AFTERNOON SESSION.
Mr. NULL, by consent, introduced a bill [S. 282] to divide the State into Congressional Districts, which was read the first time.
Mr. BROWN moved to reject the bill.
Mr. BELL desired to see the Congressional Districts remain as they are, but the late law of Congress providing for the members of the Forty-eighth Congress is so framed that it requires each State to re-district for representative purposes. We ought to re-enact the present law, so that there shall be no mistake about Indiana's representation in the next Congress. He did not favor the bill.
Mr. WILLARD would not oppose a bill, if there be a necessity, re-establishing the old apportionment. He hoped this bill would be rejected.
Mr. BROWN was not troubled with the fears entertained by the Senator [Mr. Bell]. A simple page: 233[View Page 233] resolution re-enacting the old laws will satisfy the Congressional demand. He opposed the bill, and would not vote for it under any consideration. He demanded the previous question.
The demand was seconded, and under the operations of the previous question the motion to reject the bill was agreed to by yeas; 24; nays, 23.
FLOOD SUFFERERS.
Mr. RAHM, from the Committee on Finance, returned the flood sufferers' relief bill [H. R. 419] with a recommendation that it be amended so that so none of the money shall be expended except to relieve present necessities in the way of board, clothing, bedding and medicine; reducing the amount to $60,000, and allowing pay to members of the Relief Board for expenses, and a per diem to the Lieutenant Governor; and that all unexpended moneys be returned to the Treasury April 1.
Mr. SPANN thought this commission should employ men at $1.25 a day and thus extend relief and work at the same time to sufferers.
NEW INSANE ASYLUM.
The Senate returned to the consideration of Mr. Rahm's bill [S. 87] for the creation of an additional Insane Asylum at Evansville.
Mr. McCULLOUGH favored concurrence in the minority report, and the selection of the location by the General Assembly, rather than to delegate that species of legislation to four or five men. Evansville has many advantages among others the purchasing of supplies, probably, more cheaply than in any other portion of the State. If a location is selected in any other part of the southern portion of the State, it would be doing injustice not only to Evansville, but also to the entire State. There is no reason why the location for the southern part of the State should not be fixed at Evansville.
Mr. VOYLES did not like to be placed in the attitude of favoring any one locality over another, and it is unjust to designate but one point in the bill, leaving others to be selected by a Committee.
Mr. MAGEE favored the minority report, and was very anxious to see the bill advanced to the final vote and passed.
Mr. FOULKE opposed the minority report. The theory of referring the question of selection to a Commission is that the claims of every locality may be fairly and justly considered, and one locality should not have any advantage over another. The minority report does not propose a logical or fair solution of the question: it simply would shut out the presentation of claims from other cities in the southern part of the State.
Mr. SPANN could not see the force of the argument just made. There should be no Hesitancy in adopting the minority report. Evansville is located in the proper place geographically and has all facilities for ingress and egress, besides the advantage of climate. Conceding these facts why not concur in the minority report &s the necessity is apparant for more and better accommodations for the insane? The same movements will be made before the Commission proposed to be created as have been made before this Senate: and as no city in Southern Indiana has come up here asking for an Asylum, except Evansville, that locality might as well be adopted and without further delay.
Mr. FLETCHER regarded Evansville as the only place the southern portion of the State for the location of one of these Asylums, from the fact it has among other advantages cheap building material, and a large population about it. In the northern portion of the State there are several sides presenting equal claims, a selection from which it may be well to leave to the Commission. He favored the minority report.
Mr. Van Voorhis contended if such be the case the matter can be safely left to the Commission because it can not go around Evansville as a location.
The minority report was concurred in by yeas, 33; nays, 14, and the majority report, as amended by the minority, was recommenced.
The bill, as amended, was ordered engrossed.
LOCAL BILLS
On motion by Mr. YOUCHE the House amendments to the Lake and Porter and Pulaski and Starke Court bill [S. 257] were concurred in, also the House amendments to the qualification of Jurors bill [S. 20] on motion by Mr. Overstreet.
On motion of Mr. ADKISON the bill [H. R. 329] to authorize the Auditor of State to issue patents m certain cases to the purchasers of Wabash and Erie Canal lands was read the first time.
REFORMATORY SEWER.
