The New York herald., 1879-03-13

tion of apportionment; while the republicans
headed by Mr.. Terry. OF Washington. argued
or na. v sneis opponents were entirely responsible
sions. The impression gains ground here that no
fair Apportionment bill will pass this session. as
any attempts in that direction will be strangled
when the conference committees get to work. 1t
will be recollected that similar tactics
word conducted the manipnlations on his side Of the
House. Mr.. Terry moved to recommit this
taEe e w to amend fra to
York aud add ono to Washington county.
giving New York twentyfour and Washington two.
lature on the apportionment question since 1875.
After this four years struggle, he SAID. the demo-
this bill constructed is. lie continued at length
and in the course of his remarks he denounced the
passage of this bill weak and cowardly sub
mission to the democratic party. He made q
strong appeal to the House in behalf of Washington
county in which republicanism had spent its child
hood. and where 1t had been nursed into strength
and power. Mr.. Hepburn said that no man obeying
the constitution and laws of the State could report
or support any other bill than the ono now before
the House. Mr. Terry's motion to amend was lost
by vote of 25 to So
MORE TROUBLE OVER COMMISSIONERS DUNLAP.
The Commissioner of Jurors bill was also passed
to-day i'll the House, cutting down the salary OF that
official on and after the 1st of May next. when Mr.
reading Of the the biz caused little utter It 81 discus
sion Mr.. Grady wanted the measure recominittcd
SO that the salary might bo placed at $4,000. that
gentleman contending such compensation was little
enough for the important duties discharged. The
reforiners. headed by 'Mcssrs. Dean and yarnum.
castigated Mr.. Grady for his assumption that $4,000
was not ample salary. Mr.. Dean called attention to
the fact that before the Office of Commissioner of
Jurors was created the duties were discharged in the
County Clerks Office without extra compensation.
Mr.. Grady retorted with the accusation that the
publican reformers of last year had passed bill
constitutional and would have to be vetoed by the
Governor' Notwithstanding the gentleman s efforts
The Senate will now give its decision upon this bill.
THAT SPECIAL RAILROAD COMMITTEE.
The controversy over the additional members of
designation by tho Speaker Of Messrs. Noyes, wads-
worth. Baker and Terry to act with the fve gentle
men already appointed.
HAsrY ARRESTS OF LIQUOR DEALERS
Mr.. f. Hognns bill authorizing all police captains.
sergeants and others who may be III charge OF sta
arrest for breaches of the Excise law accept bail
now likely to become law. 1t was to-day reported
favorably from the Judiciary Committee OF the
THE GUARDIAN SAVINGS INSTITUTION.
Mr.. Flynn offered resolution that the Attorney
General be requested to investigate the affairs Of the
receiver of the Guardian Savings Institution of New
York and take such action he may deem expedient
for the protection OF policy holders. Tabled
NEW CODE.
There was presented to the Legislature yesterday
the petition of l42S lawyers against the nine sup,
in favor of repeating the thirteen chap
ters rewriting them. as to get
contained only the names that had been sent in to
the Law Reform Society. but is considerably larger
than that sent in last year by the New York commit
tee. Others have been presented to the Legis-
lature from the intcror-as, for instance.
one from Utica containing 104 names, six
of which only in the present memorial.
There at the same time laid upon the tables Of
the members printed copies OF lists of last year.
tanng 647 Names besides those in this years petit
ton. There being no reason to suppose that. in
spect Of any of these of last year. change Of
opinion has occurred beyond the less than six per
cent claimed by the friends OF the Codeseventy
nine in alive have the names of 1898 lawyers
so unalterably opposed to 1t as to join in these
emphatic protests against 1t. Adding the ninety
eight names from Utica there is total of 2,001
These exclusive of memorials sent in from other
parts OF the State. The results thus far are. that
more names are sent in against the new Code this
year than sent in last year, and that after all
the efforts of its friends since it was first presented
three years ago they have got only onequsrter OF the
Bar OF the State to give it even vague approval