THE
BREVIER LEGISLATIVE REPORTS.
VOLUME TWENTY-TWO.
INDIANA LEGISLATURE.
IN SENATE.
MONDAY, March 2, 1885 - 9:30 a. m.It having been stated that neither Lieutenant Governor Manson nor President pro tem. Magee would be present at the opening of the session this morning -
On motion by Mr. Campbell, of St. Joseph, the Senator from Laporte (Mr. Weir) was called to the chair.
The Divine blessing was invoked by Rev. J. P. Cowan, of the United Presbyterian Church.
THE INDIAN PROBLEM.
Mr. FAULKNER returned from the Committee on Federal Relations Mr. Adkison's concurrent resolution. [See page 232].
It was concurred in.
THE DRAINAGE LAW.
On motion by Mr. DRAKE the constitutional rules were suspended by a yea and nay vote, and his Drainage bill [S. 82] was taken up, read the second time by title, the third time by sections, and passed - yeas, 35; nays, 0
Mr. SELLERS, explaining, said the bill provided that where lands to be drained were powered by two or more counties that the preliminary expenses of the establishment of the drain shall be paid by each county where the drain lies
Mr. WINTER moved to amend by adding to Section 1 the following: "The Commissioner charged with the construction of the works for drainage shall be paid out of the funds raised for its construction."
The amendment was agreed to.
The bill passed by yeas -, nays -.
Mr. MACY asked and obtained leave to introduce a bill [S. 345] to legalize a deed made by a former Treasurer of State to William M. Lock, which was read the first time. On his further motion the constitutional rule was suspended by a yea and nay vote, the bill read the second time by title only, the third time by sections, and passed by ayes 39, nays0.
JUDICIAL DISTRICTS.
On motion by Mr. HILLIGASS, the House amendments to his bill [S. 137] to divide the State into circuits for judicial purposes were read and concurred in.
COUNTY DOG FUND.
On motion of Mr. CAMPBELL, of St. Joseph, his bill [S. 108] to create a county dog fund was read a second time.
Mr. WINTER moved to amend by changing the manner of the distribution of the funds so that the fund raised in each township shall be distributed therein.
The amendment was rejected.
The bill was read the third time and passed - ayes, 39; nays, 1.
THE APPROPRIATION BILLS.
Mr. FOULKE moved that the order of business be suspended in order that he might introduce a general appropriation bill. He said: A motion of this kind was introduced in the House and a motion also made that each member wonld have the right to call up one bill before the House would pass to the consideration of the general appropriation bill. The result will be that a general appropriation bill will be defeated. I believe that many Democrats as well as many Republicans are anxious that there shall be no special session, and in order that there may be no cause for an extra session, I ask that the order of business be suspended.
page: 278[View Page 278]Mr. WILLARD: Never in the history of Indiana has a general appropriation hill originated in the Senate. I think it would cause a disagreement and the defeat of the bill. It is true, as the Senator has said, that an order has been made enabling counties to call up special bills, bat I understand that the House to-morrow will rescind it and take up the general Appropriation bill and send it to the Senate. No one more earnestly desires the passage of this bill than myself, yet I think that this action proposed to be taken by the Senate would lead to such a difference as would absolutely prevent the passage of such a bill.
Mr. HILLIGASS: I am opposed to the motion made by the Senator from Wayne (Mr. Foulke). I am not willing to go beyond precedence in the past and permit the appropriation bill to originate in the Senate. I am opposed to an extra session, and stand ready to resign if it becomes necessary to have one I suggest that the Senator from Wayne abide his time, and an appropriation bill will be passed in goad time. If there is any responsibility it must necessarily rest with the Democratic majority, and I will stand by that majority.
Mr. SMITH, of Jennings: If the Democratic majority can stand the responsibility of not passing this bill I want to be counted out of this majority. I think the appropriations are addressed to the conscience of the members of the General Assembly and is not a party question. I believe we ought now to give the House an opportunity to see if they will not pass an appropriation bill. I am willing to trust them; but if at the last moment the time comes and no appropriation bill comes to us from the House, I stand ready to join the Republicans and pass a proper appropriation bill before the session expires, although if the appropriation bill fails and all other bills fail, there will be an extra session.
