IN SENATE.
TUESDAY, April, 12, 9:30 a. m.GENERAL APPROPRIATION BILL.
On motion by Mr. MENZEES, the report of the Conference Committee on the bill H. R. 422 was read.
Mr. GRAHAM moved to reject this report and that a new Committee on Free Conference be appointed. He had hoped the Committee would strike at one abuse of the Appropriation Bill, viz.: appropriating a large sum to certain officers--notably Prosecuting Attorneys; and for other abuses.
Mr. BROWN opposed the motion. It is a plain duty owing to ourselves and our constituents to press this bill; $700 is not too much for Prosecuting Attorneys. Pass this bill and if other contingencies arise calling for an extra session, let it come.
Mr. GRAbAM would not do anything knowingly to defeat the passage of this bill at the present session. There are items in that bill that should not be in the law and for that reason, the bill should be amended. He desired it stripped of its infirmities and its wrongs.
Mr. WILSON said this Conferance Committee tried to do it duty. In twenty minutes every member can advise himself fully of all the charges proposed by the Committee. He regarded the vote increasing the appropriation to Prosecuting Attorneys some $9,000 or $10,000 as one of the most unfortunate of the season; but should this report be rejected because of this, certainly the passage of the bill this session should not be defeated because of that item.
Mr. MENZIES did not think all the wisdom of the State would go out in darkness when this Legislature adjourns. If there is pernicious legislation in this bill such action can be modified by a succeeding session. He did not think an extra session should be called, rather than pay Prosecuting Attorneys some $9,800. He did not like the system of legislation referred to and carried out in this bill, though custom has sanctioned its practice.
Mr. GARRIGUS thought it strange so small a thing should provoke such earnest contention. Why don't some Senator refer to the $25,000 appropriated to the State University? There is no more reason why the State shold give $25,000 to the Bloomington University than it should give that amount to Butler University, or Asbury, or others in the State which do as much and more to advance intelligence than that one-horse Institution in Monroe County
Mr. FOSTER believed the Senator from Hamilton (Mr. Graham) had set himself right on the record and before the people, and should not further obstruct the passage of this bill
Mr. BENZ had the utmost confidence in this Conference Committee, and should vote against the motion to reject its report.
The motion to reject was lost, and the report of the Conference Committee was concurred in.
FEES ANDS SALARIES.
The Lieutenant Governor announced the special order to be the fee and salary bill [S. 369].
Mr. BROWN moved to lay aside the special order and take up the bill [S. 298], concerning the re-location of County Seats.
Mr. BENZ saw no necessity to take this bill up; it is local in its effect and we have important measures before us. This bill only refers to Johnson County and he hoped it would not be taken up.
Mr. BROWN had asked no other favor of this kind, but many of his constituents desiring this bill he felt it a duty to ask the passage of it. It authorizes a change of County Seats on petition of 65 per cent. of the voters, and has provisions for appeal to Circuits and to Supreme Court, and carefully guards the voting.
The motion was rejected--yeas, 11; nays, 25.
Mr. MENZIES moved to lay side the fee and salary bill and take up the bill [H. R. 437] for the publication of the Revised Statutes of 1881. He said the fee and salary bill can not be acted upon and become a law this session. It has not progressed one step. He voted all the time yesterday to take it up, and if it could be passed this session he would vote for it. It is here, an obstacle to bills that have passed the House, and should be laid aside for more important matters.
page: 167[View Page 167]Mr. LANGDON understood his side of the House would make a reasonable effort to take up and examine the feel bill. It is understood that this class of legislation could not be taken until after the adoption of the Constitutional Amendment. In the past fee bills have been passed in a few hours; and now let us look into the bill and see how it conforms to the will of the majority, and if it is found impracticable it can be laid aside.
Mr. BROWN said the Senator concedes that there is no possibility of passing a fee and salary bill this session. This bill can not stand before a Justice of the Peace, it being contrary to the new amendment and to the Constitution. It is a cheat and a fraud which would represent the ignorance of the Legislature in basing compensation entirely upon population and not upon services rendered. It is as iniquitous a piece of legislation upon fees and salaries as ever was devised. He had heard no outcry in the State other than that Sheriffs have duplicated mileage in the serving of processf and Clerks charged constructive fees, but this Legislature passed a law yesterday remedying these evils. He could not repeat one-third of the important questions demanding action, and it shall go to the country that the Democratic party has not impeded legislation.