On motion by Mr. FLETCHER the Constitutional rule was dispensed with-yeas, 38; nays, 6-and the bill [H. R. 52] to construct a sewer from the Female Reformatory down Market to New Jersey, and down New Jersey to connect with the Washington street sewer, or at the eastern end of the Washington street sewer-appropriating $30,000-was read the first time, and again by title.
Mr. VAN VORHIS opposed the route named in the bill as entirely impracticable.
Mr. FLETCHER moved to strike out the words "Market street" and insert in lien the words "Washington street" and insert "Pine street" instead of "New Jersey street."
The motion was agreed to.
The bill was read the third time and passed by yeas, 29; nays, 14,
CONGRESSIONAL RE-APPORTIONMENT.
Mr. BROWN, by request, moved to reconsider the vote of this afternoon rejecting Mr. Null's hill [S. 282] to divide the State into Congressional Districts (notwithstanding his opposition to the bill.
Mr. BELL favored the motion, and called attention to the late law cf Congress concerning Congressional apportionment.
Mr. HENRY conceived the purpose of the bill to be to re-district the State for Congressional purposes. Where no change has been made in the number of members from any one State the late law of Congress does not apply. Indiana is not affected by it in the least.
The motion to reconsider was agreed to by yeas, 25; nays, 22.
Mr. BROWN withdrew his motion to reject.
The bill was referred to the Committee on Congressional Apportionment.
MECHANIC LIENS.
On motion by Mr. SAYRE the bill [H. R. 103] concerning liens of mechanics and laboring men was read the first time.
AMENDMENT TO THE RULES.
Mr. VOYLES called up his motion, notice of which he gave the other day, to amend Rule No. 54 so that the daily "order of business shall be suspended upon a majority vote of the Senators present," instead of a two-thirds vote, as the rule now requires. He demanded the previous question.
The Senate seconded the demand by yeas, 24; nays, 20 and under the operations thereof, the motion to change the rules was agreed to by yeas, 27; nays, 20.
ALLEN COUNTY CRIMINAL COURT.
Mr. BELL, by consent, introduced a bill [S. 283] to abolish the Criminal Court of Allen County on the first day of January, 1884, which was read the first time.
Mr. BELL moved for a suspension of the Constitutional rule, that the bill may be pressed to the final vote now. The motion was agreed to-yeas, 44; nays, 0- page: 234[View Page 234] the bill read by title only, then by sections, and finally passed the Senate by yeas, 42; nays, 0.
On motion by Mr. WHITS, the bill [H. R. 408] to amend Sections 7, 21 and 41 of the Common School law, was read the first time.
A NEW PROPOSITION.
Mr. HOWARD, by consent, introduced a bill [S. 284] to amend an act amendatory of the decedents' estates act, being Section 2,484 of the Revised Statutes. [Relating to the protection of bona fide purchasers of real estate, where wife in second marriage joins in conveyance, providing that she or her heirs shall not claim interest in such estate after conveyance without restitution of payments made and for value of necessary improvements thereon.] It was read the first time and referred to the Judiciary Committee.
METROPOLITAN POLICE BILL.
Mr. VOYLES from a majority of the Judiciary Committee returned the bill [H. R. 133] for a metropolitan police force for the city of Indianapolis with a favorable report.
Mr. VAN VORHIS from a majority of the same Committee, submitted a report declaring that the bill proposes to take from Indianapolis the right of self-government, and the right to choose the instruments by which good order may be preserved, and compel them to submit to that most vicious, outrageous and unjust policy of taxation without representation. It may force the city to expenditures beyond the limit prescribed by law; it increases the public expenses of the city more than $25,000, and thus reduces the outlay for fire protection, street lights, sanitary provision, etc., etc. It is a plain and bold proposition to organize the police force for partisan purposes, and to give the Democratic State officers control of a large amount of money without accounting to anybody for its expenditure, which they may expend without any pretext whatever in connection with the police. The bill is vicious in principle and tyrannical in effect, loosely and imperfectly drawn so as not in any way to protect the city. The report recommends its indefinite postponement, and is signed by three members of the Judiciary Committee.
Mr. BROWN moved to make the bill and reports the special older for 2:15 o'clock to morrow.
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. JOHNSTON offered a concurrent resolution to supply officers who may have lost the statutes by flood or overflow with other copies on application to the Secretary of State.
It was adopted.
The Senate adjourned.
