THE
BREVIER LEGISLATIVE REPORTS.
VOLUME TWENTY-ONE.
INDIANA LEGISLATURE.
IN SENATE.
MONDAY, Feb. 19, 1883-2 p. m.The Senate met at 2 o'clock p. m.
Prayer by Rev. W. B. Collins.
On motion of Mr. GRAHAM the reading of the Secretary's minutes of Friday's proceedings was dispensed with.
A MESSAGE FROM THE GOVERNOR
was announced by the Doorkeeper and His Excellency's Private Secretary communicated the following message, which was read by the Clerk:
EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT
INDIANAPOLIS, Feb. 19, 1883
Gentlemen of the Senate:
The Constitution provides that every bill which shall have passed the General Assembly shall be presented to the Governor, and that if he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it with his objections to the House in which it shall have originated. It further provides that if any bill shall not be returned by the Governor within three days (Sunday excepted) after it shall have been presented to him it shall be a law without his signature unless the general adjournment shall prevent its return.
Senate Bill No. 1 relating to the government and management of the Benevolent Institutions, was presented to me on Wednesday, the 14th inst., Saturday, the 17th inst., had the Senate been in session, was the last day upon which I could have returned the bill with objections. The Senate not having been in session that day, and yesterday having been Sunday, no doubt is entertained that it is competent for me to return the bill with my last objections to-day. On Saturday last, however, thinking that a question might possibly be started whether, in order that the objections might be in session, the bill should not have been delivered to the presiding officer of the Senate on that day along with my objections thereto, I placed the bill in his hands and a written statement of my objections to it, and requested him to return the bill to the Senate on the meeting of the Senate to-day, and also to cause to be communicated to the Senate the statement of objections which I delivered to him. I have the honor now to repeat the same request, regretting however that an occasion has arisen which obliges me, under a sense of official duty, to differ from a majority of the two Houses in relation to the expediency of the passage of the bill.
ALBERT G. PORTER.
EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT, Feb. 17, 1883.
Gentlemen of the Senate:
I respectfully return to the Senate, with my objections, Senate Bill No. 1, entitled, "An act providing for the better government and management of the Hospital for the Insane, the Asylum for the Blind, and the Institution for the Deaf and Dumb; repealing all laws or parts of laws in conflict therewith, and declaring an emergency." The power of the Governor to appoint Trustees for the three Benevolent Institutions, the Hospital for the Insane, the Institution for the Education of the Blind, and the Institution for the Deaf and Dumb, was conferred by the act of March 6, 1879, reorganizing these institutions. But one Legislature has intervened since the passage of the act. The Legislature that passed it deemed the necessity so strong for the provision transferring from itself to the Executive the power of appointing Trustees that it did not allow the President of the Board of Trustees and two other Trustees whose terms of office had then two years to run, to serve out any part of the residue of their terms. The reasons of the Legislature for desiring to transfer this power from itself to the Governor are not difficult to understand. The sessions of the Legislature are limited by the Constitution to sixty days, except when some extraordinary duty is devolved upon it, such as revising the whole body of our laws.
The time is sufficient when the Legislature is in a condition to address itself with earnestness to its legislative work. But to perform the duties entrusted to it within the time limited, and to form wise laws, the uninterrupted and deliberate attention of members of the Legislature is of course imperatively necessary. That attention can not be given when the Legislature converts itself into a body for the distribution of officers, and time is necessarily consumed every day in the bodies of the Houses and elsewhere in listening to the solicitations of candidates and their friends. The inevitable effect is a distraction from the duties incumbent upon themselves and a
page: 221[View Page 221]great waste of time. It is also well-known that when the Legislature makes itself a direct agency for bestowing office, party spirit always runs so high that the greater portion of its time is spent in useless political controversies, to the great detriment of the business which its members were elected to discharge.
These may well be supposed to have been the considerations which induced the Legislature in 1879 to change the law to what it is now. The chief complaint of the people against our laws is that they are so unstable. The people do not see why the laws abolished and changed so often that plain men can never be certain what the laws are, and are obliged to resort, to a professional class to learn what they are, on the simplest subjects. It Is a wise rule not to change a law until evil consequences from it are sensibly felt.
