Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1841-1853, 1848-03-16


iure Of approval
My time has been much occupied with an examination
multitude of bills caused by the approach your
final adjournment, aud with my other public duties that my
notice Of the bill must necessarily be quite brief
The bill provides that the claim Of Patrick Mckinley
against the State for materials furnished for
the Silver Creek bridge in Floyd and Clark countless shall
be referred to three abators appointed by the Governor
two of whom shall be men of legal know edee-that The
award decision Of ihem Of majority Of them, shall
be in writing and filed in the clerks office Of the Floyd cir
cult that the shall be final unless appealed from
within thirty days to the COURT and that
ing the final award the Audiior Of State shall issue
his for the which may be allowed 10 McGn-
ley on the Trcasuer who shall pay the same ou' Of any
ion Of the Floyd circuit court rendered on this very claim in
1889 APP that by The Of the present BILL the at
braioIs will in their power award Mckinley
twenty thousand dollars against The State Before authority
parted with for that puIpose should satisfactorily 40.
pear that the claim PresumPtreiy good Every such
Investigation is attended with expense and the State should
not authorize unless there is al least plausible ground Of
complaint 1t is Of impractcabe for The Legislature
or the Executive to knoc whether the claim is well or ill
founded aud the argument for thus effect asking the State
permit suit to be brought against herself doubt
that uncertainty, by mal and legal investigation.
But that investigation has already been aft ded and acted
upon eight years ago. Experience has abundanty
shown that frequently when State authorizes suit to
be brought against herself she the loser. In uch
verses the State weak and the individual strong
If the State litgant gains suit, much stronger
evidence that justice requires H. than would be in the
Of individual have not time all the
for this but they known to member Of the
bar of standing and experience.
This claim years old 1t is founded transactions
which happened long 1897 Ii grew of the
disastrous internal Improvement system, unfortunately
authorized by the State in 1885, The claimant
aced TO build the bridge Silver Creek, already referred
to, in Mach, 1887.
After proceeding with bis work ill towards the close of
the year, and after having been paid con- Of
S2lSl4 90 his contract finally declared abandoned by
the engineer by the terms OF the contract ITSELF the
gineer authorized to do The complaint is, that the
claimant yet entitled to damages fOr materials furnished
for and woIkdone the bridge. The defence is that he
according 10 his contract
The matter was at first referred BY the claimant for re-
dress, TO the board of internal improvement.
The facts then fresh in the memory Of all concerned
the witnesses had not died removed TO distant parts and
yet then the board decided against the claim
Upon the application of the claimant afterwards to the
Legislature joint resolution passed early the
sion of 1883 allowing him bring against
by bill IN chancery in the Floyd circuit court for the full
amount of his claim.
This passed under strong and protest against
it, The part Of less than "A members of the House Of
Representatives. House Journal Of 1889, page 452
Having made this reference il is unnecessary repeat in
this place. objections which then urged and many Of
which think eminenty worthy of consider aiion but de-
sire that the objections then pertinent they
yet in full force with the additional Ones which
will now proceed to remark.
The suit brought and on the 9th day of May lS40
decree rendered by that against the for
500 and From this Decree appeal taken the
supreme court where il finally reversed aside
"for the want Of equity"
Since bill under consideration presented me.
have from anxious desire do justice looked
examining all the evidence verbal and documentary well
an elaborate brief each side Of The cause file
the productions Of able COUNSEL and feel bound
in judgment the evidence as TO numbers and profession
al skill and experience aud 10 its specific and pointed
bearing accordance with the decision Of the supreme
court and ia favor Of the State.
But il not perhaps necessary to decide on the merits Of
the controversy and injustice may sometimes be done to
claimant, for every human tribunal is fallibe still for every
practical purpose the presumption must and ought be- that
the final judgment decree of court is right and that it
settles the controversy ii the interest Of the community
that litigation shall sometime If the present bill
should become law, another investigation be ordered and
another be had against Mckinley what will prevent
him from sgan applying to the Legislature for the privilege
the State third time What reason could then be
urged against it, which he urged Would any
thing satisfy this Importantly this weayng of the State,
but final success What encouragement would be held out
to Iauge class of similar clams After the claimant has
bad the privilege Of suens the State with all the adj
vantages confes and has failed TO establish his claim IN
the judgment of the highest judicial tribunal does seem 10
me this lately bankrupt State weak she be adj
mted in such controversies, should enjoy at least the
privileges Of other gan parties and be suffer ed hually 10
Iepoe This view msnifesy just, that by way of OBJ
WAITING has been said that one perhaps two, of the then
judges which reversed The decree have since
pressed the opinion that the claimant suffered injustice IN
their decision.
But aside from its great improbabity would not ard
especially communication like the present. aude
to such rumOr except for the purpose Of declaring
tire disbelief Of it, At the time desiie 10 exCupate
the gentlemen who have communicated the 10 Ie,
from the slightest intentional misrepresentation of which,
am satisfied that they incapable. am too we'll aware
how natural is the transition from misappehenson, 10 eX-
sggeraiion and final injustice.
The whole recod The whole evidence the whole argu-
before that court, aud Il would IN my Judgment
be unjust its members, as it would be against the
sounde pulley suppose that they dad not give the
its merited examination and full consider alton.
But another stOng objection to my mind against the claim
is that ii is sale. argument against this objection
that the claimant is Whatever obstacle poverty may
be 10 prosecuting claim n court is whatever 10
application the legislature That body cannot justly be
changed with HberaIy and especially 10 private claims
There has been every encouragement therefore apply 10
it relief and the only natural and safe supposion under
the circumstances is the conscious worthessness OF the CLAIM
itself.
Several other objections have occurred 10 my mind touch
ing the restriction TO the mode Of investigation, the un-
just principle of allowing eight years interest on unquda-
ted damages permitted by this BILL Sc Sc which have
not time dwell upOn But cannot omit saying that
think radical defect in the BILL independent OF the above
objections that while take 100000 from the Tieasu-
y makes provision TO supply its loss by increasing the
tax correspondence The large appropriations at The
session necessary for the States resort
his collections from the suspended debt to meet the States
interest due IN July last under The late arrangement Oh the
public debt Is il throw upon future legislature the
necessity aud the odium Of increasing the
suice the treasury occasoned by the present bill Let
the members Of each Session be responsible for their own
actions The sound aud safe rule, and which beg
may violated in this S,ae, is, debt
without making provision at the time for It's ultimate
payment
Ii is painful objections bills for private relief
Our sympatbes naturally flow towards The individual We
forget the user sympathy due to the laboring
by increased taxation every lime unjust claim allowed
The opposition Of individuals is almost TO follow re-
ction and there nothing stimulate the performance
Of such duty, but the abstract public welfare An ofneer
however who can hesitate in such case is unworthy OF the
confidence rposed in him. and is derect common gratitude
those who have bouoied him.
trust shall never be found wanting TO the claims OF
Justice aud patriotism, in any such emergency.
claim DID, the facts not recent, and the MEM
bers had full opportunity Of examining the
former proceedings 10 the have enjoyed hope 10
fir the 10