Mr. CHAPMAN cited among the chief business that should be done by this General Assembly the passage of a fee and salary bill. The complaint referred to by the Senator from Jackson (Mr. Brown) is but a mere bagatelle--but one in 10,000 of the complaints that have been made for years. To say there is not much complaint is to array the intelligence of the people against the voice of the many. The man who gets property by false pretenses is put in prison, and the party who gets of power under false pretenses should be remitted to the rear. Democrats as well as Republicans should be desirous of relieving the people from the burdens of taxation. If there is a desire and a willingness to pass this bill, there is oceans of time. Since its introduction there has been an abundance of time to perfect it. This is a strangely involved problem, it is said, to frame a fee and salary bill to conform to the Constitution. To this he filed a negative. This bill does not run below $1,000 and goes as high as $15,000, and the feelings of the average Hoosier are that a man who gets $1,500 a year gets pretty good pay. When this bill was introduced eleven days ago it was said we had not time to consider it--that the civil code and public expenses bills should be got out of the way. While not intending to belittle these bills he declared they were not one-tenth part of as much importance to the people. If a majority is opposed now to consider this bill it is due to the people that they should show their hands by voting for the motion to indefinitely postpone, for if not considered to-day it ought to be indefinitely postponed for this present session.
Mr. SPANN stood opposed to this bill because it is vicious and outrageous and can not be amended so as to be equitable and fair. He represented three of the smaller Counties in the State, and this bill destroys the value and the efficiencies of the County offices in two of these Counties. The Senator from Marion talks about consuming time. While Mr. S. ventured to predict, the Brevier Reports will show that no one has consumed more time on this floor than that Senator. We should vote to cut the head of this bill off by the shortest route, and should vote to indefinitely postpone such an unjust and unfair measure. Where is the work of this Legislature, if a fee and salary and other necessary measures fail? Shall the work of a Codification Commission, at a cost of $40,000, come to naught because we have not properly made use of the time? When a fee bill, just and right, and equitable, is put in proper shape, he should vote for it, but not for this bill.
Mr. COMSTOCK thought it not a question how much zeal and diligence has been shown heretofore, but the question is, how will the Senate vote to-day? These questions have to be met as they come up. If this motion passes, the matter of fees and salaries can not be taken up this present term. If the provisions of this bill are unjust and iniquitous, that is a reason it should be carefully and cautiously considered and perfected. There are some provisions in it, if he was properly informed, that are equitable and just. The people have sent us here with the expectation that fee and salary bill shall be passed by this General Assembly. The question is, shall we make an attempt in this direction at so late a day in this session? He favored going on with the work of codification, and was also in favor of considering the question of fees and salaries.
Mr. BELL said the record will sustain the fact that he has uniformly voted to forward this fee and salary measure. All Senators know it would be an absolute impossibility to pass this bill at the present session. In his anxiety to get a fee and salary bill before the Senate, as one of that Committee he consented to report this measure, though conscious it contains many objectionable features.
Mr. CHAPMAN stated that he had stood with the friends of this fee and salary bill on every vote yet taken.
Mr. MENZIES would not vote to indefinitely postpone that bill, because after measures further along in legislation may have been satisfactorily disposed of, he was willing to take up and consider the fee and salary bill as far as it can be considered this session.
Mr. WOOD said: We have only two or three days to pass bills. The fee and salary bill is one of the most important that ever came up before a Legislature. Why should a bill of so much importance be pressed now? It can not be considered well. Two weeks are required to perfect a fair and just bill. I am credibly informed that this bill increases the salary of Auditors and Treasurers 25 per cent. In Clinton County, about $800; in St. Joseph, about $1,900; in Vanderburg, about the same, and so on throughout the State, and the bill cuts down the Clerk and Sheriff nearly half, I am told. The salaries paid by taxation are increased, and those paid by fees arising from litigation are cut down too low. This bill may contain lurking features that would be unreasonable, and I do not propose to vote for it without any consideration. There are some bills that must be passed. We can not adjourn with honor without passing them. These will take all our time. We struck from the old bill all constructive fees, yesterday, and with that I am content.
Mr. CHAPMAN demanded the previous question, and under its operation the motion to indefinitely postpone the fee and salary bill was rejected.
The motion to postpone till to-morrow was also rejected.
Mr. BROWN made an ineffectual motion to take up the House message concerning the general appropriation bill.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
On motion by Mr.VIEHE, the Senate refused to concur in the House amendment to the probate bill [S. 351], and requested a Committee of Conference--Messrs. Viehe and Grubbs being appointed as such Committee on the part of the Senate.
FEES AND SALARIES.
The bill [S. 369] to provide fees and salaries for certain County officers was read the second time and ordered engrossed by yeas, 28; nays, 22.
Mr. HENRY moved to reconsider the vote ordering the bill engrossed.
page: 168[View Page 168]On motion by Mr. BROWN, this motion was laid on the table.