Mr. FOULKE: That is the reason we ought to see to it that the appropriation bill will mot fail. I am very sure that so far as the Republicans in the Senate are concerned there will be a desire to acquiesce in almost any kind of a bill. I think the effect of the Introduction of this bill in the Senate will be to accelerate the passage of the bill in the House. It did not behoove the Democratic majority at the last session when it could have passed the appropriation bill in the for the Speaker to take the floor and maintain it at the last day when he thought the bill could be passed, and it ill becomes the Democratic majority now to come and charge upon the Republican members the defeat of the appropriation bill of two years ago.
Mr. HILLIGASS: It is well known that the Republican members here, in the face of the majority, were enabled to get the floor and hold it for hours after hours, and I stand here, sir, to charge that this body alone was responsible for the passage of the Appropriation bill two years ago, and that failure was on the part of the presiding officer.
A motion to lay the motion of the Senator from Wayne on the table was agreed to by yeas 25, nays 16.
NARCOTICS IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS.
Mr. HILLIGASS moved that the report of the committee on the bill [H. R. 16] be concurred in.
Mr. FOULKE: I would like to say that very recently, within a week, acts of a similar character have been passed in Missouri and Alabama.
Mr. JOHNSON, of Tippecanoe: To have the effect of alcoholic liquor taught children in our public schools is not the proper remedy for intemperance. I think that if the influence of home, if the influence of the church and the Sunday-schools are ineffectual in conquering this great evil, certainly there will be no such result in introducing it as a course of instruction in our public schools.
Mr. McINTOSH: I made a minority report on this bill, and I am opposed to the bill as it now is. If my report could be adopted by the Senate, and then amended somewhat, I would be in favor of it.
Mr. SMITH, of Jennings: I understand if this becomes a law it will be necessary for children to purchase new books. There are more children deprived from the benefits of a common school education on account of their being too poor to buy new books than from any other cause. Although I am opposed to the bill I desire to give every man a fair hearing.
The motion to lay on the table was rejected by yeas 16, nays 24
Then came a recess for dinner.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
Mr. HILLIGASS: I move the adoption of the majority report. The only remonstration that has come to the Senate against the passage of this bill has come from an Eastern school-book firm. Any person acquainted with this subject at all knows that this question is entirely ignored in the public schools of the State. Two-thirds of all the paupers and three-fourths of the criminals come from the class of parents addicted to the use of narcotics. It is the highest duty of the Legislature to lay the facts in regard to the on of narcotics before the children of the State. As a vital question to posterity, these principles ought to be taught in the public schools. It is not fanaticism to teach the evil effects of narcotics on the human system.
Mr. McINTOSH: I am a fast and strong friend of the common schools, but I believe the passage of such a bill will obstruct and practically destroy the common schools of the State. I doubt if there are a dozen teachers who can pass the examination proposed in this bill. There are many physician practicing medicine who could not pass such an examination. Our school teachers are teaching these things as well as they know page: 279[View Page 279] how, and I believe they ought to be taught I will not vote for this proposition.
Mr. SMITH, of Jay: It should not be the desire to bring the common schools into the dirty cesspool of politics, as this bill would do. I believe this bill is the outgrowth of persons disappointed in the success of prohibition. This bill should not become a law. This bill proposes additional labor for the the teachers, and we should hesitate about passing it for fear it will prove an injury to the common schools of Indiana.
Mr CAMPBELL, of St. Joseph: When it is said that even the school teachers and many doctors do not know enough about the evil effects of the narcotics referred to to pass the examination required in this bill. I regard that is a strong argument in favor of its passage.
