Skip to Content
Indiana University

Search Options

View Options

Table of Contents

Brevier Legislative Reports, Volume XXI, 1883, 311 pp.


Mr. Johnston's bill [S. 102] to amend the act for the organization of the Asylum, for the Feeble Minded Children was read the second time, with a Committee report recommending its amendment. The amendments were concurred in and the bill ordered engrossed for the third reading.


Mr. Hatchinson's bill [S. 50] concerning the official term of the Director of the Northern State Pris )n was read the second time, with a favorable report from a majority of the Committee on State Prisons, and a minority report recommending a substitute bill requiring one of the Directors to be selected from the present Board, so as to have an experienced member of the Board, etc., etc.

Mr. Campbell stated the object of the minority report, because of the benefit of experience, to place the Board in better shape to transact its business. Conceding qualifications which always accompany experience, the minority report recommends the selection of one experienced Director, who can give the benefit of experience to the other members. Anoiher object of the substitute: It provides for the election of successors after the terms of these officers expire, which latter latter measure is not in the original bill.

Mr. VOYLES said the Directors already selected are men placed in the positions because of their qualification. The object of the bill is to make the Board of Directors serve for a term of four years-both Prison Directors should serve the same length of time.

The minority report was rejected by yeas, 19; nays, 23.

The majority report was concurred in.

The bill was ordered engrossed for the third reading.


On motion by Mr. BENZ the Senate took up the special order for this hour [2:30 o'clock p. m], being his bill [S. 6] for the election and appointment of Supervisors of Highways.-See pp. 98 and 131 of the Brevier Reports.

Mr. Henry's substitute bill-see page 98-was rejected by yeas, 21; nays, 24.

The question recurring on the minority report recommending the substitution of new matter-

Mr. RISTINE explained the substitute embodies two sections from Mr. Voyles' bill with reference to working out road tax in the Township

Mr. VOYLES said that law does not provide for filling a vacanc in the office of Road Superintendent; and if other respects could be improved, but there is such a clamor for the old law he believed it better to pass the bill No 6 as introduced. He hoped She minority report would be temporarily, at least, rejected. If the bill No. 6 fails then he would be in favor of the minority report.

The minority report was rejected by yeas, 19; nays, 27.

The majority report of the Committee was concurred in by yeas, 31; nays, 14.

Mr. MARVIN moved to amend the bill by requiring the Supervisor to be a freeholder for the reason that the Supervisor should be a responsible man, and if not a freeholder he can not be made legally responsible.

Mr. BUNDY opposed the amendment. If there is any reason why a man, In order to be a Road Supervisor should be a freeholder, he did not know of it. There are many irresponsible men who own land and many responsible men who do not own any land.

Mr. BROWN thought every man should have a fair chance to obtain public favor. He desired to see every honest, aspiring young man have a fair Chance to become a Road Supervisor.

Mr. BENZ said: "I am opposed to that amendment, and will state my reason. When I was a young man I was elected Supervisor, and I did it so well I was elected twice, when I was elected School Trustee Then I was elected County Coroner, and held an inquest on a nigger twice. [Laughter,] On the same nigger twice. [Renewed laughter.] I'll tell you how it was about that nigger I held an inquest over twice, I gave a man $5 to bury him, and he put him in the river with a stone around him; but the rock got loose and they found him again and I had another inquest over him [Laughter.] Then they elected me as Representative, and twice as Senator, and next step I'm going to beat my friend Browne for Congress. [Applause]

Mr. WILLARD moved to amend the amendment by adding the words "or householder."

Mr. SPANN objected to both amendments. If we are going back to the old law let it stand free to all.

Mr. MARVIN insisted the Supervisor should be legally responsible, so he can be compelled to do page: 163[View Page 163] his duty. One reason the old law became unpopular was the Supervisor was irresponsible in many cases and would not be forced to do his duty.

Mr. FAULKNER worked four years ago in the House of Representatives to get the property qualification out of the law. It does not require property to make a man tell the truth and be honest. He favored an open field and a fair fight.

Mr. WILLARD withdrew his amendment to the amendment so that the question may come directly on the freeholder question.

Mr. SPANN moved to lay the amendment on the table.

The motion was rejected-yeas, 17; nays, 28.

The amendment was rejected by yeas, 2; nays, 43.

