Skip to Content
Indiana University

Search Options


View Options


Table of Contents



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

THE
BREVIER LEGISLATIVE REPORTS.
VOLUME TWENTY-ONE.

INDIANA LEGISLATURE.

IN SENATE.

WEDNESDAY, Feb. 28, 1883-10 a. m.

The Senate met pursuant to adjournment, Lieutenant Governor Hanna in the chair.

On motion by Mr. VOYLES the reading of the Secretary's minutes of yesterday's proceedings was dispensed with.

On motion by Mr. BENZ his bill [S. 200] to revive an act of May 14, 1860, for assessment of lands for the benefit of certain roads, excluding roads Incorporated after December 1, 1879, and legalize said assessments, and providing for collection of the same, was read the third time and passed by yeas, 39; nays, 0.

Mr. BENZ urging its passage because it will greatly benefit his County, where many roads are badly washed by the floods.

Mr. VOYLES also hoped the bill will prevail.

Mr. Bundy, by leave, introduced a bill [S. 290] appropriating $200 for the services of William H. Schlater in preparing a list of bills introduced into the last General Assembly, which was read the first time.

SALE OF STATE LANDS.

On motion by Mr. MAGEE his bill [S. 149] to authorize the Auditor of State to map sell and convey certain lands belonging to the State, was, under a setting aside of the Constitutional rule by a two-thirds vote, read the second time by title, the third time by sections and passed by yeas, 40; nays. 0.

Mr. MAGEE explained it authorizes the State Auditor to cause maps to be made of all forfeited or escheated to the State, in each County thereof, cause the game to be appraised and sold, the proceeds to go into the school fund.

Mr. FOULKE presented a petition on the subject of temperance from 37 voters of Ripley County.

LEGALIZING ACTS

On motion by Mr. McINTOSH the bill [H. R. 61] to legalize certain acts of Township Trustees, was, under a dispensation of the Constitutional rule, pressed through the three readings and passed by yeas, 39; nays, 0. Mr. Mclntosh explaining its necessity.

On motion by Mr. RISTINE his bill [S. 260] to legalize the incorporation of Darlington, Montgomery County, was read the second time by title, under a suspension of the Constitutional rule, the third time, and passed by yeas, 38: nays, 0.

CONVICT LABOR.

Mr. HUTCHIN80N offered a concurrent resolution, which was adopted, that the Directors of the State's Prisons are directed not to permit, on any contract, the convicts of either of said persons to work outside of the walls or enclosures of said Prisons.

EXPRESS COMPANIES.

On motion by Mr. SAYRE the bill [S. 269] to regulate the business of Express Companies was, under a rule of suspension by a two-third vote, read the second time by title only, the third time by sections, and passed by yeas, 37; nays, 1.

Mr. SAYRE explaining the receipt described on page 161 of these reports shall be record evidence.

A LOCAL BILL.

On motion by Mr. COMPTON his bill [S. 45] to allow the Commercial Bank of New Albany to have an office wherever the Directory may desire was read the third time and passed by yeas, 38; nays, 0.

DRAINAGE OF WET LANDS.

On motion by Mr. ADKISON the bill [S. 278] supplemental to the drainage act of March 9, 1875, was, under the suspension of the rule by a two-thirds vote, read the second time by title, the third time by sections and passed by yeas, 46; nays, 0.

LOCAL BILLS

On motion by Mr. VOYLES the bill [H. R. 381] to fix Court Terms in the Forty-third Judicial Circuit was read the second time by title, under the Constitutional restriction, Committee amendments concurred in, the bill read the third time and passed by yeas, 38; nays, 0.

On motion by Mr. VAN VORHIS the bill [S. 250] to establish provisions respecting private corporations existing prior to 1852 was read the third time and passed by yeas, 36; nays, 2.

Mr. VAN VORHIS and Mr. MAGEE, explaining it embraces laws already passed, the legality of which are in some doubt-allowing the Bank of Commerce to become a banking institution, etc.

