THE
BREVIER LEGISLATIVE REPORTS.
VOLUME TWENTY-ONE.
INDIANA LEGISLATURE.
IN SENATE.
SATURDAY, Feb. 24, 1883-9 a. m.The reading of the minutes was dispensed with.
On motion by Mr. BROWN a Committee of Two-Messrs. Brown and Spann-were appointed to inform the House that Mr. Kelley is Principal Secretary of the Senate.
CONTRACT CONVICT LABOR.
On motion by Mr. CAMPBELL the Senate resumed the consideration of the convict contract labor bills, pending at the time of the election of Principal Secretary of the Senate last night the auction being on the motion to refer to a Select Committee.
Mr. CAMPBELL opposed the motion, as no serious objection has been made to the bill S. 147. This bill provides a remedy for the contract- lopping proceps, it also prohibits the employment of convicts outside of the Prison walls, etc. [See page 167 of the Brevier Reports.] The bill was been submitted to the scrutiny of some of the best lawyers on this floor and received their approval. The detriment comes to the laboring classes because of the low price convict labor products, are thrown upon the market, in order to meet which the free laborer must reduce his price. As soon as a brand of Cain is put upon Prison products it reduces the price, and can possibly have no other effect. The object of the bill is to enhance the values of convict labor productions.
Mr. HILL inquired whether these amendments were not intended to depreciate the price of articles manufactured by convict labor.
Mr. CAMPBELL could not answer for the motives of the movers of the amendments. He opposed establishing a fixed per diem for convict labor, because there are strong men and weak, decrepit and maimed, and a uniform price can not be made to work well.
Mr. HOOVER suggested there were but a small number of the latter classes.
Mr. CAMPBELL: Then the minimum price would be made to apply to such. He believed in an open competition in the Interest of the laboring men and taxpayers of the State, and it is only for such legislation should be had. He opposed creating an aristocracy in the Prisons, and feeding such at the expense of honest taxpayers of the State.
Mr. JOHNSON agreed with the Senator that the objects of the bills will be defeated by a reference to a Committee. At least 25,000 voting petitioners have come here praying for the abolishment of contract convict labor. If new provisions are to be introduced into the present system, they will be evaded and disregarded, as the present provisions have been. The system is pernicious, and ought lobe abolished as proposed by the bill [S. 281]. which will do for the State what the protective tariff is doing for the country at large. The National Government finds a protective tariff necessary to he interests of home manufactures. This bill proposes a like tax upon the people of Indiana in the interest of our own manufacturers and laboring men. An amendment made to the bill yesterday authorizes the employment of convict labor within the walls in the manufacture of articles not made in the State else where. He bad himself favored this plan in the Committee.
Mr. McCLURE, residing in the vicinity of the Prison South, said: Nearly every session there are moral and political philosophers proposing improvements in the management of our Prisons. When he first heard these bills read he was ready to vote against them, because they are both impracticable. Look at their contradictions in terms. The object of branding Prison-made goods is clearly to depreciate their market value, which should not be done, because if done, contractors can not afford to hire convicts at a fixed minimum price for such labor above what they would be able to give.
Mr. BROWN moved to add to the bill [S. 241] a clause that its provisions shall not apply to any existing convict labor contract.
Mr. FOULKE offered the substitue he explained last night, to go, with the other proposed amendments, to the Committee.
Mr. BROWN regarded it as apparent these bills should go to the Committee. The bill [S. 281] proceeds upon the idea there is no labor to be performed by convicts except on a Prison farm. The Senator from Wayne [Mr. Foulke] comes in with a proposition for the manufacture of articles not now manufactured in the State. He condemned the bill as the worst piece of legislation yet brought to the Bar of the Senate, and it legisla page: 250[View Page 250]tion on this subject is needed, he believed the Committee would bring in a bill. In answer to the query Mr. Brown said there is serious doubt as to whether legislation on the subject is needed. Before the investigation o the contract system these Prisons had to be maintained by the State, but since then the Prisons are self sustaining.
