THE
BREVIER LEGISLATIVE REPORTS.
VOLUME
TWENTY.
INDIANA LEGISLATURE.
SPECIAL SESSION.
IN SENATE.
FRIDAY, April 8, 1881--9:30 a. m.FARM PROPERTY INSURANCE.
On motion by Mr. LEEPER, his bill [S. 355] authorizing farming property Insurancen Companies to do business in three contiguous Counties was read the third time and passed.
STREET CARS TO INSANE ASYLUM.
On motion by Mr. CHAPMAN, his bill [S. 373] to grant a revokable license to a street railway from the Union Depot to the Insane Hospital was read the second time, and, under a dispensation of the constitutional rule, a third time and passed.
BRIDGES OVER COUNTY LINES.
On motion by Mr. DAVIS, the bill [H. R. 266--see page 70, vol. 20 of these Reports] concerning bridges over streams forming County boundary lines, was read the second time and pressed to the final reading and passed.
GREEN RIVER ISLAND.
On motion by Mr. MENZIES, the bill [S. 281--see yesterday's report] to amend Section 2 of the act of 1877 for the establishing of the State line near Green River Island, was read the third time and passed.
TEMPERANCE LEGISLATION.
The joint resolution [H. R. 7--see pages 103 and 107 of these Reports] proposing an amendment to the Constitution prohibiting the manufacture or sale of intoxicating liquors was read the third time, and, under the operation of the previous question, passed by yeas, 26 nays, 20; as follows:
YEAS--Brown, Bundy, Coffey, Comstock, Davidson, Davis, Garrigus, Graham, Grubbs, Hefron, Henry, Hostetter, Kahlo, Keiser, Langdon, Lockridge, Marvin, Owen, Ristine, Sayre, Shaffer, Smith, Spann, White, Wilson and Vancey--26.
NAYS--Bell, Benz, Bischowski, Briscoe, Chapman, Compton, Foster, Hart, Hutchinson, Kramer, Leeper, Majors, Menzies, Rahm, Traylor, Urmston, Van Vorhis, Viehe, Voyles and Wood--20.
Mr. Brown said: I shall vote for the passage of this joint resolution, but I am not sure that I ought to do so. I regard it very different from the proposition of leaving the liquor traffic in the hands of the Legislature, so that the different localities can settle the matter among themselves whether they will or will not permit the traffic to be engaged in. And if, at the next election, the people express themselves against it I will freely free to so vote in the next General Assembly. In my opinion this is the worst possible move genuine temperance cause. If this proposed amendment is finally submitted to the people it will be voted down, and that will set the temperance cause back at least twenty yeara. But the teperance advocates are clamorous for the opportunity of submitting the question to the people, and I will not stand in the way of the people expressing their opinion upon it.
Mr. COFFEY says: "Without committing myself for or against the resolution, I shall vote for it. The questions involved belong to the people, and I am willing that the same shallbe submitted to them in the form of an amendment to the Constitution for their ratification or rejection. More than 50,000 voters of the State are asking it, and believing their request should be granted, I vote 'aye.'"
Mr. DAVIDSON, understanding that he would have a chance to come in possession and be fully informed as to the views of his constituents before casting his final vote on this resolution two years hence, was willing to vote in favor of the resolution to-day.
Mr. HEFRON says: I shall vote for the adoption of this resolution, not because I indorse the provisions contained in it, but because I desire that the people of the State may have an opportunity of expressing at the ballot-box their wishes upon this much-agitated question. Upon questions of great public concern, affecting their moral or social welfare, the people, in my judgment, ought to be consulted at the earliest possible stage in the proceedings and their desires ascertained, so that their public servants may act intelligently and advisedly therein. I therefore vote "aye."
Mr. RAHM says: I voted against the prohibitory amendment, because I didn't believe in such a page: 149[View Page 149] law, when all the adjoining States can manufacture all they want to do, and sell their products to us. Our faming community would be the losers, especially those raising corn. It is better to pass a strict temperance law than to destroy the business and commerce of our State.
Mr. SMITH says: Without expressing an opinion upon the merits of the amendment, I desire to cast my vote in accordance with a conviction that I have always entertained--that being, that the people are the source of all political power, and whenever they express a desire, by petition or otherwise, to have any great matter of interest submitted to them in the form of a constitutional amendment, the Legislature should, without hesitation, make such submission, and let the voters of the State determine by the ballot, whether such proposed amendment shall become a part of the Constitution or not.
