Daily State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1861-1865, 1865-02-02
ton. which Eas referred to the Judiciary commit


es 81 500 4 year, which was referred 20 the com
niticcs Oh fees and ~sslaries.
Nr. Emerson. loo, amending section 3ST Of
the old practice act. which wss referred TO the
judiciary committee.
Mr. Miller. OF Clinton l0I giving county re-
corders tie RICH; 70 demand advance fees, vhicb
was re.erei 10 tue commute on fees ard sal
aries Attf 1AAA
Mr. Griffin. 100. ameading sections 5. So and
A OF the general election act allowing soldiers
to votel II was referred to the committee on
the judiciary.
Mr.. Brown, le3. eIempting ten scres. worth
moi more than SIS. 900. TO any and every parson.
age. Referred to the committee on ways and
means.
Sir. Gregory. l0i, dividing among the colleges
Of this state toe congressional land donation.
Mr. Lasseile, l05, amending section 46 Of the
common school law. which Was referred TO the
educational com mittee.
Dir. Cook. LOG, authorizing warehouses built
for keeping AID storing tobacco. which was re
ferred to the committee on commerce and man
ufactures.
Mr.. Church. l07, to provide fer the number
and meeting Of directors for consolidated com
Danies. and to increase stock and borrow mon
ey, &c. Referred To the committee or rail
roads.
Mr.. Pueit. los, amending section IS Of the act
for the incorporation OF cities. &c, approved
March 9, 1851.
Dir. Sullivan, of Scott, 100, amending section
% of the assessment act Of June 81, 1852. which
Was referred to the committee on county and
township business.
Mr.. Shoaf, Of Allen, submitted the follow
ing -
Resolved, that the committee on education be
instructed 10 inquire into the expediency of so
amending the school law as TO authorize the
German language to be taught exclusively in
certain common schools, where there is a suf-
fcient number Of inhabitants entitled 10 the ben
efts of the school Law to require il.
On motion of Mr.. Oilemnn, referred 20 com
mittee on education.
SOLDIERS BoUNTIEs.
Mr.. Newcomb, from the committee on judicia
~, reported relative to bill No ii, FOR the relief
of wives and families of soldiers and seamen Ia
ken captive, disabled, or who may be killed or
die in their line of duty; amended. aud recon
mending its passage.
Mr.. Brown moved that the report Of the com
mittee be cOncurred in.
Discussion followed until the hour of noon id
journment.
Mr.. Speaker called the House to order at 2
O'Clock.
lie stated that it was his impression that there
was no quorum in the House. and in order to de
termin, ordered the clerk to call the roll.
a quorum was ascertained IT, he present.
House bill No. ID, pending at the hour Of
morning adjournment. was taken up.
Mr.. Whitesides argued the merits Of the bill at
length, and approved the amendment, as reported
by the committee, that a distinction should be
drawn betw cen soldiers with means aud soldiers
who had left their families at home without
means. 1t was wrong 1t would create confusion
in every township OF the state. We did not want
AN irresponsible township officer to dispense the
charities of q great and magnanimous ommuni
ty. Let us stand, therefore. by the bill as il
came from the hands of the gentleman who re
ported il.
Mr. Ferris followed in support OF the amend
ment. lt was tight and proper. Ii was to rem
der certain that the families of volunteers should
have IA comfortable subsistence. With these
views. he would vote to sustain the amendment.
Mr.. Woods io!lowed i'll opposition to the
amendment.
Mr.. Cefiroth said if a stranger should com
into this House, he would conclude that IL was
largely composed of copperheads. He would
take il for granted that il vas insisted tia; the
general government was incompetent to take
care of those fighting their battles. Some men
would save, and some men would sguander.
This was human nature. and it could not be
helped. But the soldiers pay was already mu-
Liicent. 1t was q high and holy duty to provide
properly for soldiers families, and do we repre-
sent the wisdom OF the state in voting TO lavish
the peoples money in this way? 1t would be a
wrong aud a crime for Us thus TO vote. As the
gentleman from Ripley had remarked, the title of
the bill ought to be changed so as to read "a bill
not for the benefit of soldiers families, but Il bill
to increase the pay of soldiers
Mr.. Branham followed in support OF the bill.
He had introduced It, after well considering IL.
He hoped the amendment would not prevail. but
if it did. be should vote for the bill anyhow.
Mr.. Emmerson followed. He thought that, if
the amendment was adopted, soldiers" should
be stricken out of the bill, and the word % pau
per" be substituted. There was not 4 county in
the state where the poor would be allowed to
perish for something TO eat. We owed a duty to
soldiers. If they were to be regarded az paupeIs
he wanted. as he ha6 asid, their name left entire
ly out of the bill.
Mr.. Buskirk thought the state OF Indiana
could not provide for the increase Of the pay OF
our soldiers. The consequent taxation would be
perfectly appalling. But We must be charitable
That was the lnculcation OF the Book OF all
Books. So il was the duty of every citizen TO
aid the government in time of war. The bill
gives to the county commissioners the power to
appoint q competent trustee, who should decide
whether the applicant had available means of
support or not.
II that trustee should prove himself incom-
petent or partial he could be removed and
another appointed In his stead. Was IL riSbt
that persons much poorer than a soldier be taxed
to support his family 7 The soldier was in
the army because it was his duty TO be there. If
his amendment was adopted every soldiers fam
lily that needed benefits under the bill would
get them. Aside from the question of increas-
ing our state taxes. this bill demands forty cents
on the hundred dollars for the specific purpose
Already our taxes figure up enormously. Let
us therefore not attempt 10 do more than we
can. If the soldier does not receive enough
let Us memoralize congress 10 give him more
Mr. Burton advocated the amendment and
spoke at Length in favor of the bill. He would
divide the last loaf Of bread with the soldier or
his family who needed ii, but he was opposed To
the taxation OF the people to support those at the
public expense who did not require il. He was
not for rolling the peoples money into the lap OF
luxury. He did not propose to tax the people
for the bsneft OF persons who had FIVE thousand
dollar horses at home. The wife of such a man
could get all the credi, she wanted. As unpa-
triotic as some men might deem him, he would
trust her Tor all she wanted.
The gentleman talked on this bill as If tie
war was a new thing, lie would tell gentlemen
that in his judgment it would become an Old
thing before the country was done with il, and
therefore it behooved u TO husband our re-
sources. DE was for the bill that those in need
Of its benefits might receive them: but he was
opposed 10 sguandering the peoples money upon
those who were not legitimate objects OF public
] oIarfrr