The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1881-06-01
A FLAGRANT MISTAKE PHExPRESs
COMPANIES THE BENEFICIARIES.

a FLAG KANT MISTAKE (?0E6PRESS
COMPANIES THE BENEFICIARIES.
The gross incompetency, to use no harshel
phrase, of the clerk or clerks of the State
Senate during the late session of the In
diana Legislature, is brought into a promi.
nence seldom exceeded by incOmpetency or
malfeasance. The case to which we refer
relates to taxing Express Companies as
found in Section "a of an act concerning
taxation. That our readers may compre-
hend the the pernicious effects of the mis-
take p We copy so much of Section 81 as
will serve as explanatory:
Section 81. Any Joint Stock Association,
Company or Corporation, incorporated un-
der the laws of any other State, conveying
to, from or through this State or
any part thereof, money, packages,
gold, silver, plate or other articles by
express, or contract with any Railroad
Company, or the managers, l~essees, agent or
receiver thereof. not including Railroad
Companies engaged in the ordinary trans
portation of merchandise and property in
this State, shall be deemed to be an Express
Company, and every such Express Com
pany shall annually, between the LIST day of
April and the LIST day of May, make and de-
liver to the Auditor Of State a statement,
verified by the oath of the officer or agent
making such report, showing the entire re-
ceipts of each agent of such Company doing
business in this State tor the year then next
preceding the LIST day of April for and on
account of such Company, including its
proportion of gross receipts for bust
ness done by such Company
in connection with other Companies.
Provided, That the amount which any Ex-
press Company actually pays to the rail-
roads within this State for the ~transporta-
ton of their freight within this State, SAND
THE AMOUNT OF WAGES PAID TO
EMPLOYEES WITHIN THIS STATE, AND
THE AMOUNT PAID FOR THE PUR-
CHASE OF TANGIBLE PROPERTY
WITHIN THIS STATE may be deducted
from the gross receipts of such Company, as
above ascertained.
Tho rlanca inrlndad within thu stars
which we have placed in capitals, was
not a part of the act as it passed the
Legislature. 1t was, however, embodied
in an amendment to the act, offered by Sem
stor Chapman, in the exact language We
have given, and was rejected. This fact
can be abundantly proved, the history OF
the transaction being given to day else
where in the Sentinel. 1t will be
seen that, Notwithstanding the rejection
Of Senator Chapman's amendment by the
Senate. by a vote of 80 nays to 10 ayes
it is in the act as published and is a part
of the law. 1t is quite difficult to under
stand how such a fragrant mistake (?) could
have been made. 1t is difficult to
credit it to incompetency, since it bears all
the ear-marks of deliberate design. 1t
largely nullifes the law, and in its effects
absolutely relieves the Express Companies
from paying to the State a sum ranging
from $50, 900 to $4,000 a year. We do not
say that the rejected amendment of nate
Chapman was incorporated in the act by
design, and for the express benefit Of
the Express Companies, but we do
say thai the transaction is we'll calculated to
arouse suspicion in that direction. 1t is a
mistake (?) OF such serious proportions as to
require the most searching investigation,
and this it is likely to receive. When a
legislative clerk, by committing so gross an
error, nullifes law and puts thousands of
dollars annually in the pockets Of certain
corporations. the time for searching investi-
CATION is at hand. The case viewed from