Mr. VOYLES says--I am opposed to this proposition. The resolution ought to be entitle "A resolution to so amend the Constitution that the property of such persons as are engaged in manufacturing beer, ale or other liquors, shall condemned, confiscated and rendered of no value." If this resoluton should go before the people and be adopted, millions of dollars of valuable property would become absolutely worthless in the hands of its owners. I am not in favor of doing ing tending to lead to such a hardship and ch destrucion of values. I do not believe that when the manufacturing of liquors and beer in Indiana shall be stopped by constitutional inhibition that the use of the liquors will cease. The Democratic party never gave indorsement to any such a proposition in this State, either in platform or legislation, I therefore vote "no."
Mr. WILSON says: The fundamental law of the State should express the will of the people. If there be any doubt as to whether the present Constitution does contain their will, the plain duty of the Legislature is to afford her citizens an opportunity to indicate their will in the way provided therein, without delay or hindrance. No man is worthy to represent a people whom he fears to trust on all questions of public welfare. He voted "aye."
Mr. WOOD says: I am entirely opposed to this proposed amendment. It is extreme and fanatical in its provisions, and will do more injury to the cause it is offered to aid than its authors now contemplate. The people of the State do not want it, and the expense of submiting it to a vote of the people, if ever it be submited, will be money wasted. Such a measure is fraught with danger of property rights. Thousands of dollars of property will become valueless under this pernicious proposition, and no good will come in return. It is a wrong step and will strike down vested rights and ruin much invested capital. It will aid nothing now demanded but be prolific of much detriment to business interest, and I vote "no."
Mr. YANCEY would vote for this resolution because the people petitioned for the right to settle by ballot that question. He believed in the sacred right of petition, and that the Legislature has no right to withhold from the people the right to vote on a proposition to amend the Constitution--the basis on which all our laws are enacted, and by which the people are governed. He voted "aye."
And so the joint resolution [H. R. 8] passed the Senate.
Mr. SHAFFER moved to reconsider the vote by which the joint resolution passed, and to lay that motion on the table.
The latter motion was agreed to.
TERMS OF OFFICERS.
The joint resolution [S. 6] proposing an amendment to the Constitution making the term of office of Secretary, Treasurer and Auditor of State four years instead of two, and disqualifying either from serving two consecutive terms, was read third time and passed by yeas 38; nays, 5.
The joint resolution [S. 7] proposing an amendment to the Constitution, making the term of office of County officers four years--ineligible to two consecutive terms, was read the third time.
Mr. TRAYLOR--This resolution will establish one term and only one for County officers should it become a part of the Constitution. All know that in many cases County officers during their first term electioneer for a second term. Many Treasurers say to tax-payers: You need not pay your taxes yet, wait, I will let it pass; and in one County in 1878, out of a $64,000 tax duplicate, the delinquencies run to $34,000--the Treasurer doing nothing but electioneer for a second term. And it sometimes happens that an Auditor electioneers with men who owe interest to the school fund, so they get behind as much as five years. The one term system will have a tendency to improve the civil service of the State.
The joint resolution [S. 7] passed--yeas 40; nays, 4.
WOMEN SUFFRAGE.
The joint resolution (H. R. 8] proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the State granting the right of suffrage to females having the same qualifications as males was read the third time and passed under the operation of the previous question--yeas, 27; nays, 18--as follows:
YEAS--Brown, Bundy, Comstock, Davis, Garrigus, Graham, Grubbs, Hart, Henry, Hostetter, Hutchinson, Kahlo, Keiser, Langdon, Leeper, Lockridge, Menzies, Owen, Ristine, Sayre, Shaffer, Smith, Spann, Van Vorhis, White, Wilson and Yancy--27.
NAYS--Bell, Benz, Bischowski, Brisoe, Chapman, Compton, Davidson, Foster, Hefron, Kramer, Majors, Marvin, Rahm, Traylor, Urmston, Viehe, Voyles and Wood--18.
Mr. BROWN said: Eary at the last session I brought in a bill for a Constitutional Convention. I was then answered by the Republican members of the Senate that the seven amendments then pending to the Constitution, if adopted, would cure all the ills that were existing in consequence of a defective Constitution; that they would bind up the bruised arms and heal all the wounds of the people. Yet I find that in less than one month after the adoption of the seven amendments eight more are brought in, principally by Republicans, as necessary to cure Constitutional imperfections. I think more is being done to-day than has been done before to hasten the day when the people will call a Convention to interpose in their behalf against this patch-work upon the Constitution and a rectification of this foolishness. And my desire that there shall soon be such a Convention, for such purposes, is the controlling reason why I vote for these amendments.
Mr. HEFRON says: Though I am always willing to submit to the judgment of the people upon questions of all public concern, I can not give the sanction of my vote to a proposition which contaius such unreasonable and such unjust discriminations, as in my judgment, are contained in this resolution. I vote "no."