On motion by Mr. WILLARD his bill [S. 189] to authorize Railroad Companies to guarantee the page: 268[View Page 268] bonds of any other Railroad Company organized under laws of another State, was read the second time by title, under a suspension of the Constitutional ruled by a two-third vote, considered as engrossed, read the third time and passed by yeas, 39; nays, 1.

Mr. W1LLABD explaining the bill will apply only to the L., N. A. and C. Railroad, allowing it to endorse bonds for a railroad to connect with the Cincinnati Southern.

Mr. YOUCHE opposed the bill-

Mr. VOYLES saw nothing in the objection. The bill will prove of great advantage to the people along the line of the read.

ADOPTED CHILDREN.

On motion by Mr. MACARTNEY the bill [H. R. 80] to amend Section 3 of the act of March 2, 1855, regulating the descent of heirs, was read twice by title only, under a setting aside of the Constitutional rule by a two-thirds vote, the third time by sections, and passed by yeas, 38; nays, 0.

Mr. MACARTNEY explaining it is a copy of a bill introduced by himself two years ago, but which failed to pass for want of time. It relates to the heirship of adopted children, property to descend to heirs of adopted parents the same as if the child was never adopted.

LEGAL ADVERTISING.

On motion by Mr. FLETCHER the bill [H. R. 346] concerning legal advertising in certain cases [relating to cities of 16,000 inhabitants or over, shall be done in one daily-the party interested shall have the right to designate the paper] was read twice by title, the third time by sections and passed by yeas, 36; nays, 0.

The Senate took a recess till 2 ;30 o'clock. >

AFTERNOON SESSION.

On motion by Mr. WHITE the bill [H. R. 408] to amend Sections 7, 21 and 41 of the Common School law, was read twice by title only under a dispensation of the Constitutional restriction, by a two-thirds vote read the third time by sections, and passed by yeas, 43; nays, 1.

Mr. WHITE, explaining, it will give the County Superintendent better supervision over the schools, and changes the time of settlement to the first Monday in August-the school year ending July 31, etc, etc.

Mr. Yancey demanded the special order, but gave way for-

A LOCAL BILL.

On motion by Mr. DUNCAN the [H. R. 308] to amend the act incorporation he Trustees of Hartsville Academy was read twice by tide only, under a suspension of the Constitutional rules, by a two-thirds vote the third time by sections, and passed by yeas, 42; nays. 10.

Mr. DUNCAN explained it was only to change the name of Hortville College.

METROPOLITAN POLICE BILL.

The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR directed the reading of the bill [H. R. 13[?]] to provide for a metropolitan police force in all cities of 29,000 and over inhabitants-see pages 16 and 234 of the Brevier Reports-and it was read the third time.

Mr. GRAHAM resumed the floor to continue his speech commenced at 1:45 o'clock this morning. He would yield, however, to any arguments on the other side who had any arguments to advance in favor of the bill.

Mr. RAHM said he would like to speak about fifteen minutes.

Mr. FLETCHER felt more than ever convinced that this bill is desired by a majority of the voters of the city of Indianapolis. He had taken more pains than before to make careful inquiry as to the opinion of a majority of the people, and thought the bill absolutely fair, and could not see how Senators on the other side could object to it. If this bill is going to work wreck and ruin it is certainly for the benefit of the Republican I party. The people are willing to take t, they are willing to try it, and they are willing to pay for it. What more to say for the bill he didn't know.

Mr. YANCEY listened attentively to what ha just been said and obtained no evidence whatever that the bill should pass, unless it be that the Senator has gone around inferentially and drummed up certain citizens of this city who are in favor of the bill, not from that class of this great city of Indianapolis who pay the taxes of the city Government; but representing the bummer class who are al ways terror stricken at the sight of a policeman. These are the men who are clamoring for this bill-they ought to be on the stone pile of the city. This bill means nothing more nor less than the defeat of the Republican party and any Senator honest enough to acknowledge the truth will acknowledge that.

