The Wheeling daily register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1864-1878, 1877-03-23
THE USURY BILL.
The Title Of the Bill Discussed and
How the Governor Put His Foot
into 10.


into ID.
CLARKsBuRG, March q, 1877.
Editors of the Register:
In the editorial OF the REGISTER on
the veto by the Governor of Senate Bill
No. u, known as the "Usury Bill" l
think YOU do injustice to the lawyers"
VINO happened to be also members of the
Legislature. The lawyers, us the journals
of the Legislature Will show, did not vote
for the bill. In the Senatethere were nine
LAWYERS, Of whom two, Messrs. Berkshire
and l. Dmis, voted Toy tnt h'.i. The
other seven voted against IL. See Senate
Journal, February Is, 1877, page 4.
In the House oc Delegates, L am
not able to state the vote, as |
have not received complete set of the
daily Journals of the House. But the
REGISTER Is mistaken In the assertion
that the blll was purposely y made uncon.
stitutional by the "lawyers" in order to
deceive the "grangers." The fact is that
the supposed constitutional OBJECTION Of
GocernOr .Jacob does not eriSt, rs the
Journals clearly show. BY reference TO
Senate journal of February 10Th, 1917,
page 4, it will appear that ION motion of
Mr.. Turner, the title OF the bill was fur
ther amended by inserting after the
word void the words 'as to the Interest
charged or retained" By reference to
the House journal of the same date,
page 10. the title of the BILL rs reported
by me TO the House, is printed IN full.
And in House Journal for February
18th, page 9, and for February I'D, page
IA, when the bill is reported for
first and second reading, the title is
correctly reported again. Not having
the House Journal of Feb. 2Sth at hand,
l am not able to state what the final ac
tion on the bill WAS.
The bill was correctly enrolled as to
the title, as will appear from the House
journal of March lst, where the title OF
the bill is again reported by Mr.. Riley,
the chairman of the House Committee on
Enroliei Bills, as correctly enrolled. l
presume | made like report to the Sem
ate, but not having the Senate journal
of that date at hand, am unable to make
n positive statement in regard to it
The Governor made a mistake in
looking only at the inside title of the
bill for the title, instead of looking at the
outs,dc also. The discrepancy arose very
probably from the fact that the cngros
sing clerks have practice OF copying
the printed title at the beginning OF
bill when it is eugrossed-a practice
which it seems 10 me ought never 10
h,v. obtained. rs the title is not part Of
the bill, and is never acted on until after
the bill IS passed The title being y
separate thug, is written on the outside
of the engrossed bill, aud any amesd-
ments mode To it are there inserted. SO
that, as in the case of the bill under dis
cussion, the enrolling clerks frequently
have one title on the outside Of
the enrolled bill, and differ
ent one on the inside. The
Joint committee on enrolled bills en-
desyored to correct all such mistakes;
hut IN the hurry of the last two days,
having so many bills to examine, and
knowing in this case that the outside
(proper) title of the bill was correctly
enrolled and having been informed
by good authority that the outside title
is the proper title-the bill went to the
| Governor in that way.
l have thought it proper to write this
| communication, TO relieve the commit
tee on enrolled bills OF any blame that
might be laid to their charge by persons
who should examine the journals, and
also to correct the wrong impression
which your article on the subject was
likely to create.
Hoping you will allow space in your
paper for this explanation, and that it
may result in the adoption of new rule
for engrossed bills by the next iegisls'
ture. am yours truly
| L. ii. TURNER.