Mr. RAHM says: I have asked quite a large number of ladies of both parties in Vanderburgh County if they desired to vote, etc., and each and every one answered "No!"with the request for me to vote against all such nonsense. I vote "no."
Mr. WILSON says: "I believe 'all women (equally with men) are born free and equal;' that representation should go with taxation. Why should we refuse equal voice in the Government to the good, the pure, the intelligent citizen because she is a woman, and grant it to the low, vicious and ignorant simply because he is man? I do not believe any man was ever injured by association with the other sex in any legitimate enterprise in life. Why should we fear to share with them political power, and yet trust them with our 'lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor?' At least I am willing to let our page: 150[View Page 150] people direct us, and abide the expression of their will constitutionally expressed."
Mr. YANCEY says: I vote for this resolution because I believe it but right and just.
And so the joint resolution [H. R. 8] passed the Senate.
SUPREME JUDGES.
The joint resolution [S. 15] proposing an amendment to the State Constitution, increasing the number of Supreme Judge to nine, five of whom shall form a quorum, to serve for six years if they so long behave well, was read the third time and rejected by yeas, 18; nays, 23.
THE LEGISLATURE.
The joint resolution [S. 16] proposing to amend the Constitution so the Senate shall be compose of thirty and the House of Representatives of sixty members, was also rejected by yeas, 9; nays, 32.
The joint resolution [S. 17] proposing an amendment to the Constitution of Indiana so that the regular sessions of the General Assembly may continue for 100 days and special, or called, sessions thirty days, was read the third time and passed by yeas, 34; nays, 8.
LOAN OF CITY SINKING FUND.
Mr. BELL introduced a bill [S. 376] to authorize any cities or town having a bonded debt and having a sinking fund created for the liquidation of said debt, to loan the said sinking fund and add the interest to the principal of said fund, which was read the first time.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
PUBLIC OFFENSES.
The Senate returned to the bill S. 393.
Committee amendments to over twenty sections were adopted.
Mr. MARVIN said there are small streams all over the State that dry up in the summer, but have fish in them in November. He moved to amend so as allow a six foot dip net to be used in that month in any creek.
Mr. HENRY objected to this proviso.
Mr. LANGDON was sure the people desired the fish protected. Under such amendments poachers would be on hand and the streams would be depopulated of food fishes. Fishes in the streams of Indiana are almost all gone. It is said one acre of pure water will produce more food product than five acres of land. Let us join hands on the subject of protecting and propagating fishes, and in time more can be taken by hook and line than by seine now. Fish food in Indiana is the rich man's food, because the streams are so depleted that fish are costly, and are imported from other States. He opposed the amendment.
Mr. WILSON also objected to the amendment. Let such amendments be withheld for two years, and he hoped, under the auspices of the Fish Commission, much advantage will be seen from its operation.
Mr. MARVIN withdrew his amendment.
On motion by Mr. LOCKRIDGE, Section 163 was amended so as to prohibit the malicious depositing of any putrid, noisome or offensive substance on any public highway.
INDIANA COAST SURVEY.
On motion by Mr. RISTINE, the bill [H.R. 359--see page 112, vol. 20.] relating to the operation of the United States Court and geodetic survey in the State of Indiana was read the second time by title and the third time by sections under a dispensation of the rules.
Mr. RISTINE said this a measure which costs the State of Indiana nothing, and will result in great benefit to the State. The purpose of this bill is to aid the survey to be made and enable stations to be erected on elevated knobs--perhaps one or more in a County. Another object of the bill is to protect a permanent monument that is to be placed the earth and prevent it from being removed.
The bill passed--yeas, 86; nays, 1.
SALES BY INFANTS.
On motion by Mr. FOSTER, the bill [H. R. 124] relating to sales by infants of real and personal property, providing for disaffirming such sales and recovery of the property, was read the third time.
Mr. BELL--It provides that an infant femme covert can not, after making a conveyance, set it aside without repaying the consideration, and in other cases where an infant falsely represents to be of lawful age, the same requirements follow.
Mr. MENZIES objected to the bill, especially to the second section, which proposes to strike down the shield for infants.
Mr. BELL insisted this bill was in the interest of common honesty, and intended to strike the sword from the hand of infants and not to touch the shield.
Mr. BROWN said: This bill, if passed into a law, would affect past as well as future transaction. Upon principle it is unwise to overturn a law upon the subject of contracts without a saving clause that it shall apply to the future only. This bill leaves a port open by which the greatest kind of frauds could be perpetrated. He gave reasons why the bill should not pass.