Mr. CHAPMAN moved to suspend the constitutional rule that this bill may be considered engrossed and read the third time, and on this motion he demanded the previous question.
The Senate refused to second this demand.
Mr. BELL said the bill would add $5,000 to the salary of one officer in Allen County and leave two others with but a meager sum.
The motion to suspend the constitutional rule was rejected.
Mr. CHAPMAN made a ineffectual motion--yeas, 28; nays, 10--to make this bill a special order for to-morrow at 9:30 o'clock--two-thirds not voting in the affirmative.
GENERAL APPROPRIATION BILL.
Mr. FOSTER moved that the Senate adhere to its amendment to the bill [H. R. 422] making general appropriations for the years 1881-3.
Mr. BROWN always doubted the propriety of appropriating more money in this bill that the law provides as salaries; and though supporting the increase, he would not stand one minute in the way of concurring in a report which passes so important a measure as the general appropriation bill.
Mr. GARRIGUS raised a point of order that the report of a Conference Committee must be concurred in or rejected as a whole.
Mr. HENRY voted for the increase in the appropriation bill to prosecuting attorneys, but was willing now to recede,
The motion to adhere was rejected.
REVISED STATUTES OF 1881.
The Senate returned to the bill [S. 437].
Mr. MENZIES moved to strike out the clause requiring the statutes to be printed in one volume, if practicable.
The motion was rejected.
Mr. SAYRE moved to amend so as to make the pay of the Board of Revision $4,000 a year instead of $3,000. The services of these gentlemen are richly worth $4,000 a year. He referred to sums paid Revision Commissioners in other States, and thought $4,000 little enough. The member of the Revision Board from his part of the State abandoned his professional business at a sacrifice in order to engage in this work.
Mr. SHAFFER moved to reduce the sum to $2,500 annually for the work already done, and $4,000 for the future.
Mr. VAN VORHIS, judging from the work already done, thought $2,500 a year is enough, but for the future thw ork is of a different nature, and is worth more.
Mr. GRAHAM favored the amendment proposing a salary of $2,500, regretting to attack the sum appropriated in the bill, because he had the highest respect for the members of the Board of Revision.
Mr. GRUBBS opposed the amendment to the amendment, believing it too small, and he also opposed the amendment, believing it too large, but he favored the sum named in the bill.
Mr. GARRIGUS had seen members struggling for days to keep from making the pay of Prosecuting Attorneys $200 a year more. He thought there was too much money proposed to be voted these gentlemen, for work that has had to be doctored up by the Legislature after having been gone over line by line by a Revison Committee of our own. The salaries given to Circuit Judges is ample, and all he was willing to vote for.
Mr. BROWN stated there were thirty-eight bills here undisposed of that have been prepared by this Commission. In the last twenty-five years there has not been a Legislature which has kept more closely to honest work than this, and most of this work has been based upon what has been prepared by this Revision Committee. He would stand by the proposition of the Senator from Wabash [Mr. Sayre] to pay $4,000 a year.
The amendment to the amendment was rejected.
Mr. CHAPMAN moved to substitute $3,000 a year. He desired to be liberally just.
This amendment was rejected--yeas, 19; nays, 24.
The $4,000 amendment was rejected, and the report of the Committee making the pay $3,500 per annum was concurred in without a division.
On motion by Mr. SPANN, the bill was amended as as to give the preference to resident bidders, other things being equal.
Mr. GRAHAM offered an amendment, which was rejected, striking out the provisions giving copies of the Revised Statutes to Members of the Legislature, Town Trustees and County Officers, except Clerk, Auditor, Treasurer, Sheriff and Recorder, and reducing the profits on the sales of copies from 100 to 25 per cent.
Mr. HENRY moved to strike out the clause giving a copy of the Revised Statutes to each Member of the General Assembly.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR declined to entertain the motion because its subject matter was embraced in the amendment just voted down.
The Senate amendments were ordered engrossed.
WAR LOAN BONDS.
On motion by Mr. CHAPMAN, the bill [H. R. 409] to authorize and provide for the payment of the War loan bonds of the State, was read three times--twice by title only--and finally passed under a dispensation of the constitutional restriction.
L. S. SHULER--T. N. JONES.
On motion by Mr. BENZ, the bill [H. R. 479] for the relief of Lawrence S. Shuler and Thomas N. Jones was read the first time and referred to the Judiciary Committee.
The Senate took a recess till 7:30 o'clock p. m. to complete the reading of the bill [H. R. 393] defining public offenses.
NIGHT SESSION.
The Lieutenant Governor called Mr. VIEHE to the Chair who directed the Clerk to read the bill H. R. 393.
After some time spent therein came an adjournment till to-morrow.