Mr. RAHM did not know whether the people of Indianapolis wanted this bill or not, but we down at the town of Evansville do want it-Republicans as well as Democrats, and they are not bummers or loafers, but there is a petition here signed by 442 of the leading voters and citizens of Evansville, including bankers, wholesale merchants, city and County officers. Republicans and Democrats. The Republicans don't believe what they say when they say if the bill passes, Marion County will go Republican. They know if the bill parses they will have a free fair and square election In Marion County, and that is what they are afraid of. He appealed to Democratic Senators to vote for this bill, because it will be blamed on us if we pass it, and let us get the credit fur it. The Democratic Senator from Marion [Mr. Fletcher] says the people of Indianapolis want it, and we ask it, without regard to party, for Evansville, where it is wanted to protect the lives and properly of citizens without regard to party.

Mr GRAHAM had already discussed the question, but as, the Senator from Marion [Mr. Van Vorhis] has more interest; In this matter than any other Senator, unless it be his colleague, he would yield his time to that Senator.

Mr. VAN VORHIS said the parties who are pushing this bill are the very off-scourings of the Democratic party, associated with an equally low class belonging to the Republican party. Among the best class of the citizens of this city nobody wants this bill. The Senator from Vanderburg [Mr. Rahm] says the people down there want it but the people of Vanderburg do not know the provisions of this bill or they would not want it. It practically opens the City Treasury without limit, let or hindrance to the Police Commissioners.

Mr. VOYLES said: I had not intended to speak to this bill, but since it has been so vociferously asserted that, nothing can be said in support of the bill, I have concluded to say a word. The Senator from Marion [Mr. Van Vorhis] has gone aside from the question, and has made a tirade against individuals in the city who are for the bill. I essay to teach the Senator a lesson in logic. I would remind him that viturperation is not argument, it is malice. If the Senator can find no arguments, and must resort to the abuse of individuals, he is hard pressed in his opposition to the bill. The Senator from Hancock [Mr. Yancey] has said that this bill means to fix things up in Indianapolis so that the Republican party can not carry the County. So we have it. By this we are plainly told that the Republican party holds its majority in this city by reason of the odious police force, and I say such a state of facts is a shame to the city and it is reprehensible in the greatest degree. The Senator from Marion denounces the bill as unconstitutional, yet he does not sate in what manner the bill conflicts with any article or section or party of the Constitution. It is a singular development when a Senator, who is a good lawyer, declares a bill to be unconstitutional without even attempting to justify page: 269[View Page 269] his declaration by citation of the of the slightest conflict. This bill makes a non-partisan police, and no one but the zealous and unfair partisan can or will object to its provisions. Republican methods at elections in Indianapolis have been such as to outrage every sense of justice and fairness. Elections ought to be free and untrammeled, but this principle does not apply to the methods In this city. I know what I am saying. It is a part of the recent published history of Indianapolis that persons have been slugged and robbed on the streets and the police force that is of such great value to the partisan interest in which they have been selected. It seems that where life and property is unsafe in the city, by reason of the police being engaged in political work to the exclusion of their police duties, it is a shame that the legislative powers of Indiana are to be defied And proper legislation openly and willfully obstruced by the other side of this Chamber, and that human life may continue insecure in the night time-in absolute peril after dark-to hold the Republican party in power. It is a disgusting spectacle that such a vicious thing must be upheld to sustain any party in power. This bill specially makes it impossible for its police to engage at any time in partisanship. I am for this bill.-[Time expired.]

The hour of 4 o'clock having arrived-

The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR directed the foil to be called on the passage of the bill. The bill passed the Senate by yeas, 27; nays, 21; -9,8 follows:

Yeas Messrs. Bell, Brown, Compton, Davidson, Duncan, Ernest, Faulkner, Fletcher, Hill, Hilligass, Hoover, Howard, Hutchinson, Johnston of Dearborn, Johnson of Tippecanoe, Magee, Marvin, May, McClure, McCullough, McIntosh, Rahm, Richardson, Smith of Jay, Voyles, Willard and Youche-27.

Nays-Messrs. Adkison, Benz, Bichowski, Campbell, Fleming, Foulke, Graham, Henry, Keiser, Lockridge, McCartney, Overstreet, Ristine, Sayre, Smith of Delaware, Spann, Van Vorhis, White, Yancey-21.

