional restriction was set aside, and the bill was read the first and second by title only.
PETITIONS ON TEMPERANCE
were introduced or filed with the Secretary under the rule of the Senate by Messrs. Brown, Graham, Menzies, Chapman, Urmston, Wood, Bundy, Gar- page: 119[View Page 119] rigus, Marvin, Traylor, Comstock, Hefron, Coffey, Davidson, Spann, Keiser, Menzies and Owen, which were referred to the Committee on Temperance without reading.
The Senate adjourned till to-morrow.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
FRIDAY, April 1, 1881--9 a. m.INSANE ASYLUM INVESTIGATION.
Mr. RYAN offered a concurrent resolution that the Chairman of the Committee for the Investigation of the Insane Hospital be allowed to employ a short hand reporter to report evidence, etc., and that the Chairman be allowed to administer oaths. He said the investigation has been going on for three evenings, and that such disclosures have been made as to justify the Committee in directing me to offer this resolution, and to state it is important that the testimony should be taken. The managers of the Hospital have procured a like reporter to represent their interest. This investigation should be done in such manner that the evidence can be presented to this House and the people.
Mr. EDWINS said it was unecessary to put the State to this expense of a short-hand reporter; that other Committees took evidence by the clerks.
The resolution was adopted.
REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES.
The Judiciary Committe returned the bill [H. R. 379] for the establishment of a Commission of Claims against the State, recommending the passage of a substitute; also, on the bill [H. R. 480] concerning publications of Sheriff's sales, recommending its passage.
These reports were concurred in and the bills were read the second time and ordered engrossed.
FREE GRAVEL ROADS.
A majority of the Committee on the Judiciary reported in favor of the passage of the bill [H. R. 358] in relation to free gravel roads, construction, etc., and a minority recommended that the bill lie on the table.
Mr. LINSDAY spoke in favor of concurring in the minority report.
Mr. KENNER was opposed to the passage of this bill, and favored the adoption of the minority report, for the reason the provisions, if enforced, would have an injurious effect upon the people of the County. One of the provisions requires the County to be responsible for the bonds issued for the construction of such roads, thereby burdening land-owners far distant from the road, not having any interest in its construction.
Mr. COLE was of the opinion that this bill, if it should become a law, would work no good. He favored the minority report.
Mr. FLOYD said: I agree with the gentleman from Huntington (Mr. Kenner) that the law is right as it is, without this proposed amendment, for the reason that the County is not the contracting party, and should not be held liable for the contract to build a gravel road.
Mr. BUSKIRK said: If this proviso is stricken out of every tax-payer in the County would help to pay these bonds, while, leaving it as it is, only those living near the road, receiving the benefit of such construction, will be held liable.
Mr. TETER said: The intention of the author may be good enough, but the effect of the bill may overreach his intention.
Mr. LINSDAY--The gentleman from Huntington (Mr. Kenner) says under the provisions of this act the County is responsible for the acts of County Commissioners. I defy any lawyer or business man to point to a single case where a County officer in the discharge of his duty becomes responsible for a dollar. When do Courts become responsible for erroneous judgments? You can not find it anywhere. They are never pecuniarily responsible for a dollar. These bonds are affected by the proceedings of the County Commissioners, who are the agents of the County. The only question involved is one of cost.
The minority report was adopted--yeas, 56; nays, 27.
EDUCATION OF PAUPER CLILDREN.
t Senator Spann's bill [S. 130--See page 66 and 152], for the education of pauper children, was read a third time.
Mr. FANCHER said: We have some 600 poor children confined in our Poor Houses, who are not receiving a particle of education. This provides for a Matron, who shall lodge, educate, and board these children at her house--keep them there and educate them. If the Matron has no house, it provides that the County Commissioners may erect one.
Mr. RYAN--I understand from the reading of the bill that there is nothing obligatory upon the Board of Commissioners to do so.
Mr. FANCHER--That is so. It also provides that such matron shall not receive more than thirty cents per day for the care of those children.
Mr. BUSKIRK moved to recommit the bill to a Special Committee, with instructions to amend so as to provide for the appointment of a new Superintendent.
Mr. BARTLETT said: I can not see the necessity of recommitting the bill. It provides that the shall be a female of suitable age and experience to take care of these children--be under her care--give them what we call a family training, that the children may be educated and sent to the Common Schools This is what is known as the "Merritt bill," which was presented in the House by myself, and when the Senate bill was referred to the Committee on County and Township Buildings, the Senate bill was substituted for this. I move to lay the motion to recommit on the table.
The motion was agreed to.
The bill passed--yeas, 77; nays 16.
Mr. Edwins' bill [H. R. 247] to regulate the proper entry of mortgages was read the third time.