Mr. SPANN would not remain quiet under an imputation that vicious measures came from his side of the Chamber only, but repelled such statements.
Mr. HILLIGASS disliked to see every discussion worked into a political harangue. He proceeded to show there is a little vicions legislation in Section 3 of the bill S. 281, which will be an open bid in every County for changes of venue. The laboring men and farmers are not willing to pay for the maintenance of convicts in the Penitentiary in idleness. This bill will lay down the bars for those who committ petit larcenies to go acquit. He favored the motion to refer it to a select Committee, and demanded the previous question on that motion.
The demand for the previous question was seconded by the Senate-yeas, 24; nays, 20.
So, under the operations of the previous question, the motion to refer was rejected by yeas, 22; nays, 23.
The question recurring on the substitute [Mr. Foulke's] for Section 3-authorizing the Directors of Prisons to establish manufactories therein not at pesent established in the State, the profits of such to be paid to the State Treasurer, after deducting the expenses of managing said Prisons-
It was agreed to by yeas, 27; nays, 17.
The substitute was ordered to be incorporated in the bill.
The Senate refused to order the bill engross-yeas, 16; nays, 27.
The question recurring on the bill [S. 247]-
Mr. Brown's amendment to the bill that it shall not apply to existing contracts was agreed to.
Mr. Graham's amendment requiring the minimum price for contract labor to be seventy-five cents per day was rejected by yeas, 19; nays, 26.
Mr. Willard's substitute amendment requiring goods to be branded "convict made goods" was also rejected by yeas, 8; nays, 35.
Mr. Yancey's amendment requiring such goods to be branded "manufactured by convict labor" was also rejected by yeas, 12; nays, 33.
The report of the Committee embracing amendments proposing to reduce the time of contracts from seven to six years was also rejected by yeas, 37; nays, 27.
The Senate ordered the bill engrossed for the third reading by yeas, 34; nays, 11.
Mr. CAMPBELL moved that the Constitutional role be suspended ihat the &111 may be passed to the final vote '
The Senate took a recess until 2 o'clock.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
The motion pending at the time of the noon recess to suspend the Constitutional rule was rejected by yeas, 22; nays, 26.
Mr. HENRY moved to reconsider the vote by which the Senate refused to order the bill [S. 281] to be engrossed.
The motion was rejected by yeas, 27; nays, 21.
Mr. VAN VORHIS moved to suspend the order of business, and take up the joint resolution [S. 2] to pay Mrs. Sarah May, widow of the late architect of the new State House $10,000.
On motion by Mr. BELL this motion was laid on the table by yeas, 25; nays, 21.
Mr. FOULKE made an ineffectual motion-yeas, 26; nays, 20-to adjourn.
METROPOLITAN POLICE.
Mr. McCULLOUGH moved to suspend the special order and take engrossed House bill No. 133 and read it a second time, and concur in the report of the majority of the Judiciary Committee thereon, and upon that demanded the previous question.
After discussion of points of order raised on this motion-
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR decided the previous question if seconded would go only to setting aside the special order and taking up the bill.
The demand for the previous question was seconded by yeas, 26; nays, 19. The main question was ordered by yeas 25; nays, 19.
Mr. HENRY demanded a division of the question.
The first part of the motion was agreed to by yeas, 26; nays, 19-so the special order was set aside.
The second part of the motion was agreed to by yeas, 26 nays; 19-so the bill was taken up.
The bill [H. R. 133] to provide for a Board of Metropolitan Police Commissioners in all cities of 29,000 or more inhabitants was read the second time. See pages 46, 47 and 48 of the Brevier Reports-with a favorable majority report and a minority report-see page 234 of this report, recommending indefinite postponement.