It is claimed by the friends of the bill now re turned, that the present law which it is intended to replace, has thus far worked well. If, under it the Governor nominates for Trustees persons unsatisfactory to the Senate, that body can refuse to confirm the nominations, and put upon him the responsibility of nominating others whom they may ultimately approve. If he omits to do so the incumbents will continue to hold their places. The people will therefore perceive no satisfactory reason why in four years after passage of the present law it should be repealed by the law which the Legislature in 1879 condemned.
The power of appointing to office is not one to be coveted by the executive. To a sensitive mind the disappointment inflicted upon many worthy applicants is more keenly felt than the gratification of giving to a successful few. In arguing in favor of the law as it now is I feel that I can speak therefore, in an impersonal way for what is best for the public and not for what would be most agreeable to the appointing officer.
ALBERT G. PORTER.
On motion by Mr. BROWN the messag3 was made the special order for day after to-morrow at 10 o'clock.
OVERSTREET AND JOHNSON CONTEST.
Mr. VOYLES, from the Committee on Elections, submitted another minority report revising that the supplemental charge of bribery is possible not sustained by sufficient facts to unseat Senator Overstreet, but that the whole proof is sufficient cause for unseating him and for seating Mr. Johnson.
On motion by Mr. GRAHAM, the House amendments to his bill [S. 29] to legalize the acts of Trustees of Westfield, Hamilton County, excepting suits now pending, were concurred in.
GENERAL APPROPRIATION BILL.
The Lieutenant Governor announced the special order being the consideration of the general appropriation bill [H. R. 302], as in Committee of the Whole [Mr. Bell in the Chair] commencing where the Committee left off on Friday afternoon.
Mr. MAGEE moved to make office expenses of the Clerk of the Supreme Court $500.
It was agreed to.
Mr. BUNDY moved to increase the appropriation for the Fishery Commission from $1,000 to $3,000. He has information that the present Fish Commissioner spent more during the past year than the appropriation. If we are to have this most benevolent institution of the States it ought to be placed on a basis that will enable the Fish Commissioner to carry out the purposes and intention of the law.
Mr. WILLARD opposed the increase, especially when not more than $1,300 was asked.
Mr. WHITE favored the motion. The northern part of the State is dotted all over with lakes, which should be stocked with fish. The State of Michigan appropriates s^me $10,000 a year, and Indiana should not be so far behind.
Mr. YOUCHE heartily concurred with the remarks just made by the Senator from Elkhart [Mr. White]. There is nothing that adds so much to the comfort, happiness and pleasure of the people of his section as good fishing grounds. They all are in favor of it, and they all want the Fishing Commission to be encouraged.
Mr. FAULKNER opposed the motion. Fish can be obtained by anyone by sending for them, without money and without price, a large sum being yearly expended by the government for the propagation of fish, which will be distributed to proper applicants.
Mr. SPANN insisted Indiana ought not to be niggardly in this matter of placing in the streams of this State food fishes, so that fishing may be full and free to every man who will cast a line. Indiana should be put in a position in this matter to be abreast of sister States on this fish question.
The amendment [Mr. Bundy's] was agreed to upon a division-affirmative, 23; negative not counted.
Mr. MAGEE moved to increase the sum appropriated for maintenance of T( pairs of the State's Prison North from $75,000 to $85,000, at the suggestion of the Chairman of the Committee on Prisons.
Mr. CAMPBELL visited the Prison with the Committee and knew the boilers were old and dangerous, and provision should be made for insane convicts. which latter are simply inhuman.
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. SPANN made the same motion with regard to the State Prison South. Before that Prison can be put in proper condition it needs a new wall better cell facilities, etc.
Mr. WILLARD thought it a strange way to treat an appropriation bill, when nothing of the kind is asked by the management. Last year both of these Prisons were within $75,000 of two years ago. It is the business of those interested to make these kind of demands, and he objected to these increases.
