THE
BREVIER LEGISLATIVE REPORTS.
VOLUME TWENTY-ONE.
INDIANA LEGISLATURE.
IN SENATE.
TUESDAY, January 23, 1883-10 a. m.The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR announced prayer by Rev. David Walk, of the Central Christian Church.
On motion by Mr. McINTOSH the reading of the Secretary's minutes of yesterday's proceedings were dispensed with.
Mr. RISTINE presented a petition from citizens of Montgomery County, praying for a tax on Foreign Fire Insurance Companies, which was referred to the Committee on Insurance without reading.
Mr. SMITH of Delaware presented the following which was referred to the Committee on Temperance:
To the General Assembly of the State of Indiana:
Whereas, It has been the recognized right of Government to prohibit or destroy anything detrimental to the public good, as decided by the Supreme Court of the United States; and
Whereas, The liquor traffic-the foe of God and man-with its long train of crime and wretchedness, stands judged and condemned by large multitudes of good and intelligent people; and
Whereas, The present laws of the State, adopted for the pretended regulations of the sale of intoxicated liquors as a beverage, have failed to protect the inhabitants of the State against the excessive taxation, pauperism, crime and the destruction of morals resulting from the liquor traffic; and
Whereas, The last session of the General Assembly of the State of Indiana passed a joint resolution, intended as an amendment to our State Constitution, forever prohibiting in the State the manufacture and sale of intoxicating liquor as a beverage; therefore
Resolved, That we, the Quarterly Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church, of Winchester, Ind., do most heartily approve the action of the last General Assembly of the State of Indiana in voting to submit to a vote the people such an amendment to our State Constitution.
Resolved, That we hereby memorialize, request, petition, and pray your Honorable Body to agree to said amendment and vote to submit the same to a direct vote of the people at a special election.
R. D. ROBINSON, Presiding Elder .
E. H. BUTLER,
Secretry
H. N. HERRICK, Pastor.
Winchester, Ind., Dec 10, 1882.
EMPLOYES OF THE DOORKEEPER
Mr. BROWN, from the Committee on Executive Appointments, returned a resolution that all employes not authorized by law be discharged, with a report recommending the retention of the twelve attendents employed by the Doorkeeper, as they are all needed.
Mr. DUNCAN, from the same Committee, recommended the discharge of all employes not authorized by law. If more is necessary, then there should be a change in the law.
Mr. DUNCAN: At the time the resolution was offered for the appointment of the extra five Doorkeepers there was an impression among new members that the law governing these appointments was enacted long ago, whea not so many were needed; but at the close of a hundred days' session of the last General Assembly, there was a law passed authorizing the Doorkeeper to employ but seven assistants; and if it was necessary to have more than seven, Senators must then have understood it. As long as the law stands as it does, he should oppose the appointment of a single attendant more than is allowed by law.
Mr. SPANN contended that the Senate may direct more attendants than the law allows.
Mr. McINTOSH possibly has been caught in a trap in offering this resolution, but he found in the statute the number of assistants the Doorkeeper was authorized to appoint and their duties. He did not know where these employes are. In the House where there are 100 members, they have but seven, the number authorized by law under the Doorkeeper, while we have twelve-the Doorkeeper himself making thirteen. They are not all necessary and it is an imposition and an outrage on the taxpayers. There are at least forty employes in the Senate, as he understood.
Mr. BROWN favored the majority report, believing these employes are all needed. He moved to lay the report and resolution on the table.
The motion was agreed to by yeas, 31; nays, 14.
page: 92[View Page 92]RESOLUTIONS.
Mr. WILLARD offered a resolution according the privileges of the floor to ex-Senator Wright, ot Iowa, which was adopted.
THE BENEVOLENT INSTITUTIONS.
Mr. YANCEY offered a resolution complimentary to the officials of the Benevolent Institutions cf the State. and declaring that they be continued in office until the meeting of the next General Assembly.
Mr. BROWN objected to its consideration.
The LIEUTENENT GOVERNOR: It will lie on the table.
EXECUTIVE APPOINTMENTS.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR announced the special order being the majority and minority reports from the Committee on Executive Appointments, submitted on Saturday.