Mr. MOODY--I am very much opposed to the passage of this bill. I think it is intended to accomplish that which has already been accomplished by the general tax bill passed by this Legislature. The gentleman from Madison (Mr. Edwins) says this bill will reach and cause to be taxed $5,000,000 of property that will escape taxation under the tax law. I ask the gentleman why he does not specify what property he expects to reach for taxation by this bill, not provided for in the tax bill already passed. How absurd this bill is when examined. It provides that all mortgages, before the Recorder can record them, must be entered upon the Auditor's books for taxation. Do you think a man living in Steuben County and loaning his money in DeKalb should be required to pay for the unnecessary work of entering his mortgage upon the Auditor's books for taxation, or does the gentleman propose that he shall pay a tax in both Counties? The same difficulty arises as to non-residents. Thousands of dollars are loaned by non-residents to the people of our State, and this bill proposes to tax their mortgages. What justice is there in this? The people want all property taxed once and only once, and I think the new tax bill will accomplish this, and to pass this bill will only tend to confusion without any corresponding benefit to any one. Many reasons might be urged against the passage of this bill, but I hope a word to the wise is sufficient.
Mr. GILMAN said: I believe all property page: 120[View Page 120] should be taxed, and it may be taxed twice, but when it comes to taxing it three times it is a little too much. Under the tax law just passed we have to pay a tax on all kinds of property. I pay a tax upon my farm and lands, and the man who loans me money on a mortgage pays taxes on the mortgage. Whether a man lives in or out of the State he is taxed just the same. Now this bill proposes to make the Auditor of each County a Smelling Committee to see that the citizens shall be compelled to pay taxes. I hope the bill will not pass.
Mr. CARTER thought the principle of the bill was wrong; furthermore, that ground has been fully covered by the tax law to the utmost of our ingenuity. That was supposed to reach every species of property. He thought if property under that law escaped the Assessor the owner perjures himself or escapes under the eyes of the officers. This bill says that every mortgage shall be recorded in the Recorder's office for taxation. A mortgage is not a subject for taxation. It is not a thing of itself, but it is the security of a debt, and yet the gentleman comes in here and pretends to say that a man who makes a mortgages shall first go into the Auditor's office and have it entered for taxation.
Mr. EDWINS said that he did not wish to detain the House very long in discussing this bill, as he had discussed the merits of the bill at some length on two several occasions before, and he was satisfied that in spite of what he could say the capiialists and their agents would not allow such a bill to pass this House. He was well aware how unpopular it was to advocate any measure looking to the taxing of the property of the rich with their agents here on the floor of the House guarding their interests. It was a fact patent to all that those who were worth only from $5,000 to $15,000 paid the taxes of the country. The great bondholders of the Nation were exempt from taxation, and the wealthy classes of this State were only trying to follow these examples. We ask simply that there shall be placed on the Auditor's duplicate the evidence of money loaned in the shape of mortgages, so that the Auditor could certify to the Assessor, just like he would a deed, the amount of such property. Is there any hardship in that? Certainly not. And all this sophistry is certainly in bad taste in those gentlemen opposing a measure that would place so much property on the tax duplicate for taxation that is now hidden away.
The bill failed to pass--yeas, 27; nays, 55.
The SPEAKER made the Committee, concerning the relaying of the corner-stone of the State House, to consist of Messrs. Miles, Carter and Hargrove.
OIL INSPECTOR.
Mr. FANCHED moved thoat the House do not recede from its amendments the bill [S. 25] repealing an act for the appointment of an Oil Inspector, and that a Conference, and that a Conference Committee be appointed.
The motion was agreed to.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
BILLS FINALLY PASSED.
Mr. Chandler's bill [H. R. 362] in relation to promissory notes, bank checks, bills of exchange, excepting the holidays, for the prsentation and payment of the same, was read the third time and passed--yeas, 63; nays, 9.
Mr. Neff's bill [H. R. 231] concerning partition fences, was read the third time and passed--yeas, 52; nays, 22.
Senator Henry's bill [S. 176--see page 113] to amend Section 3 of an act regulating the adoption of heirs, approved March 2, 1852, was read the third time and passed--yeas, 80; nays, 0.
Senator Menzies bill [S. 155] concerning Circuit Courts, was read the third time and passed--yeas, 77; nays, 0.
Senator Menzies bill [S. 212-see page 146] concerning ferries and prescribing punishment for the violation of its provision.
Mr. GIBSON said this bill provides that when a man owns a boat in Kentucky, he shall pay a license in this State, and puts him upon the same footing as ferries in Indiana.
The bill passed--yeas, 74; nays, 0.
PATENT BALLOT-BOX.
S Mr. MOODY moved to suspend the regular order and to reconsider the vote of the House refusing to ask the Senate to return the bill concerning elections and the contest thereof to this House. He said: When that bill was upon its passage through the House I sought an opportunity to protest against its passage. I made a careful examination of this bill after it passed. The only recommendation the bill had was that it was originated by the Codification Committee. This ballot-box will cost the people of Indiana $75,000 to cast a vote which ought to fall as easily and free to the citizens of Indiana as the beautiful snow; yet this bill was hurried through simply because the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Ryan) thought the people of Indiana wanted it. I believed when that bill passed that it would not protect the elective franchise. I believed it was a fraud upon the people of Indiana, and I am now convinced and make this effort for the purpose of reconsidering it.