Mr. FOSTER advocated the passage of the bill.
Mr. HENRY declared this bill to be in the interest of grossest dishonesty.
Mr. CHAPMAN thought the bill ought to be recommitted. The second section states what the law should be, in his judgment.
On motion by Mr. BUNDY, the bill was referred to a Select Committee of three.
HUSBAND AND WIFE.
On motion by Mr. COMSTOCK, the Senate voted to adhere to its amendments to the bill [H. R. 219] concerning husband and wife, and ask for a Committee of Free Conference.
The Senate took recess till 7:30 o'clock.
NIGHT SESSION.
Mr. Traylor took the Chair, and directed the Clerk to read the bill [H. R. 367] concerning proceedings in criminal cases. After some time--
Came an adjournment till to morrow.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
FRIDAY, April 8, 1881, 9 a. m.PLATE GLASS INSURANCE.
The bill [S. 368] supplemental to an act regulating foreign Insurance Companies, was read the second time.
Mr. FURNAS moved to amend the bill by adding to Section 1, Provided that nothing in this act shall effect or control the prosecutions for violation of law and of the provisions of the foreign insurance laws of the State prior to the passage of this act.
Mr. EDWINS was opposed to this amendment, for the reason that this Plate Glass Insurance Company about a year ago got a certificate from the officers of State, certifying that they could do business in the State with $100,000 capital. The Company is not strictly responsible, therefore he thought the amendment should not be adopted.
Mr. RYAN said this Insurance Company knew when they commenced doing business in this State that they were doing so in violation of law--a well-established, recognized statute of the State, and that they were seeking and willing to take its chances of slipping through, and transact business in the manner in which they did without proseution. It would be an unjust discrimination against other organizations were the page: 15[1][View Page 15[1]]Legislature to step in and legalize the acts after having been visited with the consequence of violation of law. These laws were supposed to have been instituted to protect the rights of the people, and if this Insurance Company takes its chances in the violation of the law, I say it is small business for this body to pass a law exempting them from the consequences of this penal offense. This amendment is one which ought to prevail. I am utterly opposed to this thing of legalized statutes, and this Legislature has run entirely mad upon that subject. Corporations, Insurance Companies, Notaries Public and officers of all kinds have been in here during the session with legalizing acts. The Legislature had better organize itself into a different sort of an Institution or stop legalizing any corporation or individual which has violated the law. Any horse thief has as good a right to come in here and say that the Auditor of the State gave him the priviledge to steal that horse, and that the Legislature should pass a law relieving him of the penalty. I hope the amendment will prevail.
Mr. FRAZIER--This bill, by its first section, changes the amount of capital required to be held by Plate Glass Insurance Companies from $200,000 to $100,000. This is as it should be. Life and Fire Insurance Companies are liable at any time to suffer large losses, even beyond the amount of the capital required; but the business of insuring plate glass is small. The loss liable to be sustained is small compared with the loss which may befall a Fire Insurance Company; and if $200,000 is sufficient for a Fire or Life Insurance Company, $100,000 is certainly sufficient for a Plate Glass Company. No Plate Glass Company in the country has more that $100,000 capital, and to require more is to exclude them from doing business in the State. The second section makes all associations and partnerships not incorporated under Indiana laws and engaged in the business of insuring plate glass foreign Insurance Companies within the meaning of the act, This is certainly right. We require incorporated Companies to have certain qualifications or they can not do business in the State, and yet a firm without capital can, under the law, do business here and pay no taxes, be governed by no laws, have no agent here upon whom summons can be served, pay their losses if they see fit, and if they fail our citizens are compelled to go out of the State to sue. I can not see the consistency of making certain requirements of a corporation and at the same time permitting partnerships to transact the same business without any of these requirements. The second section puts all, whether corporations, associations or partnerships, upon an equality, and makes the same requirements of all.
The amendment of the gentleman from Marion is for the purpose of permitting one of these partnerships, which is amenable to no law of the State, to persecute and harrass in the Courts a corporation which seeks to comply with the law, pays taxes, has the requisite capital, and can be sued in this State. The adoption of the amendment would be an injunction, and it should not be adopted.
Mr. KENNER--There is one fundamental section in the bill of rights which says the General Assembly shall not grant to any citizen previlege which shall not be extended to other citizens. If this Company has violated the law--if they have got into the State of Indiana and conducted their business with $100,000 or less capital, when the law says a Company of this kind shall have $200,000 capital, they have violated the law, and the question with us is: Shall we settle this matter here after the Court has held her amenable to the law for violation and say they are exonerated? I believe the law is unconstitutional on the merits of the bill itself. It says there is an Insurance Company which came into the State, issued policies, with a capital of only $100,000 capital when other Companies must have $200,000 capital, thus giving them a right which we deny every other Company in this broad land. I do not want to go that far. I say, let the amendment prevail.
