Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1841-1853, 1846-02-12

I
to Mr. Parker. 1t introduced to the House by
| him, and the following proceedings had thereon:
No. 472.
An amend the 2lSIh of the 18th chapter
of Revised Code, page 267.
JAN Is, read LIST and I'd times, and referred the ju
dietary committee.
| Jan. 10, read Sd time and passed.
SENATE
! Jan. 10, read LIST, "a and Sd times and passed.
German, Sec, Senate
Enrolled. II. H. T., Sec'y.
| Parker.
hereby certify that the above is true copy Of the en-
dorsemenis, the back of the entitled b now
on file in my office, which was passed the
sion of the Legislature.
JN0. H. THOMPSON, Secretary of State
! Jan. Both, 1876
! VIII candid men say that there was any fraud in
| the proceedings above shown have taken place
Can it, with TRUTH be said the law understood
| by the Judiciary committee, composed, il was,
principally by of the legal profession Was it
not understood by Mr.. Osborn of Laporte and Mr.
Mcdonald (he last named gentleman being the chair
man of the Judiciary committed who advocated its
passage in speeches before the House, and who read
the section of the Revised Law proposed be amend
ed q! No one acquainted with those gentlemen each
of whom represented constituency interested in the
queetion, suppose that they did not understand
il. Its passage through the Senate was favored by
Col. Reyburn, who protested against the ayes and
noes being called the motion to suspend the rules
just what it does mean, that purchasers should have
one year longer than the time fixed i'll the Statute
of 1913, in which to redeem such lands may have
become forfeited, and to prevent forfeiture taking
place by year provided for in the Sec
ton thus amended. Can any one believe that Cover
nor Whitcomb did not understand bill so plain and
simple in its provisions Those who would assert it.
certainly would do injustice to his reputation for le-
gal ability. Does any one suppose he would Stgn
bill the provisions of which he did not fully under
standi Those who would thus contend thereby i'm
peach his ability to perform the duties of the station
which he occupies Where, them is the fraud practsed
upon the Legislature and upon the country Admit
for the argument its existence, the person who drew
up the bill to be alone denounced and the Legislature
who enacted it, and the Executive who signed it, TO
be held entirely innocent Would this be right in
the eyes of honest men. 1t does not exist, however
and 1t would never have been charged by any other
than Just such those who figured In getting up
the resolutions represented to have been adopted
the public meeting at Peru on the 26h inst say
represented, because understand, that since their
publications many of them disavowed By several
respectable gentlemen who were present and who
would not have sanctioned the passage Of resolutions
so infamous in their character understand that the
resolutions and address were drawn up by, and pub
lished under the direction of individual (cf whom
shall speak directly in manner unauthorized by
the meeting Having established beyond all contro-
veIsy that the which passed the session
makes no alteration in the existing law diversey af
fectng, in any particular the rights of purchasers of
canal land-that it was passed by the Legislature
after a reference to a standing committee of the
House, and after discussion of its provSions-that
1t received the sanction of the Executive who must
have examined it, the only question remaining is,
whether was justifable in making the entries of
! the lands above mentioned.
Whatever view might be taken of the inquiry a
question in ethics, (and thus considered, do not be-
lleve it wrong) its propriety ought not TO be ques-
| toned by men, whose fortunes have been made by
swindng Indians first made drunk to facilitate its
accomplishment or by conservator of the
laws, who commits moral perjury by recommending
their violation These are not the men to determine
this question satisfactorily for enlightened COM
muniy. From their denunciations l appeal to the So
Der Judgment of honest men,
Jack Wright, who occupies to the disgrace of the
State, the station of president judge of circuit
court was the presiding genius of the Peru meeting
At his instance IT called. The resolutions and
address could not have emanaed from any other man
this side of Jeersonve and the walls of the peni-
Tertiary contain individuals who would blush at the
| avowal of the doctrines which they inculcate.
Were it not that these resolutions and address are
forth having received the appreciation of nu-
merouS assembly of the citizens of Miami county,
would not notice them. 1t would be unnecessary to
do so: for those who acquainted with Wright
| know that he is addicted to falsehoOd that
somewhat mitigation for the offence it is urged in
his behalf that, lying, with him, is constitutional
defect and that he is not therefore, accountable for it.
Let any man read the resolutions and address referred
to, and then determine whether their author is not
better suited in morality and capacity, 10 lead gang
of highwaymen, than to preside in Court of justice
The second resolution penned by the Judge. recon-
mends the appointment of a committee to rob In
divdual of his property. 1t is wrong for person TO
purchase land under the provisions of the law, but
perfectly right in a committee to steal money al
though prohibited by the law This is the morality
the honesty of Jack Wright and his cOmpeers.
Passing over the remaining resolutions, which are
nearly all of the character, wish TO point out
the falsehoods which are asserted in the address.
1t is false that Col. Reyburn refused 10 have any
thing to do with tie passage of the amendment-but,
on the contrary thereof, favored its passage. il is
false that sin the confusion of the adjournment, the
bill was passed without the knowledge of the men,
bers," but on the contrary thereof 1T acted upon
by those directly interested in its passage with full
knowledge of Its purport 1t is false that the bill
wives any act which not existence previous to its
passage, nor does it make it more imperatvely the
duty of the Commissioner TO permit the entry of forfeit
ed lands than did the law existing at the time of its
passage; in fact, making alteration whatever in
that respect. 1t is false that the clerk In the land
Office employed assistance, and that three persons
were secretly employed in filing certificates" but on
the contrary thereof the entries made and the
certificates were issued and the business transacted in
the usual MANNER in the presence of whoever chose to
come into the office. 1t is false that Mr. Fitzgerad's
name was used by me, to cover entries made for my
use The lands purchased by him with the exception
of about section, which bad been forfeited by the
United States in the above mentioned and In
| which only am interested) paid for with his
own money, for his own use and benefit The asser-
ton that Mr. Smith had made an affidavit that had
stolen the certificates, believe 10 be untrue. know
not what effect the threats of bandit may have had
upon him, or what he may have been forced to do
but this am certain, if he did SO, he stated that