The question being on concurring in the minority report recommending that the Senate consent to and confirm the appointments of the Governor for Superintendent and Trustees for the Benevolent Institutions of the State forthwith-
Mr. FOULKE believed these appointments should be confirmed at once, every one being competent and fit persons for the positions named. There is no objection on personal grounds, but only that time may be given for the consideration of a bill proposing to take these appointments from the Governor. As a politician, as soon as it shown these appointments are to be made, not so much for fitness as the means to further partisan ends, the worse it will be for the Democratic party. Appointees of legislative caucuses are rewarded for party labor, while more competent persons are more likely to come by executive appointments. If incompetent persons are recommended by the Governor let them not be confirmed.
Mr. BUNDY could not understand the object of postponing the confirmation of these appointments. It has not even been insinuated that these men are not competent for the positions to which they have been appointed. If the Senate is to wait for partisan legislation to be enacted we are not discharging our duties under the law, nor acting as common courtesy would indicate to the Governor.
Here a Committee from the House of Representatives await their presence for a Joint Convention in pursuance of concurrent action of the two bodies of the General Assembly. Thereupon, on motion, Senators left their chamber in charge of the Committee of Escort.
When Senators returned the Senate took a recess till 2 o'clock p. m.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
The following described bills were introduced, read the first time and severally referred to appropriate Committees unless otherwise stated:
By Mr. WHITE [S. 163] concerning County Teachers' Institutes where an average attendance of twenty five an allowance of $35; where an average of forty teachers, drawing a warrant for $50; an average of fifty-five, the warrant shall be drawn for $100 for the purpose of defraying the expense of said institute.
By Mr. BUNDY [S. 164] to amend Section 457 of the act concerning proceedings in civil cases, being 586 of the Revised Statutes of 1881.
By Mr. SPANN [S. 165] concerning attorneys employed as counsel in the several Counties of the State. It provides that attorneys who are employed by Boards of County Commissioners to give counsel and are employed by said Boards shall not be employed or accept employment from any litigant who may have any business before said Boards. It is intended to stop the practice of attorneys taking fees from the County Commissioners and from litigants at the same time.
By Mr. GRAHAM [S.166] to prescribe causes for removal from office of County officers. One hundred and fifty copies ordered printed.
[The bill provides that if any County officer shall demand or receive any fee to which he is not entitled by law he may be proceeded against by any citizen, on complaint filed in the Circuit Court, and if the complaint be found to be true the officer shall be removed and a successor appointed by the Board of Commissioners.]
EXECUTIVE APPOINTMENTS.
The Senate returned to the consideration of the subject pending at the time of Senators leaving the chamber for the Joint Convention.
Mr. HENRY thought the minority report should be adopted. These political questions should be disposed of as early in the session as possible.
Mr. BELL asked if one of these appointees was one of those persons who went and helped to count out by fraud a President duly elected to be the Chief Magistracy of the United States.
Mr. HENRY answered, no. He was glad to know that it is the purpose of the Democrats to postpone these nominations until the law is changed, so that the Democrats can get themselves together upon a proposition that will change the mode of appointing these officers. If that be the purpose, why not take up Senate bill No. 1 and dispose of it? If that legislation is important, and above everything else, let it be disposed of without further delay. It has been conceded b; Democrats in this General Assembly that the present law of appointments is a proper one, and in their opinion no new places should be made for party applicants. It is worse than tossing up a penny for a choice to have places filled by action of the General Assembly. It is in the power of the Democratic side to defeat the nomination of an improper person. He hoped the present incumbents would be allowed to retain their places, and not be upturning the management of these Institutions every two years.
Mr. SPANN understood that Senators on the other side divided on this quesiton. One of the Governor's nominees was what is called a visiting statesman of whom it can be said there is no more honorable man in the State of Indiana. If that gentleman went to the South it was in the interest of a free ballot and a fair count. The Presidential Electoral Commission was a Democratic measure, and could have been defeated by Democratic votes. No objection can be raised to the confirmation of these nominees but a partisan one. The helpless, unfortunate inmates of these Benevolent Institutions reach out to some twenty thousand families in this State, and yet the Democratic party propose to make them the shuttle-cock in politics. What single man in all these lists of appointments but has a character above suspicion, and who is pure-hearted and capable? He spoke in favor of concurrence in the minority report.