Mr. MOODY--I insist it was no fault of the Company that they did business in this State with a capital of only $100,000 instead of $200,000, for the authority of our own State, issued under seal of the Auditor of State, said they might takes risks in this State with their capital stock, and now are we to say that the door shall stand open for these New York gentlemen to satisfy their malice by bringing a criminal prosecution against this Company for each and every policy they have issued in this State. If you gentlmen think this is just, then vote for the amendment; but if you think and I think, and I believe you do--that this would be an act of injustice on the part of the State of Indiana toward this Company--then vote the amendment down.
Mr. WRIGHT--I undertake to say that under the circumstances there is nothing done but what ought to be legalized. The question is, is $100,000 sufficient for a Company of this kind? A Life and Fire Insurance requireds $200,000 capital stock. The simple question for the members to decide is should this Plate Glass Company be required to have as much stock as Life and Fire Insurance Companies? I undertake to say not, because I believe the business of Life and Fire Insurance Companies may have ten times as much capital involved, and ten times as many losses as Plate Glass Companies. One hundred thousand dollars is ample security to every man who insures his plate glass in such a corporation.
Mr. FULLER--From what I understand of this amendment, I am in favor of it. The law knows nothing that excuses violation by a corporation or person on account of ignorance. If I violate a law, I am amenable to the law, whether the law is known to me or not, and a corporation has to abide by the law as an individual party. If there is nothing wrong, there is nothing to harm them. I do not think the Legislature ought to amend a law so as to excuse parties, and especially great corporations, governed by attorneys that are able to tell them what is lawful. We have no right to undo what the Courts have done.
Mr. MEREDITH thought it only a matter of good faith. They come in here and do business, as they thought, in a legitimate way. They have violated the law. It is a question whether we shall keep good faith with these officers and the persons doing business with them.
The amendment was rejected--yeas, 38; nays, 44--and the bill was ordered engrossed.
HOUSE BILLS PASSED.
The Committee reported on the bill [H. R. 291, see page 69 of these Reports] defining the rank, powers and duties of the Adjutant General, fixing his salary, recommending its passage.
The report was concurred; the bill passed--yeas, 56; nays, 26.
Mr. Cotton's bill [H. R. 345] to transfer the Center Township Library to Marion County was read the third time and passed--yeas, 66; nays, 5.
Mr. SHEILDS' bill [H. R. 383] to provide for the removal of drifts from streams other than those running between States was read the third time. He said the bill is one in which my people are very much interesteo. It can be demonstrated by the removal of drifts that we can reclaim at least 100 miles of overflowed land, thereby lessening the amount of disease vastly. I hope the bill will pass.
The bill passed--yeas, 68; nays, 1.
DRAINAGE OF THE KANKAKEE MARSH.
Senator Garrigus' bill [S. 300] to provide for the page: 152[View Page 152] survey and leveling up of wet and swamp lands and contemplated routes and outlay of watercourse of the Kankakee regions, appropriating $5,000 for that purpose, was read the third time.
Mr. GARDNER said this is a very important bill to the State of Indiana. There are nearly a million acres of wet lands that are comparatively worthless, that it is believed may be reclaimed by a simple system of drainage. This act contemplates a survey to ascertain what routes are practicable for the drainage of this land. A certain number of surveys have been made, under the authority of the United States, for the purpose of ascertaining whether the Kankakee is a stream that can be drained so as to render this land useful. It is very well known that some of the richest lands in the State of Indiana are located in this region, which only require a suitable system of drainage to make them among the best paying lands of the State, now wholly unprofitable. This bill is in the interest of economy to the whole State, as it will, if drained, bring in a large increase of revenue. I hope the bill will pass.
Mr. BEATTY said: I am very well acquainted with these lands. A larger portion of the land is owned by citizens of the adjoining Counties and of the State, but a small portion of it is owned by men outside of the State.
Mr. CARR was opposed to the bill upon the ground that it was unfair to tax the people of the State to survey lands owned by private individuals.
Mr. THOMPSON said there was a gigantic scheme gotten up for the purpose of draining this marsh. I understand this is only a modest way by which improvements can be made, and the next Legislature, after this $5,000 is expended, will be called upon to appropriate a much larger amount. It is only a gigantic scheme by which the people are taxed for this improvement which benefits only private individuals, and I think the Legislature ought to vote this measure down.
