The Indianapolis sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1880-1904, 1885-02-27

stric'lon-yeas, IS; nays, 2-.hs bill was read
the third time.
Mr.. HILLIGAS explained: Il is estimated
that this bill vii save a, least so, 600 year.
10 embo6ies ali OF the present law and pro-
vides that most OF the reports shall De pub
lished semiannually instead OF annually, as
now, and gives the Printing Bureau the
right TO eliminate from such reports any
matter he may consider unnecessary.
PROPOSED CHANCE OF RULE.
Mr.. WILLARD called up his resolution
offered several days ago 10 amend rule 81 so
as the order of buiiness can be suspended by
majority instead OF tw0-thirds vote, and
on that motion be demanded the previous
question.
The resolution was rejected by yeas 81,
Mr. FOULKE moved to reconsider the
vote Just taken and TO lay that motion On
the table
The latter motion was rejected by yeas
20 nays %.
On motion by Mr.. willard, the motion to
reconsider was made a special order for 2
o'clock tomorrow.
APPELLATE COURT.
Mr.. Wsir's bill IS. 45l 20 create en Appel
late Court, being The special order for this
hour, was taken up. the question being on
the adoption Of a minority report.
Mr.. MCCULLOUGH: This is an import.
ant measure. The original bill provided for
q Court OF five judges. 10 sit az indianapolis.
A me j0rity report recommends It's passage.
minority report recommends the passage
OF bill for three Courts OF three members
each, D. sit in three several districts OF the
Safe The after bin is drawn bT SONS III
the best LAWYERS in the Sm'e. O1e objection
20 the biii providing for one Court Is those
Judges must DO paid $1,000 a year, that L..
$4,000 for the Eve Judges. There are 200
yHlumek OF the Supreme Court reports sold
while numbers OF tho States around as sell
reports running up 10 thousands Only 100
are sold Outside Of The State, while so 600
copies Of Massachusetts reports are sold. The
Supreme Count OF Indiana is taking very
low stand. IL shows Indiana Courts are not
authority. Our judges will compare with
the Judges OF other States, but this dlscrep
ancy Is because we compel them TO pass
upon cases without the consideration they
should have ne time TO give.
Air. WEIR. / would just as coon have the
one as the her, perhaps | might say my
preference GU "a be for the three courts. II
the Sena cor clude there must be an APP
pellate CO. 3, a. the choice can be made
as between tha % i believe this meaure
10 be rs important as any bin that has been
pTesen tee TO the Legislature.
Mr.. SMITH OF Jennings This Is meas
IRE or great Importance 70 the lawyers. 10
the lucges, and OF greater Importance 20 the
people OF Indiana. / is the only way Ia
which We can In a legal manner relieve the
Supreme Court. Undsr the bill which the
Senator from Gibson advocates nearly every
case now sent to the Supreme Court now
could be brought to that court. The bill OF
the Senator from Laports is preferable. II
the decisions of such court is not TO
be authority, ! shall vote against
creating any court. Were there
three courts there would be decisions con
niciing at times, each with the other. We
should have court that will produce de.
cisions that sre uniform and binding. il
seems TO me this is the greatest objection 10
this system OF three courts with nine judges
Mr.. CAMPBELL, OF Hendricks. / don
entertain the opinion that there is an abso-
Int need OF this Court 20 enable the
Supreme Court TO catch up with the bust
ness. The time has besn when the Supreme
Court Was farther behind than it is no 2.
Ny principal reason for faV0ring an Appel
late Court, is that il will supplant the Com
missioners of the Supreme Court. An Ap-
PeNaIe Court OF FIVE judges would be no
additional expense believe it better 70
have but one Appellate Court with three
Judges.
Pending this
The Senate adjourned till $50 tomorrow.