Mr. BENZ said the Warden of the Northern Prison requested him to make an increase, and would have been here but for sickness, asking that an additional amount be appropriated.
Mr. SPANN said the Warden of the Southern Prison made a similar statement. The work house needs repair, the cells need repairs and the Prison generally put in better condition.
The amendment was agreed to upon admission-affirmative, 23; negative, not announced.
The Finance Committee's amendment reducing the appropriation for the Female Reformatory from $30,000 to $28,000, being read-
Mr. WILLARD said the appropriation for this Institution has not been expended but once.
Mr. VAN VORHIS insisted instead of lowering this appropriation it ought to be increased. He moved to insert $35,000 instead of $30,000.
Mr. MARVIN hoped the sum in the bill would be allowed to remain. The managers tell him, as a member of the Committee, that they never had enough money appropriated for its management.
Mr. GRAHAM desired to see the substitute amendment prevail. He visited this Institution two years ago with the Committee, and if the inmates are fed as they were on that occasion, it is a disgrace to the State of Indiana-the food was unfit for any human being to eat He hoped the management would see 10 it that no starvation is Bilowed in that Institution.
Mr. HILLIGASS understands that two years ago there was over $2,000 unexpended; and that this is not the way to avert the evils just complained of. Unless this is done he opposed increasing the appropriation.
Mr. BROWN contended this sum can be used for maintenance-including food and clothing and repairs. This bill makes an increase of $2,000 over last, year, and that is probably as far as should be gone. He hoped the officers would remedy the evil spoken of by the Senator from Hamilton [Mr. Graham.]
page: 222[View Page 222]Mr. WHITE thought the appropriation ought to be increased.
Mr. CAMPBELL in conversation with the Governor, that gentleman stated the appropriation has been too small.
Mr. RISTINE stated that there was urgent need in preparing comfortable quarters for the sick.
Mr. VAN VORHIS was satisfied $35,000 is none too much. That Institution is in such a needy condition the State ought not to permit it to remain. Many things have been left undone that otherwise would be done if it had the funds. The Hospital Department should be improved. The inmates are increasing, and the labor of the inmates would be better utilized if money were available to procure material.
The substitute [Mr. Van Vorhis'] was rejected upon a division-affirmative, 16; negative, 18.
The Finance Committee amendment was rejected.
Mr. BENZ moved to reconsider the vote adding $10,00 to the State Prison South.
Mr. SPANN opposed and Mr. Faulkner favored the motion.
It was rejected upon a division.
On motion by Mr. BROWN the words "and the certificate of State stock, if there be any of such stock," were stricken from the bill.
Mr. WILLARD moved to amend by providing there shall be no appropriation for expenses of the office of the Clerk of the Supreme Court for the fiscal year beginning November 1, 1881.
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. BUNDY moved that the Committee rise, report its action and ask leave to be discharged.
The motion was agreed to, and according-
The Committee rose.
On motion by Mr. BUNDY the Senator from Madison [Mr. Henry] took the Chair, the Lieutenant Governor being absent from the Chamber.
HOUSE BILLS READ THE FIRST TIME.
The following House bills were read the first time and referred to the appropriate Committees, unless otherwise stated:
The bill [H. R. 3] to amend Section 461 of the act concerning proceedings in civil cases.
The bill [H. R. 53] to legalize the town of Barnettsville, White County.
The bill [H. R. 133] to provide for a Board of Metropolitan Police Commissioners, was being read by the Clerk when-
Mr. Bundy objected to taking up bills out of the order as they came from the House, stating there were quite a number of House bills received in the Senate prior to this one.
Mr. Spann also objected and gave notice that he should file a protest against the action of the Clerk in reading bills out of their regular and proper order.
Mr. BROWN moved to take up the Police Commissioner bill and read it now, and on that motion he demanded the previous question.
The demand for the previous question was seconded by yeas, 22; nays, 17.
The motion to read the bill was rejected by yeas, 22; nays, 17-two thirds not voting in the affirmative.
THE GENERAL APPROPRIATION BILL.