Mr. WOLF--I can not see why members should object to this bill. I live in a village within four miles of the Kankakee marsh, and I know there is a vast amount of lands there--the best in the State. This bill should become a law, or any other bill that tends to improve this large tract of land, so that it will be cultivated and become useful to the State.
The failed to pass--yeas, 41; nays, 26--for the want of a constitutional majority.
On motion by Mr. FALL, the bill [S. 349] to legalize the incorporation of the town of Lagro was read the second time by title, the third time by sections, and passed--yeas, 57; nays, 16.
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
The joint resolution [H. R. 9] to amend the Constitution of the State so that State and County officers shall hold for four years was read the third time, and passed--yeas, 57; nays, 16.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time and referred:
By Mr. CARTER [H. R. 525]: To amend Sections 1 and 7 of an act in relation to the formation of limited partnerships.
By Mr. McDOWELL [H. R. 526]: Requiring County Treasurers to account for interest received or promised to be given, and the disposition to be made of such interest. [Such interest to be paid into the County Treasury as a County fund to be used for the repair and construction of roads, bridges, etc.]
BUREAU OF STATISTICS.
Mr. Kenner's bill [H. R. 232] to establish a Bureau of Statistics for the collection and dissemination of facts concerning agriculture, manufacturing, mining, emigration, transportation, social and sanitary conditions, etc., was read the third time.
Mr. KENNER said--The Bureau of Statistics under this amendment will be of inestimable value to the State of Indiana.
The bill passed--yeas, 66; nays, 14.
INCORPORATIONS.
Mr. HUSTON's bill[H. R. 420] concerning corporations, was read for the third time.
Mr. FRAZIER said it merely corrects other acts on the subject of corporations for the purpose of getting it all together; the several laws on the subject of corporations is compiled in one. There is no radical change from the law as it now stands.
The bill passed--yeas, 68; nays, 8.
CRIMINAL COURTS.
Senator Comstock's bill [S. 276], concerning Criminal Courts, was read the third time.
Mr. MORGAN moved to amend the bill--Section 8--by adding the following: "Provided, however, that the said Criminal Court in Vigo County shall cease to exist after the third Monday in November, 1882."
Mr. MORGAN--The bill before the House was prepared by the Revision Commission, codifying in one law the various statutes creating Criminal Courts in Allen, Marion and Vigo Counties, and repealing the laws at just creating these Courts. The Governor has first approved the House bill 17, creating in Vigo County a Superior Court and abolishing the Criminal Court after the third Monday in November, 1882. If this bill be passed as it is now, being the latest statute, it will in effect repeal the clause in House Bill 17, abolishing the Vigo Criminal Court on and after November, 1882. In other words, it will give us three Court in Vigo County to continue indefinitely, while the law which we have just passed, and has been signed by the Governor, give us three Courts only until November, 1882. Therefore I hope no gentleman will vote against the amendment.
The amendment was adopted, considered as engrossed, and the bill passed--yeas, 69; nays, 2.
CLAIMS AGAINST THE STATE.
Mr. FLOOD'S bill [H. R. 377] regulating the presentation of claims to the General Assembly [to file an itemized statement verified by affidavit with the State Auditor] was read the third time. He said the object of this bill is simply to revise the methods by which these claims which are brought to the attention of the Legislature, may be put in shape, that this body may have the evidence necessary to form correct conclusions in the consideration of such claims.
The bill passed--yeas, 56; nays, 11.
L. S. SHULER AND T. R. JONES.
Mr. Carter's bill [H. R 479] for the relief of Lawrence S. Shuler and Thomas R. Jones was read the third time.
Mr. CARTER said some years ago a judgment was rendered in the Clarke Circuit Court, against Shuler and his bondsman, and in the absence of Shuler the other parties agreed to pay $1,500, and the further agreement was made that the remaining bondsmen, who were then still living, would make the amount $300 each. The two bondsmen who were there and made the agreement have paid theirs and the other one is not able to pay it. Mr. Shuler is himself absolutely paralyzed. It is also claimed if Shuler had been there that judgment would not have been rendered against them.
The SPEAKER (Mr. Ridpath)--This is a matter which affects one of my constituents. This bill is to release two gentlemen from the liability of a judgment. As a legal proposition, the credits on the bond have been already released, from the fact that two parties to the judgment have paid their part of the judgment by an agreement with page: 153[View Page 153] the Attorney General, and the other part of the judgment was not a part of the agreement. Old man Jones lives over in my District. He is old and unable to pay the judgment.
The bill passed--yeas, 71; nays, 1.
BILLS PASSED.
