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.
