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.