Mr. VAN VORHIS: Much has been said in the last week or two about vicious legislation, but of all the hills that have been introduced into this or the other branch of the General Assembly, this is by far the most mischievous. It affects no city in the State except the city of Indianapolis, and he could not sit still without attempting to show up some of its vicious provisions. It will cost the city $50,000 a year more to manage the affairs than heretofore. It is directly in the interest of a few Ward politicians of the city, who among Democrats themselves, do not occupy a position of even ordinary respectability. It has passed the House and advanced so far in this Senate without the knowledge, on the part of many members who have voters for it, as to what its real purposes are. He had sufficient confidence in the fairness of many Senators on this floor to believe that if they knew its vicious provisions they would not support it. As for a meeting of the Judiciary Committee, really none was had on this bill. It waited for no consultation with the minority. A majority of the members said they were determined to recommend the passage of the bill and the Committee adjourned, and that is all the consideration this bill ever had in the Judiciary Committee It is an open secret that the Senator from Allen and Whitley [Mr. Bell] is opposed to the principle of this bill-that its provisions are in violation of the fundamental principles of self-government, yet as the purchase price for the immunity of his own city [Fort Wayne] he is ready to vote to fasten the principles of it upon the city of Indianapolis. There are facts known to many Senators on this floor-is that the principle upon which legislation is to pass through this General Assembly. He was astonished that his colleague [Mr. Fletcher] allowed himself to be controlled by the troops of fellows which have been thronging this lobby in the interest of this bill. He asked Senators to vote according to their convictions of what is right and what is just. It was with the greatest difficulty he could keep his patience and keep within bounds of what is parliamentary in not using language that might be offensive to Senators who favor this bill, His opposition was not entirely upon the idea that the bill is wrong in principle; for were the principle right, the bill is of such a character that it ought not to have a standing in this Senate one minute. It proposes to deprive the city of Indianapolis of self-government by putting its government in the hands or three Democratic State officers, manifestly for the purpose of controlling the politics of the city through the police. In all fair dealing the city should have some right to protect itself. As a Republican representative on this proposed Police Board not one man has been page: 251[View Page 251] mentioned who stands in a position (as he declared before was the case with the proposed Democratic representatives on this Board) or who occupies a position of even ordinary respectability in the Republican party. We would like to have some say as to who shall represent the Republican party on this Board. We don't want a drunken ex-Councilman or man who was at one time connected with the police force and who himself had to be carried home by his own patrolmen. Such names have been presented to represent the Republican party on this Board; no better have been, and it is doubtful if any better will be presented. Nor did he believe it was the intention to give any better Democratic representation on the Board Those who have been pushing the bill-who have hung around the lobbies of the Legislature and the corridors of the hotels, till midnight frequently, have not always kept. themselves in such a condition that their tongues were under proper control, and in their maudlin, drunken talk we have got into the merits of Their in ten lions and designs. If there has been a respectable Democrat-respectable in his own party or recognized as respectable among Democrats-who has been furthering the interests of this bill, he has kept himself in the background, and put forward those willing to do the dirty work necessary to secure the passage of this bill. bill. He appealed to Senators if they intended to persist in forcing this measure he would assist in perfecting it so it would give the city something that will prevent its being robbed without let or hindrance. There is some honor and some principle left in the gentlemen who represent the Democratic party on this floor, and he spoke with the hope of calling their attention to the unjust, unfair and vicious features in this bill, and the purposes which lie behind it. He would like to address himself to those Senators, but they are gone, their seats are vacant. He predicted that no Representative Republican would ever obtain a position on this Police Board, but that the position would be given to some milk and water Republican, and every thing would be left entirely in the control of Democrats. That will be about the size of this matter. The Constitutional question as against this bill is a well founded objection. He felt sure the people would not tamely submit to have this bill thrust upon them. Such legislation can out be reconciled with the provisions of the Constitution. When he concluded-at fifteen minutes past 5 o'clock-
Mr. FLETCHER hardly thought it necessary to argue the question further. Expressing confidence in the report, of the Judiciary Committee, who have examined into the legality of the bill, and believing himself quite familiar with the feeling of the people of Indianapolis, he ventured to speak a few minutes. His colleague [Mr. Van Vorhis] has acknowledged almost, all that could be asked as to the condition of the police force of this city at this time, and what it, has been for several years, when he said that a member of the Police Board has been constantly carried home drunk by his patrolmen-a business they were engaged in a great deal of the time. And his colleague has denounced the present Chairman of the Police Board as a public drunkard. It is known to everybody in Indianapolis that we have not had a fair election in years-I may say from the time I saw troops marched from the Governor's Circle to the place where we now are, and I saw them with my own eyes voted by the Republican party, they not being citizens of this State, but soldiers: and from that day I have never seen an honest, fair and open election in this city. [Applause and yells of approval from the gallery.]