Mr. MAGEE: I am not in harmony with the principles of this bill. I don't think it would correct the evils complained of. The most efficacious teaching is the frightful example of the effects of alcoholic stimulants frequently seen on the streets, but it does not restrain the use of intoxicating liquor. I have suspicions that there is a job behind this bill. The second section of the bill would turn out probably two-thirds of the teachers of the State I don't believe in making the common schools a medical institute. I don't believe this bill would be in the interest of the people or the interest of the children of the State.
Mr. FOULKE: Why is the history of the United States made a branch of instruction in the common schools, and not the history of England, France, etc.? It is because of the special need the boy should know of what most concerns him. And so the effects of alcoholic stimulants should be taught as specially affecting the people of the United States. I don't believe there is a school teacher in the State who can not before the taking effect of this act acquire a sufficient knowledge of physiology and hygiene to teach under the provisions of this bill. Then if there be a job behind this bill by book publishers there is open competition; the bill does not prescribe any one work. But if desired by the Senate, strike out that portion of the bill. There is nothing more required in this bill than is required in the teaching of any other branch in the common school. The adoption of the minority report would strike out the vitals of this bill without producing any good effect.
Mr. McCLURE: Upon general principles I am opposed to the bill. Every doctor fit to practice medicine is conversant with the science of physiology. Is not the true principle of physiology taught now in the public schools? I am so informed. There is no objection to teaching the children the pathological effect of stimulants upon the system. A common drunkard will tell you it is detrimental to health and will bring one prematurely to the grave. The evil goes back to the depravity in the human heart. Alcoholic stimulants have played havoc with the greatest intellects in the past and will continue to do so in the future. It is not in consequence of the people being uneducated in the fact that it is an evil? Most certainly not. Yet there is a something that impels a part of mankind on in this way until they come to a premature grave. I believe more in the law that governs the moral feelings in appealing to mankind to correct these evils. Some believe the laws of man will prove more efficacious than the laws of God or the laws of our forefathers.
Mr. SMITH, of Jay, moved to indefinitely postpone the bill and demanded the previous question.
The demand was seconded and under its operation the motion to indefinitely postpone the bill was rejected by yeas 21, nays 24
The question recurring on the substitution of the minority for the majority report was rejected by yeas 14, nays 23.
The majority report was concurred in by yeas 21, nays 23.
Mr. SMITH, of Jay, moved to refer the bill to Committee on Education The motion was agreed to by yeas 25, nays 18.
GOOD TIME FOR LIFE TIME CONVICTS.
The special order being Mr. Hoover's bill S. 254, the pending question being on a motion to reconsider the vote by which the bill failed to pass -
On motion of Mr. YOUCHE this motion was laid on the table by yeas 28, nays 14.
TWO-THIRDS AS A MAJORITY.
The special order being a motion to reconsider the vote by which the Senate refused to amend rule 54 by requiring a "majority" instead of a "two-third" vote to suspend the order of business —
The motion was agreed to by yeas 28, nays, 14
On motion by Mr. WILLARD the motion was agreed to.
CONGRESSIONAL APPORTIONMENT.
Mr. WILLARD moved to suspend the regular order, and to take up the Congressional Apportionment bill [H. R. 422].
The motion was agreed to by yeas 23, nays 14.
Mr. BENZ, when his name was called, said: I don't believe in taking up political bills and rushing them through; we have other bills here of interest to the people. I vote "no."
Mr. SELLERS offered an amendment changing some four or five districts.
It was agreed to.
On motion by Mr. WILLARD, the amendment was ordered engrossed.
Mr. MAGEE moved that the bill be printed and made the special order for to-morrow afternoon at 2 o'clock, and that speeches for and against the bill be limited to twenty minutes for each speaker.
The motion was agreed to.
page: 280[View Page 280]APPELLATE COURT.
Mr. McCULLOUGH called up the bill [S. 45] for three Appellate Courts, to consist of three judges each, to meet in the northern, central and southern districts, which was read the second time.
Mr. FOWLER: This bill is to create three new courts and 9 new judges. I believe that one Appellate Court sitting in Indianapolis can do all the work. If this bill was a bill to create three judges, it might be passable. I hope the bill will not pass for several reasons; we do not need it, and these different places are not where they should be placed.
