The Kalida venture. [volume] (Kalida, Ohio) 1841-1865, 1846-01-22
Ohio legislature.

gamblers. The motion caused spirited debate
but was rejected by the wings
MIR. Knapp presented petitions from ctl-
zens OF Putnam for an alteration of the IL
cense law-to have those found guilty ofvio-
lating the election laws work ON the roads
instead of being confined in jail-from John
Defenbaugh and 70 others for change in
the laws establishing the Lima and Defiance,
Waupaukonnetta Allentown and Kalida Free
Turnpike Road-and two petitions to vacate
the tu, npike from Allentown to Kalida.
SATURDAY, JAM l0.-ln senate, Mr.. Kel-
ley reported the bill, recommitted to the cur
rency committee, granting banking powers
to the Life and Trust Company and the
Lafayette Bank of Cincinnati.
Mr., Edgerton moved its printing, which
was lost, He also moved that the capital
stock of these corporation be subjected to
taxation. Lost, yeas l3; nays 81; party
vote. Mr.. Kelley, Stockho!der of the Trust
Co. voting against taxation.
Mr.. Jones moved an amendment requiring
the stockholders TO certify their approval OF
the Bill before it became law. Mr.. X ell
ley opposed the motion, which was lost
Mr.. Ewing moved to recommiI the Bill
with instructions to report an amendment
prohibiting these banks from paying out bills
other than their own. Mr. Ewing commen-
ted at length on the powers granted
avowed his long settled conviction of the C.
vii tendency of all banks Of circulation, and
exposed the trickery of the majority in pre-
tending to exclude "unauthorized foreign pa
per-" MIR. EDGERroN commented at length
on the provisions of the Bill, especially that
portion of it which gave the privilege TO the
Trust Co. to Bank on Bills receivable, which
he pronounced unprecedented in the histo-
ry of Banking. His caustc and withering
remarks upon the dishonest course of Mr..
Kelley must have told severely upon that
willy intriguer if his conscience and sense OF
shame are not scared by his intense love of
gain. We will give an exract Or two in our
next.
On the engrossment of the Bill the vote
stood yeas ls; nays Is. MIR. Kelley's vote
here saving the Bill from defeat.
MONDAY Jan. l2.--In Senate, Mr. Kelley's
Bill relating to the Life Insurance and Trust Com,
pany and Lafayette Bank of Cincinnati was read
third time.
Mr.. Jones moved to add a section giving to any
stockholder who shall signify his dissent within
two years to the provisions of this act, the righ
to have the full value of his stock paid to him.
Yeas, ID, Nays, 90, Lost.
The question was then taken upon the passage
of the bill, and the ayes and nays being taken
resulted as follow
Arln Tall
Coombs, Cox, Eckley, Hastings, Kelley Made
ia, Martin Of Fayette, Ororrall, Osborn, Per-
kins, Quimby, Welch, Wetmore, and Speaker
III.
NAys--Messrs. Edgerton, Ewing, Goddard
GroF, Harte, Jones, King, Koch, Martin of Col
umbana, Newman. O'NSal, Po,VcH, Reid Thorn
hill, Utter, Warner, ond Wood--l7.
So the bill was lost.
Those in italics who voted in the negative are
whigs.]
Mr. Powell moved reconsideration of the vote
Just taken, which was carried--ayes 10, nays g.
So the vote was reconsidered.
On motion of Mr. Powell,
The bill was laid on the table, 1t was afterwards
taken up and referred to a committee of one, Mr.
O'Ferral
In the House, the Bill to authorize and regulate
limited partnerships was read a third time.
Mr.. Finn moved its indefinite postponoment 1t
introduced an innovation into the hitherto saluta ry
law partnerships with view to iortify stlong-
hold for capital, against the determination ofrc-
peal declared by the democrats. MrFlinn eloquent.
ly denounced the principle of limited partnerships
as deceptive and unsafe for the public. 1t changes
the individual responsibility of partners,as the law
now stands, to make men answerable only fol
the amount of capital invested, exempting them
from the debts of the concern, if miSmanaged, be-
yond the amount of their investment. He
denounced it as opposed to equality, as liable tc
fuct uaon, as giving unjust privileges to pial
and as not demanded by the great body of oul
people, the agriculturists
Mr. IRWIN contended that 1t was safe as it pro.
vided for the publicity of the names, residence
and business of the partners
MIR VALLANDIaHAM unders ocd the bill to exempt
the property of special partners from liability
for the debts contracted by the firm. He was
opposed to this exemption altogether. 1t was in
part this very principle of limited liability which
had made banks odious, inequitable and dangerous
and called forth the opposition of the party he
acted with. The exemption of capitalists from
the liabilities of the firm would be at the expense
of the many who should become the creditors o
the partnership-the creditors, the many to be
sacrificed for tho advantage of the few, the part
nership debtors Yet it was those persons, the
innocent, the simple hearted, unsuspectng, ifany,
who needed the protecting fostering of legis.
lation, and not the shrewd, wealthy, calculating
business man, who, from practice and the cir
cumstances in which he was placed, was better
able to take care Of himself
Mr.. OLDs defended the Bill. He said that he
considered the law favorable to the poor. 1t gives
industrious poverty an opportunity to make use o
the capital of the wealthy. No credit is given tc
the special partner His name is not known in the