SPECIFIC APPROPRIATION BILL.
On motion by Mr. JEWETT the House resolved itself into Committee of the Whole House for the further consideration of the specific appropriation bill, with Representative Frazer, of Kosciusko, in the chair.
The question being on the motion to strike out the John Martin claim-
Mr. JEWETT confessed that up to yesterday he was under the impression that the claim was wrong. He desired, to say now that if no other argument could be produced than the argument offered by the gentleman from Knox [Mr. Williams] that the claim was the property of a certain bank or wealthy individual the claim should be paid. Such argument would sound better in the Sandlots of San Francisco than in this House, composed of Representatives of debt-paying people. When so eminent and philanthropic citizen, and one of his constituents [referring to Mr. DePauw], is attacked in the manner upon this floor he felt called upon to resent such attack. As this was the only way provided for these claims to be allowed he did not think the House could afford to reject a claim because parties have been pressing its passage. He hoped that when they came to act upon this claim it would proceed to consider the basis on its fairness as a claim. He entertained such doubts about the validity of the claim that he would not give it his support.
Mr. CAMPBELL thought that the manner in which the claim had been assailed reflected somewhat upon the Committee which reported upon this claim. He desired to have certain stenographic evidence taken before the Committee read. This evidence would amply justify the action taken by the Committee on the John Martin claim.
Mr. MOODY desired to call the attention of the House to the act under which the Board was acting when it issued this warrant to John Martin [Mr. Moody read the provisions of the act authorizing the Board to issue warrants.] If this Board had the power to issue that warrant in accordance with the provisions of an act, the State of Indiana is bound to pay the warrant. You may just as well try to avoid a promissory note properly signed as to get rid of this warrant. The question is simply this, whether or not we, as Representatives of the State, will refuse this warrant which the law authorized this Board so issue? Are we now going to undo this law? If there is any fault to be found it should be found with the Legislature that passed this law, granting this Board power to issue this warrant.
Mr. WILSON, of Marion, after giving a detailed statement of the disputed points, and the decision of the Court upon the same, stated that be had it directly from Mr. Mania himself that the money be obtained from the bank, and for which he gave this warrant for co lateral security, went to buy brick that entered into the construction of the new Insane Asylum.
On motion by Mr. HEFFREN the Committee rope and reported the recommendation that the further consideration of the bill be proceeded with in the House.
The report of the Committee was concurred in by the House.
On motion by Mr. SMITH, of Tippecanoe, the House took up the consideration of the specific appropriation bills.
A motion by Mr. AKIN to postpone the further consideration of the bill was laid on the table.
The question recurred on the John Martin claim.
Mr. SMITH, of Tippecanoe, thought the name of the State was pledged to the allowance of the warrant. The warrant was issued by competent authority, and is held by a citizen of this State. He believed this is a just claim, and in the namer of that justice which the State of Indiana has always exercised toward her citizens it should be allowed. Let us keep her escutcheon clear and untarnished, and let it be said that she has done- no injury to any one of tier citizens.
Mr. GIBSON thought it would not keep the escutcheon of the State clear by voting this appropriation of nearly $50,000. In his opinion it was nothing against the claim that the bank held this warrant as collateral, security. He stated that the content provided for masons' measurement, and that it was afterward inserted according to the "Indianapolis rules." When this change was discovered, Mr. Martin was informed that if he did not desire to accept masons' measurement he must stop work. If you are not satisfied with masons' measurement you must not go on. But in the face of this, Mr. Martin went on with the work. From that time until the close of the work Mr. Martin accepted this measurement and payment accordingly.
Mr. WILEY was, when the claim was first presented before the Judiciary Committee, favorably impressed with its fairness and honesty, and since he had heard the argument against this claim he was more impressed with its fairness than he was then. He was not acquainted with Mr. Martin; did not know whether he was a Democrat, or Republican, and did not care. Such a matter would not influence him while considering a fair and just claim. The State of Indiana can not afford to stultify and make void a contract made by the proper agents. He was here as a representative of a part of the people of the State of Indiana to say by his voice and his vote that the State shall not stultify her contract with a citizen of Indiana, and for this reason he was in favor of this claim. It is just, and the State of Indiana should pay it.
The previous question was demanded on the motion to strike out the ninth "item," being the John Martin Claim, and it was seconded by the House-yeas, 68; nays, 27.
Mr. PATTEN, in speaking of the decision of the Court in favor of the Board issuing this warrant in favor of Mr. Martin, said he did not believe the Court had any right to compel this Board to issue said warrant. He knew the claim was unjust, and he knew it was so decided by men who were conversant with all the facts. It was so decided by a former Legislature. This Board claimed that every dollar due John Martin was paid. He had no objection to John Martin or any other man who has an honest claim.
The motion to strike out was agreed to by yeas, 58; nays, 38.
Mr. GIBSON moved to reconsider the vote to-strike out and lay that motion on the table.
The latter motion way agreed to.
A motion by Mr. PATTEN, the twelfth item of the bill was stricken out-being the claim of Perin & Goff Manufacturing Company of Jeffersonville, Ind., for $5,000 for work on buildings at the State Prison South.
On motion by Mr. SCHLOSS, the eleventh item of the bill was stricken out-being the claim of J. H. Warder of $250 for measuring the wall of the Insane Hospital in the interest of the John Martin claim.
Mr. JEWETT, on the adoption of the 14th item-being the claim to Teresa and Charles Bochtell for damages on account of the death of their father, caused by the negligence of the State for $1,000, desired that the claim would be allowed by the House. He was informed that the condition of the children is deplorable, and the damages asked are comparatively small.
Mr. HEFFREN'S amendment requiring the money to be paid to the legal representative of the said Bochtell was adopted by the House.
The item as amended was adopted.
Mr. SCHLOSS moved to strike out the 15th item.
page: 271[View Page 271]A division of the item was demanded.
The question being first upon the appropriation of $500 for the purchase of books for the library of the Northern Prison-
Mr. HUSTON was a member of the Committee on Prison, and had, with other members, visited the Northern Prison. He examined the library, and thought it was a disgrace to the Institution, considering the number of convicts. He was satisfied that the library was wholly insufficient, and unless some new books were added to it, it would be wise to abolish the library entirely.
Mr. FRAZEE was also conversant with the facts of the condition of the library. He thought the House could not do a wiser thing than to allow this $500 for the purchase of these books.
This appropriation was allowed, and the other divisions of the same items were adopted.
In the specific appropriation for the Southern Prison the allowance of $15,000 for the finishing of the Hospital building was cut down to $1,500.
The appropriation of $5,000 the construction of a building to connect the cell house with the office, was struck out on motion by Mr. Huston.
The House took a recess untill 2 o'clock.