Mr. MAGEE: There has been a demand for more rapid decisions than the quality of them. The question of cost ought not to enter into this discussion. The difference in is nothing if the people get speedy justice. The Supreme Court desires there shall be a court to relieve them of this kind of legislation and, as between a a Commission and a Court, they are in favor of a Court. Will we let that Commission, confessedly ineficient inefficient , stand, or will we establish a system of judicature that is desired by the people? It entails only an additional cost of $7,000 over our present system, an amount that ought not to be taken into consideration. It is the name system in vogue in Illinois and Ohio and other States, and is recognized as the best.
Mr. OVERSTREET: From the very fact that there would be three different Courts there would be as many different decisions. I believe we have not much regard for the Commission, and we will not have any more respect for the Appellate Courts. The main purpose for the introduction of this bill was to give relief to the Supreme Court, but I don't believe that will be accomplished.
Mr. FOULKE: In the first place I was in favor of one court of five Judges sitting at Indianapolis, but there is no doubt but that we need Appellate Courts now. The only additional expense would be $7,000 It seems to me by these laws we can have a good system of judicature in this State. In regard to the different decisions, it can be said that the various courts of the State now make different decisions. It is true of all Appellate Courts.
The bill failed to pass - yeas 21, nays 31.
LEGISLATIVE APPORTIONMENT.
On motion, the Legislative Apportionment bill [H. R 423] was taken up.
Mr. CAMPBELL, of St. Joseph, offered an amendment.
Then came the recess for supper.
NIGHT SESSION.
The pending amendment was rejected.
Mr. FOWLER offered an amendment making Owen and Clay a Senatorial District.
Mr. ERNEST: The entire population of Sullivan and Greene are desirous of being together as a Senatorial District.
The amendment was rejected - yeas, 17; nays, 21.
Mr. JOHNSON, of Tippecanoe, moved to give Tippecanoe two and Clinton one.
Mr. MAGEE declared this bill to be more fair than any like measure ever imposed by the Republican party upon a minority in the Indiana Legislature. Gentlemen on the other side are the ones who set the example.
Mr. WILLARD: Irregularities in Representative Districts are made up in Senatorial Districts.
The amendment was rejected by yeas 15, nays 24.
Mr. DRAKE moved ineffectually - yeas 13; nays, 26 - to amend by inserting "Steuben" in the place of "Noble."
Mr. LINDLEY offered an amendment, the effect of which would be to have Vermillion County with a representative as it always has. I want the Senator from Lawrence of Case to explain the former's making a district over 100 miles long.
Mr. FOULKE: Some of these districts are not entitled to the term of "shoe-string" districts; they are forked-lightning districts. This is a poisoned chalice which the Democratic party offers us now.
Mr. HILLIGASS: In 1867 and 1873 the poisoned chalice was pressed to the lips of the Democratic party by the Republican party, and on the principle that the hair of the dog is a cure for his bite, I move the previous question.
The amendment was rejected - yeas, 17; nays, 25.
Mr. PETERSON moved to amend by giving the counties of Montgomery, Boone and Clinton two Senators.
The amendment was agreed to by yeas 25, nays 16.
Mr. FOWLER moved ineffectually to strike out "Bartholomew" and insert "Owen, Monroe and Brown, one Senator."
Mr. FOWLER moved ineffectually to amend by striking out "Hendricks" and inserting in lieu thereof "Owen and Putnam one Senator."
Mr. MAGEE offered an amendment: Strike out "one Representative for Case and Miami" and substitute "one for Kosciusko and Wabash."
Mr. HILLIGASS demanded the previous question.
It was seconded by the Senate upon a division - affirmative, 26; negative, 20.
The main question was ordered put by yeas 32, nays 18.
The amendment was rejected by yeas 15, nays 26.
On motion by Mr. WILLARD the amendments were ordered engrossed by yeas 25, nays 15
On motion by Mr. HILLIGASS the bill was made the special order for 3 o'clock tomorrow.
And the Senate adjourned.
