Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1882-03-02
he Senate then at a late hour adjourned.
HOUSE OF DELEGArE.


Morning Session.
The session was opened with prayer by
Delegate Dodvill.
Mr.. McCord called up the bill concerning
the
Attachment or Defendaats Property
and Claims
on its third reading.
Mr.. Mcneil asked for the reading OF Pc
tition from citizens Of Wheeling asking Tor
the rejection of the bill.
Mr.. McCord said that petitions had been
signed and sent here By persons who do
not understand the terms or purpose OF the
bill.
Mr.. Morrow gave q very clear exposition
of the purposes OF the bill, and the prac-
tice II is designed to break up. He explain.
through Ohio and other States and gather
mp claims against poor men, generally EN-
ployes of railroads, who happen TO be tenn
porarily employed in this State, and who
garnishee their wages in the hands Of the
company employing them. These claims
could not be collected where these debtors
live because their wages are exempt. But
because they are non-residents here their
wages are open to the merciless depreda-
tion of these sharks. He showed that it
was not in the interest of the citizens of
this State TO have this parctice carried on
He had been trying for seven years to
break II up in his county.
Mr.. Leonard wanted to know who was
here asking for the passage OF this bill. He
said il was not the employees, who the bill
proposed 10 protect, but he believed il TO
be inspired BY the railroad companies. He
claimed that the passage OF the bill would
operate against the interests OF the mer-
chants Of this State.
Mr.. Hubbard took the same ground, and
said that the merchants Of this State did
not misconceiye the purposes OF the bill
in asking for its rejection. He said II
would interfere with the assignment OF
claims between the merchants of the ad.
joining States. lie said it was the province
of the State of Ohio to pass law to break
up the practice il they. desired to protect
their citizens. He read from the REGISTER
to show that such law had been intro
duced in the Ohio Legislature He further
claimed that the proposed bill was in yio-
lation Of the constitution.
Mr.. Mcneil denied that there was any
Justice in Wheeling who makes 5000 out
of these claims. lie said that no Justice in
Wheeling made more than half that sum
out of all his business.
Mr. Lowry favored the passage OF the bill,
showing that it worked great hardship, in
some instances causing the discharge OF the
employe from the service Of the company
employing him.
Mr. MrCord had read petition from cit
liens of Brooke county stating that they
had signed petition for the rejection OF
the bill through a misapprehension and
they desired II to be disregarded, and the
bill passed in order to break up this iniqui.
from J. Dunbar, stating that OF the 800
suits brought in this city against non-resi.
dents, not one was brought in the name OF
o citizen of Wheeling. Mr.. McCord further
read from the Ohio statutes showing that
the law was dead letter.
Mr. Sinclair said the adoption OF this bill
would not operate against the interest OF
the merchants of Wheeling. He did not
believe that one out OF hundred OF these
suits was brought in the interest Of a resi-
dent of Wheeling.
Mr.. Leonard called for the reading OF the
petition OF the citizens OF Parkersburg. II
had been intimated that they did not knew
what they were doing. He would state that
when the citizens Of Parkersburg signed
petition they generally knew what they
were doing.
Mr.. Lowry said that petitions did not
amount to much. A petition could be got
ten up for any purpose. He could get
petition signed to hang the gentleman from
Wood II he should try. II any effort had
been made to get up "a petition in favor OF
this bill, it would have been signed ten in
favor to one against 1t.
Mr.. Dorvill called for the previous ques.
tion, and the demand was sustained.
The call of the roll on the passage Of the
bill resulted ayes "A, nays 30.
Before the announcement OF the vote,
Mr. Morrow, who had voted aye, changed
his vote TO nay. After the announcement
oflthe defeat OF the BILL he move da recon-
sideraton OF the vote by which il was re.
jected. He said he wanted TO be placed
right on the record; that he did not be.
lieve any more meritorious measure had
been brought before the House. s,
The motion to reconsider was lost.
Afternoon Session.
The House re-assembled promptly at
half past = o'clock and proceeded TO bust.
ness.
On motion OF Mr.. Beckwith House bill
No. 323, faniliarly known as the "Dog
Law" was taken up, the Senate amend
ments concurred in and the bill passed.
MrsQuarrier said that the two Houses
having settled the status Of the dogs OF
the State he now moved that the House
proceed with the calander--bills on their
second reading-for the benefit Of the pe0'
pie Of the State.
Mr.. Moffett asked that the motion be
withdrawn in order that bill now in its
third reading might be passed.
Mr.. Quarter said he supposed il was some
independent school district bill, and would
accommodato the gentleman, and withdrew
h!s motion.
House bill No. 375. for the relief OF
Isaac McNeale, late sheriff OF Pocahontas
was then passed.
Mr.. Grantham said as the motion to pro-
ceed with the calendar had been withdrawn
he would renew his motion OF yesterday to
take up Senate Bill No. l42, concerning in
sane persons. II was not q local bill, but
one Of general interest, and ought " be
passed as soon rs possible.
After some skirmishing, the motion was
agreed to and the bill passed.
Mr.. Quarter desired to renew his motion
TO proceed with the calendar-House bills i
on their second reading. He made the mo-
ton with considerable diffidence, and IL
any gentleman had pet scheme, school,
a dog, or a bridge bill, he was prepared TO
withdraw it. The motion was adopted.
House bill No. 3lG concerning the sale
OF delinquent lands for school purposes,
and OF the duties OF the Auditor and Sher-
iff in relation thereto was read q second
time and on motion OF Mr.. Quarter laid on
the table.
House bill 3ls, BY whom land books are
TO I've made out, and pf corrections there
in, came up and elected considerable dis
cussion. Mr. Grantham moved 70 fix the
compensation of clerks at not more than
500.
Mr.. Leonard moved TO amend by saying
not less than $5Oor more than 500. He knew
of onecounty in which $50 was: allowed,
but subsequently without the amendment |
Mr.. Riley wanted IL left 10 the county |
courts, and Mr. Edmiston took a similar
view.
Mr. Hall. of Wetzel, moved TO fix the
maximum at $400 Rejected.
Mr.. Grantham then Withdrew his amend
ment.
Mr.. Dodrill moved TO amend the sth
section so as to have the land books made
out by the assessors. The change in the