Mr. BELL, Chairman of the Committee of the Whole Senate, returned the general appropriation bill [S. 302] with the recommendation that it pass with the amendments adopted in Committee of the Whole.
On motion by Mr. BELL the report of the Committee was concurred in.
On his further motion the amendments were ordered engrossed.
FLOOD SUFFERERS.
Mr. YANCEY moved to take up the bill [H. R. 119] to appropriate $100,000 for the relief of sufferers by the floods on the Ohio, Wabash and White Rivers.
The motion was rejected by yeas, 13; nays, 24.
Mr. CAMPBELL explaining that his negative vote was because he desired to hear from the Senator Committee sent to investigate the ravages of the flood. That Committee has promised a report to-morrow.
Mr. McINTOSH also explained his negative vote. When the bill appropriating $40,000 was before the Senate he vainly endeavored to obtain an increase to $50,000. But now, considering the vast amount proposed to be appropriated by this bill, it ought not to be hurried through.
A MESSAGE FROM THE GOVERNOR
transmitted to the Senate the first annual report of the Commissioner of Fisheries; which on motion by Mr. Bell was referred to a Select Committee of Three, which the President pro tem. ([Mr. Henry in the Chair] made to consist of Messrs. Bell, Spann, and Bundy.
LOW RAILROAD BRIDGES
Mr. VAN VORHIS moved to recall from the Committee on Railroads his bill [S. 24] to prevent the erection and maintenance over the rails or road bed of any railroad in this State of anything dangerous to human life, for the purpose of having it referred to another Committee.
Mr. BELL declaring this motion to be for delay and nothing else, moved to lay it on the table.
The motion was agreed to by yeas, 25; nays, 15.
FLOOD SUFFERERS.
Mr. SPANN moved to take up the bill [H. R. 419] to appropriated $100,000 for the relief sufferers by the flood, read it the first time by sections, the second time by title, the third time by sections and put upon its passage.
On motion by Mr. Bell, this motion was laid on the table by yeas, 21; nays 20.
Pending the roll call-
Mr. BENZ, in explanation of his vote, when his name was called said: I represent two Counties on the Ohio River and have received dispatches to use my influence for the passage of this bill. I know the people there are suffering and need that money. I vote "no."
Mr. VOYLES, when his name was called, in explanation of his vote said: While in favor of this bill I am inclined to think that the motion to advance it, coming from the source it did and from the time it did, is only used to impede the regular order of business; but in order to accommodate the Senator who made the motion I vote "no."
Mr. YANCEY, in explanation of his vote, said: I think it is the unkindest cut of all for my friend from Washington [Mr. Voyles] to cast an insinuation in regard to the source of the motion. I want to say I am in sympathy with these flood sufferers. They are in distress, and I don't believe it is the time in Indiana to act niggardly. I know his constituency want something done to help them, and therefore I vote "no."
Mr. FAULKNER, in explaining his vote, said: I vote "aye" because the Relief Committee has not spent but $15,000 of the money already appropriated. He voted "aye"
The result was announced as above recorded.
The motion was laid on the table.
HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION.
Mr. WILLARD moved to take up the bill [H. R. 33], being the next bill in order, and on that motion demanded the previous question.
Mr. SPANN raised the point of order that it needs no motion, as the bill is in order without a motion.
The PRESIDENT pro tem. [Mr. Henry in the Chair] decided the bill [H. R. 33] to be the order of business-the Clerk had already commenced reading the bill-the motion is not in order.
page: 223[View Page 223]Mr. WILLARD took an appeal from this decision-which he subsequently withdrew.
Mr. BELL moved to proceed with the reading of the House bill 33 without the intervention of any other business, and demanded the previous question.
Mr. VAN VORHIS made an ineffectual motion-yeas, 17; nays, 24-to lay his motion on the table.
The demand for the previous question was seconded by the Senate.
The motion to proceed with the reading of the bill was agreed to-yeas, 24; nays 16.
Accordingly the Clerk proceeded to read the bill [H. R. 3[?]] to amend Section 1 of an act providing for a homestead exempting it from sale or execution, and having read the title only-
Mr. BUNDY moved that the Senate adjourn.