Pending the roll call-

Mr. BUNDY, when his name was called, said i this bill contains that which, in a Government like ours is a vicious principle, for it takes away from a people the right to govern themselves. This Legislature has no right to determine for the city of Indianapolis how that city shall be governed. If this principle can be sustained every office not elective by the Constitution of Indiana can be placed in the hands of the General Assembly to be filled. The principle can not be defended in reason. There can absolutely be no justification for we, representing other districts in the State, under-undertaking undertaking to say who shall control the offices of the city of Indianapolis and who shall take charge of its treasury, who shall expend its monies, and who shall control its government. He voted "no."

Mr. FOULKE, in explanation of his vote when his name was called, opposed this bill because it is thoroughly vicious in principle. The people asking to be protected against crime is the proper tribunal to judge what kind of government it shall have. The constituency required to pay for the police force is the proper constituency to determine how the money is to be expended. If the people of Indianapolis have a bad police force they have the power to remove it, and in their hands it ought to be left. He voted " no."

Mr. MAGEE, when his name was called, said he did not see that this bill interferes with local self-government. Cities are distinctive from other political corporations. It has no other right than those conferred upon it by the Legislature. This Assembly has the right to pass this bill, which is demanded in the name of justice and fair elections. He voted "aye."

Mr. VAN VORHIS, when nil name was called, further opposed the passage of this bill because the law of the State limits the taxation of the city of Indianapolis, and it is almost Impossible for the city to live within that limit. This bill will increase that expense from $25,000 to $50,000. and provides no guarantee or safeguard in any way whatever for anything that may go into the hands of these Commissioners. He voted "no."

The vote was announced as above recorded.

Mr. YOUCHE moved to reconsider the vote just taken.

The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: Put your motion in writing.

Mr. WILLARD moved to reconsider the vote just taken and to lay that motion on the table.

The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR: The Senator from Lake [Mr. Youche] has made that motion.

Mr. WILLARD insisted his motion was in order.

Mr. HENRY took a different view. When he concluded-

Mr. YOUCHE sent up his motion in writing In these words: "I move to reconsider the vote by which House bill No. 133 passed the Senate."

Mr. SMITH, of Jay, moved to lay the motion on the table.

The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR said the Senator from Lake [Mr. Youche] had the floor.

Mr. VOYLES insisted Mr. Willard's motion should be recognized by the Chair, and Mr. Willard desired to submit an appeal from the decision of the Chair.

The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR, declaring the Senator from Lake entitled to the floor, Mr. YOUCHE at 4:20 o'clock commenced a speech against the bill and in favor of his motion by saying that he voted in the affirmative for the purpose of moving a reconsideration. When he concluded.

Mr. SPANN obtained the floor and spoke in favor of the motion to reconsider. During his speech a message from the House announced that the Speaker had signed House enrolled act No. 133, when Mr. S. concluded at 6 o'clock.

Mr. VAN VORHIS commenced speaking in favor of the pending motion,

Mr. GRAHAM took the floor at 8:25o'clock, and he also spoke in favor of the motion.

Mr. HENRY at 10:10 o'clock p. m. proceeded to make his argument in favor of the motion to reconsider the vote by which the metropolitan police bill passed the Senate, closing at two minutes after 12 o'clock.

Mr. BUNDY was recognized by the Chair, but gave way for

Mr. MAGEE, who, after speaking in favor of the passage of the bill, moved to lay the question to reconsider on the table.

The motion was agreed to by yeas, 19; nays, 13 five Senators present but paired.

Mr. VOYLES offered a resolution, which was read for information, requiring the President of the Senate to sign the act at once, and announce the fact in open Senate.

The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR declared the resolution out of order.

Mr. SPANN then moved to adjourn, which was lost by a vote of yeas, 12; nays, 20.

Mr. VOYLES submitted a protest, which the Lieutenant Governor ordered spread on the records with a statement by the Chair.

And then, at five minuter past 1 o'clock a. m. on motion by Mr. BROWN the Senate adjourned i till 10 o'clock.

previous
next