INDIANA REFORM SCHOOL FOB BOYS.
On motion by Mr. Voyles, the Governor's veto of his bill [S. 91] for the more efficient government of the Indiana reform School for Boys, was read. Some of His Excellency's objections are: The terms of office of all but one of the Trustees of the House of Refuge have expired. Dr. William Freeman runs under the appointment until as March 1, 1885 The present bill, however, puts an end to Dr. Freeman's term of office. I refuse to make myself a party to this proceeding, which I would do by giving my approval to the bill now returned. Section 13 provides that boys, for whatever cause committed, may at any time be discharged or released on trial by the Board of Control. In the case of a person convicted of crime, it not being treason or a case of impeachment, the power of pardon resides under the Constitution in the Governor. The Governor may pardon absolutely or conditionally, but the power can not be transferred by the Legislature to any other person or to any body of persons. It is not pleasant to be obliged to differ from a majority of the Legislature on the propriety of the passage of a bill, but it seems to me to be a plain duty to return this bill with an earnest expression of disapproval.
Mr. SPANN hoped the Governor's veto would be sustained. He could not sit by and see such a wrong perpetuated simply for party purposes. The history of this State has not shown so much iniquitous legislation purely and simply for partisan purposes as has been enacted this session. The bill legislates out of office men who have done their duty well and faithfully. There has been no charge against any of them one of them, in whom there is no guile, a brother of a former Governor, who has been honored since his inception into politics, and now in his old age when he asked as a crumb that he be continued in office; they turned out to die, because he would not be controled and whipped in like a dog by Democratic caucuses. Where is the necessity of legislating Finley Bigger out of office? Only for the purpose of satisfying the greed of a party which has been out of power for twenty years. Then it legislates out of office a soldier, who has done his whole duty. The history of the future will bear out toe prophecy that in the next two years soar reformatory institutions will need investigation. Then he believed the bill to be of doubtful Constitutionality.
Mr. FOULKE would leave to Democratic conscience the propriety of passing a bill which purpose it is to legislate out of office an old soldier, who has performed faithfully his duties: but there is a question beyond that the question of the Constitutionality of this bill. It has been claimed all doubt; should be given on the side of the Constitution and against our right to legislate, but in this case there is no doubt the provision against the Constitutionality of this bill is as plain as black and white. The lower of pardon is placed by the Constitution exclusively in the hands of the Governor, while under this bill the Board of Control of this Institution may discharge or release on trial. That can be done by no power in the world but the Executive, and by the letter of the law that bill is unconstitutional.
Mr. VOYLES was surprised any good lawyer would say there was any question at, all of a Constitutional character. This section now objected to has been in the law for sixteen years last past. This bill is a fair and just revision of all laws page: 240[View Page 240] upon this subject. He understands the Republican legislated out of office has been negligent in his duties in being absent from ten out of twenty four meetings of the Board in the past two years.
Mr. YANCEY opposed the bill because it is not of his political complexion. He would not object go seriously in turning out Union soldiers occasionally if the Democratic party were not so much in the habit of turning in soldiers who fought on the other side. To day there are Benevolent Institutions governed by men who did everything in then power to destroy the institutions of their country.
Mr. BUNDY: Compared with some political measures thrust upon us this session, this is a small affair. It is not pretended that the provisions of this bill are an improvement upon the laws of the Statute books. It is policy of Democrats to fill the offices if they can get the. The Insane Asylum of the State of Indiana, so far as subordinate positions are concerned, is a House of Refuge for the Confederate Army. The bill is an outrage and ought not to pass.
Mr. GRAHAM made an objection to the bill when before the Senate originally, that it was in violation to the Constitution. It might prove a serious matter if by this bill this Institution should be left without any government at all. The Senator from Cass the other day admitted the purpose of the bill was to change its management. The Institution was going along very well and there is no complaint of the Statute. governing this Institution. Is not this bill an infamous and high handed outrage, and is there not virtue enough on the Democratic side of the Chamber to say we will go no further in this direction? In the light of this bill he felt like prophesying that in both ends of this General Assembly in two years from now instead of a Democratic a Republican majority will be found.
Mr. HILLIGASS deprecated the wide range of this discussion, especially its political direction. He referred to seven Democratic Senators with honorable discharges from the Union Army, and comes with bad grace for their fellow Senators to charge them with standing cheek by jowl with Confederate soldiers, and that there is nothing that can be admired in the Democratic party. WE have set patiently and listened to such tirades day in and day out till forbearance ceases to be a virtue. He demanded the previous question.
The demand was seconded by yeas, 28; nays, 19, and under the operations of the previous question the bill was passed, the Governor's objections to the contrary notwithstanding, by yeas, 28; nays, 20.
The Senate then adjourned.