Mr. BELL made the point of order that the motion is not in order.
The PRESIDENT, pro tem. decided the point of order not well taken.
Mr. BELL appealed from the decision of the Chair, joined by Mr. Brown.
Mr. BUNDY made an ineffectual motion-yeas, 17; nays, 23-to lay the appeal on the table.
The question being shall the decision of the Chair stand as the judgment of the Senate-
Mr. BELL demanded the previous question.
Mr. YANCEY (before the Clerk commenced to call the roll) asked to be excused from voting.
Mr. BELL made the point of order that the demand having been made for the previous question, and stated by the Chair, no motion to be excused from voting is in order.
The PRESIDENT pro tem. sustained the point of order.
The Senate seconded the demand for the previous question by yeas, 23; nays, 15, and the main question ordered by yeas, 23; nays, 14.
The question recurring, Shall the decision of the Chair stand as the judgment of the House? The decision of the Chair was not sustained by yeas, 15; nays, 23.
The Clerk proceeded with the first reading of the bill [H. R. 33]. When he had concluded-
METROPOLITAN POLICE BILL.
Mr. BROWN moved to take up and read through the first time the bill [H. R. 133] and that no other motion be entertained or other business transacted until said bill is read through the first time; and on this motion he demanded the previous question.
The demand was seconded by yeas, 24; nays, 17, and the main question ordered by yeas, 25; nays, 15.
Mr. FOULKE moved to adjourn.
Mr. BROWN raised a point of order that this motion is not in order pending the previous question.
The PRESIDENT pro tem. sustained the point of order.
Mr. BUNDY appealed from the decision of the Chair.
Mr. BROWN raised the point the appeal could now be sustained.
The PRESIDENT pro tem. permitted the appeal.
The decision of the Chair was sustained by yeas, 25; nays, 10.
Mr. SPANN moved to reconsider the vote just taken.
On motion by Mr. BELL this motion was laid on the table-yeas, 25; nays, 10.
Mr. FOULKE demanded a decision of the question.
The first part of the motion, viz.: to take up the bill [S. 13] was agreed to by yeas, 24; nays, 10.
Mr. FOULKE raised the point of order that the second part of the motion is not in order.
The PRESIDENT pro tem. sustained the point.
Mr. SPANN moved to reconsider the last vote, which was rejected by yeas, 12; nays, 24.
The bill [H. R. 13[?]] to provide for a Board of Metropolitan Police Commissioners in all cities of 25,000 or more inhabitants was read the first time.
Mr. FOULKE denounced this bill as utterly viscous, and utterly regardless of the rights of the people, and would make no apologies for obstructing the progress of this measure-the most pernicious ever operated-having for its purpose the taking away from the people their vested municipal rights. He gave way for
Mr. BUNDY, who made an ineffectual motion to adjourn.
Mr. BELL endeavored to obtain the floor.
Mr. FOULKE insisted he had yielded only for a motion to adjourn.
The PRESIDENT pro tem. decided the Senator from Wayne [Mr. Foulke] entitled to the floor.
Mr. BELL appealed from the decision of the Chair.
The PRESIDENT pro tem. decided there was nothing to appeal from.
Mr. BELL appealed from this decision.
The Senate refused to sustain the Chair by yeas, 10; nays, 24.
Mr. FOULKE still claimed the floor, and proceeded with his remarks. He contended the bill would put it in the power of the Police Commissioners to bankrupt the city of Indianapolis. At 8:20 he gave way for
Mr. MAGEE, on whose motion the bill was referred to the Judiciary Committee.
FLOOD SUFFERERS.
Mr. SPANN moved that the bill [H. R. 419] be taken up, read the first time by sections, the second time by title, the third time by sections and put upon its passage.
Mr. BROWN moved to adjourn.
The motion was rejected-yeas, 18; nays, 19.
The motion to suspend the rules was rejected by yeas, 24; nays, 14.
The Senate adjourned at 8:35 o'clock p. m.
