AFTERNOON SESSION.
The bill [S. 200] to revive an act approved May 14, 1860, for assessments of lands for benefits of page: 290[View Page 290] certain roads, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 85; nays. 1.
The bill [S. 43] to increase Coroner's fees in Indianapolis, was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 73; nays, 13.
The bill [S. 250] to establish provisions respecting private corporations existing under corporate laws prior to 1852, was read the third time and passed by the House by yeas, 73; nays, 1.
COMMISSIONERS OF THE SUPREME COURT.
The bill [S. 174] concerning the Supreme Court Commission for two years was read the third time.
Mr. McMULLEN thought that this bill ought not to pass. Since the bill was up the other day he had taken the time to examine the facts concerning this Supreme Court Commission and its work for the past two years. He found that the Supreme Court decided during the two years beginning January 1, 1879, and ending January 1, 1881, 1,251 cases, and that during the two years beginning January 1, 1881, and ending January 1. 1883, it has disposed of only 1,138 cases, or 113 cases less than for the same period of time before the Commission was appointed. The Commission has disposed of only 714 cases since appointed. Take from this the difference between 1,251 cases which the Supreme Court decided in two years before the Commission was appointed, and 1,138 cases which the Supreme Court has disposed of in two years since the Commission was appointed, and we find that th Supreme Court Commission has only disposed of 601 cases more than were disposed of by the Supreme Court. This Commission has proved rather an expensive luxury. He thought it should not be continued any longer; he was opposed to it.
Mr. TULEY believed it was admitted on all hands that something ought to be done to relieve the Supreme Court. According to the admission of the gentleman from Dearborn [Mr. McMullen] the number of cases has been greatly reduced. He thought the Commission had done well to dispose of 714 cases. A few years ago if you sent a case to the Supreme Court you knew it would keep it for three or four years since the Commission was appointed, he had known cases to be decided in three mouths The House had already decided upon the Court of Appeals. It has spoken in unmistakable terms that we do not want that Court. It is just this: we must have that Commission or nothing. He believed the people demand it, and that the Supreme Court demands; it under all circumstances he believed the bill should pass and continue this Commission for two years more
Mr. MOCK did not think we should determine the amount of work the Commission had done by the number of cases it had disposed of. The test he applied, and which he considered a fair one, is this: He was creditably informed that the number of volumes of Supreme Court Reports would greatly exceed the number issued during the year previous to the creation of this Commission. He considered this a just and fair test of the amount of work accomplished by this Commission. The difference between twenty-five volumes of the same size and number of pages and seventeen volumes, show the amount of work accomplished by this Commission. He believed that the Commission should be continued for two years, and trusted that the members would vote for this bill.
Mr. SHIVELY said: It seems to me that we should sometime awaken to the fact that Indiana has become a great State. It ought to occur to any man that the Supreme Court can not discharge this business without some assistance. It is burdened, and has been for a number of years. It is said this Commission has not done satisfactory work, but, notwithstanding this assertion, they have done good work. Now, will we so to work and defeat the bill for the establishment of a Court of Appeals and also refuse to continue this Commission. It seems to me that it ought not to be done. It has been stated that they bay only disposed of 714 cases. This is no test. They can and will work better in the next two year than in the past. Then, you can not determine the efficiency of the work by the number of cases. We should not refuse to continue this for the next two years.
Mr. MONTGOMERY thought it was a fact recognized by all members on the floor, he presumed, that the Supreme Court can not keep up with the business While this Commission may not have accomplished as much as was expected of it, yet something must be done for the relief of the Supreme Court, in order that it may catch up with its business, Ha thought this Commission should be continued two years longer.
Mr WILSON, of Marion, was in real earnestness in his opposition to this Supreme Court Commission. It might not be good policy on his part, but he was opposed to this bill
Mr. MOODY spoke in favor of the bill. He thought it was a matter of justice to the people that this Commission should be continued for the next two years, and therefore the question of expense raised by the gentleman from Marion [Mr. Wilson] should not be taken into consideration
Mr. JEWETT thought the question has been fully considered, and demanded the previous question, which was seconded by the House, and under the operations thereof-
The bill passed the House by yeas, 57; nays, 35.
SENATE BILLS PASSED.
The bill [S. 293] to repeal an act concerning legal advertisements approved March 1,1883, was taken up and on motion by Mr. Tuley the Constitutional rules were suspended, the bill was read the first and second time by title, was considered engrossed, read a third time by sections and passed the House by yeas, 87; nays, 0
The bill [S. 229] to regulate the business of Express Companies was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 72; nays, 1.
The bill [S. 289] to amend the drainage law [when petition has been filed any person effected by the proposed ditch may come into Court and object to the petition or demur to it, the same as in ordinary complaint; extends the time of the filing of the exceptions to the assessments from three days to ten days; in the event the County Survey or is not a civil engineer the Court may designate some civil engineer to act in such case] was read the third time and passed the House by yeas, 65; nays, 2.
On motion by Mr. JEWETT. Mr. Heffren's bill [H. R. 457] to allow a bounty for planting of yellow willow along the streams of Indiana, as a protection against floods, was taken up. The Constitutional rules were suspended, read the second time by title, considered engrossed, read the third time, and passed the House by yeas, 76; nays. 17.
Mr. MONTGOMERY'S bill [H. R. 415] concerning the distribution of properly, etc., was read the third time, and rejected by yeas, 34; nays, 65.
STATE AUDITOR'S BOND.
Mr. HUSTON introduced a resolution to authorize the appointment of a Joint Committee of the two Houses to investigate the matter of the bond of the Auditor of State; setting forth that such bond had not been properly filed with the Secretary of the State, and authorizing the appointment of a successor in case of any irregularity or non compliance with the law.
On motion by Mr. WILTON, of Marion, the resolution was laid on the table by yeas, 62; nays, 1.
The bill [S. 206] requiring County Auditors to advertise the amount of school funds loaned out quarterly, was read the third time and passed th House by yeas, 73; nays, 4.
The bill [S. 187] to amend Sections 5,104 and 5,106 of the Revised Statutes of 1881, to provide levy for the repair of turnpike roads, was read page: 291[View Page 291] the third time and passed the House by yeas, 67; nays, 8.
The House took a recess until 7:30 p.m.