Mr. BELL: The question before the Senate is, shall these appointments be postponed till the 30th of January? For several reasons it should be postponed. We ought to know what legislation will be had in reference to this matter, and whether there will be any necessity for filling these places in this way or not, before any definite acton is taken. He favored the majority report.
Mr. GRAHAM understood there is a purpose of undoing what was done by a Democratic Legislature four years ago. There Is no honest reason why these appointments should not be instantly confirmed by the Senate. What is the objection raised by the Senator from Allen, Mr Bell? Simply that one of these nominees was what is called a visiting statesman. He supported the report of the minority of the Committee on Executive Appointments.
Mr. BROWN would not be betrayed into the dis page: 93[View Page 93]cussion of questions entirely foreign to the one before the Senate, which is whether it is better to confirm the Governor's appointments now or wait until the 30th of January. He reviewed his bill [S. 1] for the better management of the Benevolent Institutions. It is a Democratic maxim that the servants of the people should be chosen by the people, or by the people's representatives, and not appointed by a single man who happens to occupy the Gubernatorial chair. The term of the present incumbents does not expire till 1 the 1st of February, and if the Senate should choose to confirm them, it will be ample time to do so on the 30th of January. The proposition that the General Assembly shall select these officials has been the plan since 1855 and until the past two General Assemblies. The door of the Lower House should not, be shot to a participation in the election of these officers.
Mr. FOULKE contended that it was the duty of Senators not to act as politicians, but to act for the best interests of the State of Indiana; and yet no reason has been given for the postponement of action upon the Governor's appointments, except the desire of Senators on the other side of the Chamber to act upon a bill for the reorganization of the Benevolent Institutions of the State. The Democratic party in he last campaign posed as an advocate of civil service reform, and yet, at the opening of this session, on the first day, immediately after the organization of the Senate, and before the Senate was called for bills, a bill was introduced by the Senator from Jackson [Mr. Brown] to take away the appointing power from the Governor and make these officer nothing more nor less than the spoils of a political parry and the rewards for political preferment. Is that the kind of civil service reform which the Democratic party announced to the people of Indiana in its late platform? If there be one thing above all others which should be kept pure-even as the Judicial ermine-is the State's exercise of guardianship over her wards; and in doing that there is only one thing we have a right to consider, and that is in what way may the best appointments of such Trustees be secured. He favored concurrence in the report of the minority of the Committee.
Mr. VOYLES opposed the confirmation of the Governor's appointees, because it would make a revolution in the management of the Benevolent Institutions of the State and because the appointees are such strict partisans. The management is entitled to credit, and the friends of the present management should be retained so as to continue to reflect credit upon the State and upon themselves.
Mr. MAY did not think but there is a question of politics in this matter. The Senator from Rush [Mr. Spann] discussed many questions of a political character. And the line of argument was elaborated by the Senator from Hamilton, [Mr. Graham] who gave Governor Porter taffy because he saw him in front of this Assembly [laughter] and then went over and shook hands with him as much as to say, "See what I have done for you." [Renewed laughter.] The line of argument used by Senators has had nothing to do with the question before the Senate. The time has come fur the reappointment of the Trustees and Superintendent ot these institutions, and the Governor sends the names of Republicans, thus throwing the political Issue in, and showing that it is the intention to change the management of these institutions. If the Governor had sent the names of those who have been managing those institutions so well. as he acknowledged in his message to the General Assembly, the question would not have taken the phase it has He thought this matter has been sufficiently discussed, and he demanded the previous question.
The demand for the previous question was seconded by the Senate, and under [?]
The minority report of the Com[?]
[Execut]tive Appointments was rejected by yeas, 17; nays, 25.
The report of the majority of the Committee recommending postponement of further action till January 30, was concurred in.
And then the Senate adjourned.