Mr. SPANN, as a question of privilege, moved that the galleries be cleared, as there seems to be a Democratic mob there.
Mr. BELL hoped the belt will not get off-that the motion will not be pressed.
Mr. VAN VORHIS called attention to the fact that no such outburst occurred during all the time he was speaking.
The PRESIDENT pro tem. [Mr. Bundy in the Chair]: If it occurs again there will be no motion necessary to clear the galleries.
Mr. FLETCHER (resuming) was not a lawyer and not accustomed to public speaking, but believed in the efficiency of concentrated remedies and would get this down to as floe a point as possible. By this bill Governor Porter is made a member of the Police Board, who voted for a bill precisely similar to this in Washington, and believed it was a very good thing at that time. No doubt his influence upon the Board would be better than if there was no Republican upon it at all. In discussing this question he was not acting at all in a partisan manner, or in voting for this bill as he should outside of the pot-house politicians, both Republicans and Democrats, I have not seen any great manifestation of strength regarding this bill in public. A few wealthy men, who are heavy taxpayers, have said to me: "I want you to support that bill. because I believe under the present system our property, as well as all that pertains to the city, is not safe in the hands of the present management." And I find on speaking with men who hold small properties that when I explain to them the points in a bill of this kind and how it should be administered, that they are almost to a man in favor of it. It is only the extreme partisan that speaks strongly either for or against it. I think the partisans on both sides of the Senate should agree to this bill, for if what the Senator says is true, an outrage is perpetrated by it, it will certainly become so distasteful to the people that it will aid his side of the House in carrying the next election in this city.
Mr VAN VORHIS (interposing): We don't want to pay $50,000 for that; we can do it without.
Mr. FLETCHER: I don't wish to discuss that, but I have examined the city government in a political character and it is one mass of political gangrene and corruption, and it will be managed in the interest of extreme partisans, and not in the interest of the citizens generally. It is as foul, stinking, diseased mass of political corruption as has ever been concocted, and as a physician I would recommend a remedy, not asking what the remedy will cost. The citizens of Indianapolis are willing to take the remedy, and that is that we should concur with the majority report of the Committee and pass this bill. Therefore I move the previous question.
The demand for the previous question was sectioned-yeas, 22; nays, 14. The minority report was rejected-yeas, 15; nays, 22-and the majority report was concurred in by yeas, 21; nays, 14.
A MARTIN COUNTY OFFICIAL
On motion by Mr. SPANN the House amendment to the joint resolution [S. 1] authorizing the payment of expenses of a suit by the Superintendent of Public Instruction against a Martin County School Superintendent, making the sum $707.20 instead of $600, was concurred.
THE CLAIM OF EDWIN MAY'S WIDOW.
On motion by Mr. MAGEE the joint resolution [S. 2] to appropriate $10,000 to Sarah May, widow of the late architect of the new State House, was read the third time, and failed to pass-yeas, 25; nays, 13-for want of a Constitutional majority.
And then the Senate adjourned until Monday at 2 o'clock p. m., in pursuance of an order adopted during the delivery of Mr. Van Vorhis' speech.