Mr. Frazer's bill [H. R. 443] to legalize the incorporation of the town of Syracuse, Kosciusko County, was read the third time and passed--yeas, 71; nays, 1.
The bill [S. 374] to legalize the proceedings of the Board of Trustees of the town of Bedford was read the second time by title, the third time by sections and passed--yeas, 76; nays, 0.
POLYGAMY.
Mr. Edwins offered a joint resolution that our Senators and Representatives in Congress be requested to use their influence to secure the passage of a law to prohibit polygamy in any of the States or Territories of the United States, as this body looks upon it, as not only unchristian, but grossly revolting in its tendency.
On motion by Mr. MEREDITH, the resolution was referred to the Committee on Federal Relations.
CITY MARSHALS.
On motion by Mr. GIBSON, the bill [S. 232] defining the jurisdiction and powers of allowing City Marshals certain fees in addition to their salary, was read the second time, the third time by sections and passed-yeas, 74; nays, 8.
COMMON CARRIERS.
Mr. Gillum's bill [H. R. 382 to regulate the carrying of baggage, packages, freight by railroads, steamboats, canal-boats, Express Companies, hack and stage lines and other common carriers, was read the third time and passed--yeas, 74; nays, 0.
BENEVOLENT INSTITUTIONS.
Mr. Gregory's bill [H. R. 387] to create a Board of Visitors for the Benevolent, Penal and Reformatory Institutions, to examine into management, conditions, etc., was read the third time and passed--yeas, 53; nays 35.
Then the House adjourned.
BILLS PASSED THIS SESSION:
SENATE.
No. 278. An act to amend Section 8 of an act entitled an act to authorize and regulate the incorporation of banks, discount and deposit, in the State of Indiana, approved February 7, 1873.
No. 245. An act to enlarge the powers of incorporated cities.
No. 10. An act empowering County Commissioners to convey cemeteries, and providing for the management and control thereof.
No. 130. An act to provide more effectively for the care, support and education of pauper children, repealing all laws in conflict therewith and declaring an emergency.
No. 313. An act for the incorporation of public libraries.
No. 205. An act to amend an act entitled an act to incorporate the German Theological Seminary of the German Evangelical Synod of Missouri, Ohio and other States, approved January 21, 1850, and legalizing certain acts of Directors done thereunder.
No. 192. An act to legalize the proceedings of the Board of School Trustees of the town of Milton, Wayne County, Indiana, in borrowing money for the support of the public schools of said town, and authorizing the Schools and Town Boards of Trustees of said town to provide for the payment of the same by taxation or otherwise.
No. 175. An act for the relief of the estate of Martin S. Prewett, deceased, Daniel Goldsbury and William T. Wright.
No. 24. An act to authorize the appointment of a Commissioner of Fisheries for the State of Indiana, defining his duties and making an appropriation to defray the expenses thereof.
No. 32. An act to amend Section 1 of an act entitled an act to amend Section 2 of an act entitled an act concerning the organization and perpetuity of voluntary associations, and repealing former laws in reference thereto, approved February 12, 1855, and repealing each act repealed by said act, and authorizing gifts, devices by will to be made to any corporation or purpose contemplated by this act, approved February 20, 1867, and declaring an emergency to exist, approved December 19, 1872, and declaring an emergency.
No. 164. An act to amend an act to incorporate the Indianapolis Insurance Company, approved February 8, 1836, the title of said corporation having been changed to Bank of Commerce by a decree of the Marion Circuit Court December 7, 1875.
No. 330. An act supplemental to an act entitled an act to authorize the Protestant Episcopal Church in this State to raise a fund for the support of the Bishop and to aid itinerant and superannuated ministers, their widows and children, approved June 15, 1844, and to enlarge the corporate powers of the Trustees therein named.
No. 67. An act to extend the terms of office of Town Trustees in all incorporate towns designating the manner in which they should be chosen at the next ensuing May election and thereafter and prescribing some of their duties.
No. 299. An act to repeal an act entitled an act to establish a Superior Court in the County of Cass, defining its jurisdiction and providing for the election and compensation of the Judge thereof, and other matters connected therewith, and declaring an emergency, approved March 3, 1877, providing for the transfer of all business, books and papers of such Superior Court.
No. 266. An act creating the Twenty-ninth Judicial Circuit of the State of Indiana, and providing for the transfer and completion of all business now pending in the Superior Court of Cass County to the said Circuit Court, and declaring an emergency.
No. 168. An act to amend an act entitled an act to amend the eleventh section of an act touching the relation of guardian and ward, approved June 9, 1852, and regulating suits on bond of guardians removing from the State, approved March 9, 1867.