Mr. CARTER--If this is a bill that will conflict with the rights of the Democratic party, the Senate can take care of it. I do not think we ought to have this bill brought back here. It has been away a number of days. It passed this House. We could not reconsider it except by a two-thirds vote.
Mr. RYAN said: It can not be possible for a man who talks as much as my friend on the left to always tell the truth. He can not always be posted on every question. The harangue has been more for the benefit of the Democracy of Indiana than the people in general. If he was so overcome with indignation, why did he not at the proper time and place manifest it? The passage of this bill was inspected and sanctioned by men of his party upon this floor--men who have more regard for the purity of elections than I think the gentleman has, from the speech he undertook to make upon the pass ge of this bill. I will venture to say that there is not a man who can produce a single objection to the features of that bill. This is not the time nor place to discuss this question.
Mr. EDWINS--The motion this morning was not for the purpose of bringing about a discussion. No one denies but what the ballot box contemplated in this bill will be useful, but I do claim that where we find that we have made a mistake, and can correct it, we should do so. Twenty-five dollars is too much to pay for these little insignificant boxes, when we can get them for $5 or $10, and I think that is sufficient to pay for them. I favor this that the Members of this House may have an opportunity to correct the mistake. This is the place to remedy the error, where it originated; therefore I am in favor of the motion.
Mr COLE--I desire to say that it comes in bad taste from a gentleman who occupies as much time as the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Ryan) to refer to the time occupied by the gentleman from Dekalb (Mr. Moody). I do not think this is a political question. I voted for the bill when it passed the House, and might vote for it again. I understood it was a fire-proof and burglar proof balot-box, one in which it was impossible to get an illegal vote. I have learned since that a plan was devised by which illegal votes were deposited into that ballot-box, and that it was only defeated by accident. I would like to examine this thing, and think it proper that the Houe should examine it, and if it can be shown that the boxes can be purchased for less than $25 a piece, it is right and just to do so.
Mr. MOODY said: "I did not suppose that page: 121[View Page 121] when I moved to reconsider the vote that I was going to strike the representative of the patentee of this ballot-box. I did not suppose that he was in the hall of this Legislative Assembly. I did this for the purpose of getting to reconsider the action of the House on the bill, and if there could be any improvement made let it be done; but for one, I am not willing to vote away $75,000 of the people's money for a thing that is of no earthly benefit to the State.
Mr. RYAN moved to lay the motion to suspend the regular order on the table.
This motion was rejected--yeas, 42; nays, 44.
The motion to suspend the regular order was also rejected.
SENATE BILLS PASSED.
Senator Menzies' bill [S. 245] to enlarge the power of incorporated cities was read the third time.
Mr. GIBSON said this bill was simply to extend the powers of City Councils.
The bill passed--yeas, 72; nays, 1.
Senator Langdon's bill [S. 157] to amend Section 44 of an act concerning guardian and ward, was read the third time and passed--yeas, 71; nays, 0.
Senator Veihe's bill [S. 153] to amend Section 1 of an act supplemental to an act concerning assignments of personal and real property for the benefits of creditors, regulating the manner, etc., was read the third time and passed--yeas, 69; nays. 0.
Senator Comstock's bill [S. 168] to amend Section 11 of an act touching the relation of guardian and ward, approved June 11, 1852, was read the third time and passed--yeas, 70; nays, 0.
Senator Menzies' bill [S. 156-see page 151 of these Report ] to amend an act concerning partition of land, approved May 20, 1852, was read the third time.
Mr. FRAZIER said the only material change in the bill is it gives trustees, administrators and executors powers in certain cases.
The bill passed--yeas, 69; nays, 1.
Senator Menzies' bill [S. 213] for the incorporation of Public Libraries, was read the third time and passed--yeas, 67; nays, 1.
The Senate amendments to the bill [H. R. 237] concerning landlords and tenants, were concurred in.
Mr. Skinner's bill [H. R. 490] to protect butter and cheese manufacture, was read the second time.
NEW PROPOSITIONS.
The following described bills were read the first time and referred:
By Mr. HINTON [H. R. 495]: To legalize the organization of Turnpike Road Companies.
By Mr. EDWINS [H. R. 496]: Concerning the ballot-boxes to be used at elections within this State. [Such box not to exceed in cost $10.]
By Mr. FULLER [H. R. 497]: For the employment of convict labor in State Prisons. [Shall be let out to the highest bidder at not less than ninety cents per day.]
By Mr. MURRAY [H. R. 498]: To authorize and empower Macadamized and Gravel Road Companies to enter upon land and condemn and appropriate stone and gravel situate to be used in the construction of such roads, providing compensation, etc.
By Mr. LINSDAY [H. R. 499]: To establish County Courts, defining their jurisdiction, duties and powers, providing for the payment, election and compensation of Judges thereof, requiring County Commissioners to do certain things in aid of said Courts, directing the transfer of business to other Courts, etc.
The House adjourned till to morrow.