Mr. MAGEE moved to amend so as to prevent Supervisors giving a reciept for road tax when the work has not been done, for the reason that the Supervisor sometimes gives a receipt for work done, before it is done, in fact, and there ought to be a clause in the bill preventing such action.

It was agreed to.

Mr. VOYLES moved to amend by requiring Township Trustees to appoint a Road Supervisor to serve till a successor is elected.

Mr. RISTINE thought the work already commenced ought to be closed up and provision so made in the bill.

Mr. WILLARD understands the proviso continuing the present Supervisors in office until April 1884, will permit them to operate this new law until that time-this bill having no emergency clause.

Mr. HENRY moved to amend the amendment by making the road districts an area of not less than six square miles.

Mr. VOYLES accepted the amendment. He desired to have the law go in operation as soon as passed, thereby lagislating out the officers under the present system.

Mr. SPANN opposed the amendment. The complaint against the present law seems to be the failure of means to raise revenue to put in the hands of the road superintendents. Let the majority report prevail-continue the present law one year longer.

Mr. HENRY did not understand the provisions of this bill were to be carried out by the present officers.

Mr. SPANN, if mistaken, would be glad to see the bill amended.

Mr. RAHM opposed the amendment. In his County the roads needed working badly. Men were called out and got the roads in order and were given orders on the Treasurer which will be used next month in paying taxes. He did not want such cases cut out.

Mr. SPANN moved to amend by way of substitute that this act shall not take effect until April, 1884. This would cure the defect in the section to which his attention was called by the Senator from Madison [Mr. Henry].

Mr. CAMPBELL favored the amendment believing it would meet with approbation in the northern part of the state.

Mr. BROWN considered laws should take effect upon publication throughout the State, or in cases of emergency as provided in the Constitution. A demand for the old law can not well be met by re-enacting it and providing it shall not take effect for some fourteen months to come.

The substitute [Mr. Spann's] was adopted by yeas, 23; nays, 22.

Mr. HENRY moved to amend by adding that the road districts shall not be less than six square miles of area.

It was agreed to.

Mr. HENRY moved to amend by limiting the time to thirty days' pay in any one year to the Supervisor.

It was agreed to.

Mr. KEISER moved to amend by increasing the Supervisor's pay from $1.50 to $2.

Mr. BENZ objected; $1.50 is enough.

Mr. SPANN favored the amendment.

Mr. VAN VORHIS moved to insert "$2.50" in place of the "$2" in the amendment.

Mr. WHITE thought $1.50 a day would be satisfactory to the farming community generally.

The amendment to the amendment was rejected by yeas 2; nays, 14.

Mr. VAN VORHIS moved to lay the amendment on the table.

Mr. BROWN demanded the previous question on this motion.

The demand was not seconded-affirmative, 21; negative, 22.

Mr. KEISER withdrew his amendment.

Section 1, as amended, was adopted.

On motion by Mr. HENRY the word "biennial" was substituted for the word annual in Section 3, where it occurs before the word "election."

Mr. VAN VORHIS moved to strike out Section 4. We ought to be able to secure supervision without making it a penal offense for them to refuse.

The motion was rejected.

Mr. HILLIGASS moved to amend Section 5 by requiring a $100 bond of the Supervisor for faithful discharge of his duties.

Mr. HENRY offered a substitute for this amendment for a $300 bond.

Mr. MAGEE opposed both the amendment and the substitute. The Supervisor is compelled to serve, and it would be an additional hardship to require a bond, which in many instances would be difficult to comply with.

Mr. HENRY insisted on making as good a law as possible out of this: if it is a foregone conclusion it must be passed, as it seems to be. There ought to be a bond given. There should be some safeguards placed in the bill.

Mr. VAN VORHIS favored this amendment, but there is the trouble in Section 4, which ought to be stricken out.

Mr. MARVIN saw the Senate coming back to where he desired the start-to make the Supervisor responsible. He opposed requiring a bond of the Supervisor, as the bill stands.

Mr. HENRY withdrew his substitute and-

Mr. HILLIGASS amends his by making the Supervisor's bond $200 condition for a faithful discharge of his duties.

The amendment was agreed to.

Mr. GRAHAM moved to add a proviso if such Supervisor be unable to give bond, such inability shall be a defense to the collection of the forfeiture provided in Section 4.

The amendment was agreed to.

Pending the consideration of Section 5-

The Senate adjourned.