No. 155. An act concerning Circuit Courts.
No. 156. An act to amend an act entitled an act concerning the partition of lands, approved March 20, 1852, and to repeal an act therein named.
No. 119. An act to legalize the acts of proceedings of the Board of Trustees and other officers of the town of Monroesville, Allen County, in the State of Indiana, and also the record by them made of their proceedings and acts in all cases since the incorporation of said town, and declaring an emergency.
No. 271. An act concerning proceedings of civil cases.
No. 153. An act to amend Section 1 of an act entitled an act amendatory and supplemental to an act entitled an act providing for voluntary assessment of personal and real property in trust for the benefit of creditors, and regulating the mode of administering the same, approved March 5, 1859, approved February 1, 1875.
HOUSE.
No. 306. An act revoking the conditions of the bond of the Trustee of Center Township, of Marshall County, Indiana.
No. 462. An act to authorize Railroad Companies to construct, acquire, maintain and operate telegraph lines for commercial and other purposes, and declaring an emergency.
No. 65. An act to legalize the incorporation of the Union Christian College of Merom, Ind., and to legalize all the acts of said corporation and all page: 154[View Page 154] contracts made with and by said corporation, and declaring an emergency.
No 458. An act to appropriate money to pay the expenses of the present special session of the General Assembly, and directing the management of its employment.
No. 175. An act to authorize and empower the Auditor of the State of Indiana to convey and sell by deed under seal of his office to William N. McCoy, of the city of Jeffersonville, County of Clark, State of Indiana, certain real estate now owned by the said State in Jeffersonville.
No. 122. An act to amend Section 8 of the act entitled an act to prescribe certain powers and duties of County Commissioners, Township Trustees, City Councils, and Trustees of towns in relation to elections. Also prescribing certain powers and duties of Inspectors and Judges of elections and penalties for frauds in the performance of their official duties, to prevent illegal and fraudulent voting prescribing penalties for the violation of this act, and repealing an act entitled an act repealing Sections 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19 20, 21 and 22 of an act entitled an act to provide for the registry of voters and to declare their residence, and to punish fraudulent practices touching elections and defining the duties of certain officers therein named and the form of the ballots, and providing compensation for the services of such officers, approved March 17, 1867, and prescribing further duties of the officers of elections, and providing for the appointment of the necessary officers and clerks for holding such elections, approved May 13, 1869, approved March 14, 1877, and declaring an emergency.
No. 340. An act to legalize ordinance numbered 83, passed by the Trustees of the town of Edinburg, in Johnson County Indiana, on the 22d day of March, 1879, defining the corporate limits and boundary of said town, and defining the number and boundaries of the Wards of said town, and fixing the voting places therein, and to legalize the election held in the town of Edinburg aforesaid, held therein on the first Monday in May, in the year 1880, and to legalize the official acts of the Board of Trustees and all other officers of said town elected at said election at the time aforsaid, under an act for the incorporation of towns, defining their powers, providing for the election of officers therefore, and defining their duties, approved June 11, 1852, and to legalize all by-laws, ordinances, rules, regulations, tax levies and all other official acts and proceedings of said Board of Trustees and other officers of said town adopted in pursuance thereof, approved June 11, 1852, and declaring an emergency.
No. 176. An act to legalize the levy and sale upon execution of the rights, franchises and chases in action of the New Pittsburg and Brown Turnpike Company, and to legalize the incorporation of the New Pittsburg and Hanover Turnpike Company by the purchasers at said sale under and by virtue of an act entitled an act authorizing the purchasers of railroads,plank-roads, turnpike roads and macadamized roads, or parts thereof, under mortgage sale or sales made according to the terms of deeds of trust, to organize as incorporated Companies, and prescribing their powers and duties, approved March 5, 1859, and to legalize the by-laws and all lawful acts of said Company so organized.
No. 61. Ac act concerning Telephone Companies, and supplemental to an act for the incorporation of Manufacturing and Mining Companies and Companies for mechanical, chemical and building purposes, approved May 20, 1852, and all acts amendatory thereof, and supplemental thereto, and declaring an emergency.
No. 239. An act to legalize the incorporation of the the town of Geneva in the county of Adams and the State of Indiana, and to legalize the official acts of the Board of Trustees of said town of Geneva.
No. 237. An act concerning landlord and tenant.
No. 204. An act concerning taxation.
No. 370. An act supplemental to an act entitled an act providing for the incorporation of Companies formed for the purpose of constructing bridges for railway or common railway purposes, or both, over rivers or streams forming the boundaries of the State of Indiana or a part thereof, approved March 2, 1875.
