The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1885-03-19

plttance. AT the last session this claim was put
| IN the specific appropriation bill, and, / think,
passed the Senate. We frequently hear of claims
| being allowed here on the ground of equity
| this certainly is one based on equity. 1t this
! claim was ever before the committee on claims,
have no recollection of it.
Dir. Weir moved to amend by referring the
1 claim TO select committee of three.
Mr. Mcintosh thought that the claim was de-
| feated two years ago. and that it was then I'M
! derstood that Mr. Campbell no longer had any
| interest iE the claim.
/ Mr.. Smith of Delaware said that he was on a
committee four years ago which examined this
claim He went to Bloomington and found there
| was no claim, except on equity. He found that
| there were persons here in the city who would
have received the money, and in consequence IL
was not reported back. The motion for special
| committe was agreed to. The Lieutenant gov
ernor made the committee to consist Of Senator'S
Overstreet Smith Of Delaware. and Mcintosh
Mr. Youche moved to take up his resolution
| for adjournment sine die on March %, which was
| pending at the time of the adjournment Tues
/ day evening, having received unanimous, but
| not majority, vote. The motion agreed
/ to. The question recurring on the resolution as
amended, it was adopted by yeas Al, nays 0.
| Mr. Benz, explaining his vote, said: 1.-THE
only thing am sorry about is that the resolu-
ton don't say tomorrow Unless we do better
/ than we have done since the extra session COM
| menced. we had better 90 home tomorrow"
| Mr.. Mays bill rs. S9l to provide for the cleo
ton every four years of a Clerk of the Supreme
| Court, and that he shall keep a cash book, was
read third time On motion the bill was re-
committed to the special committee which made
/ the last report thereon.
! Mr. Sellerss bill rs 94l concerning the duties
| of the Reporter of the Supreme Court was read
! the third time Mr.. Sellers said that this
| was not anything like the bill he introduced
| If it should become law the State would have to
pay 3d. SO per copy for 500 copies of these reports
while they would be sold to others for So. rs
Mr. Fowler said that this BILL by implication,
pealed the other section of the code which re-
quired the State to pay So so copy for the Su-
could be done. While it does not suit me, I
hope it will be passed. The motion to recommit
was agreed to-
The bill IS. 293l concerning ferries was re-
Mr.. Baileys bill Is 1901 to provide for the ap-
po'ntment of State boiler inspector was read
| the I'D time.
Afternoon Session.
The b Is. 1901 providin, for the appointment
of q ate boiler inspector failed to pass by
yeas, 4, nays, So.
On motion by Mr. Hilligass the bill rs 170l
concerning liens and mortgages was read the
third time.
Mr.. Adkison-T represent loan company that
has perhaps loaned as much money in Indiana as
any other company, and we have never charged
any more interest on account of this law. We
have an affidavit that they have not executed. or
brance in the last fifty days. The people have be-
come used to the present system. 1t seems to
me such a law as this bill proposes would be to
open the door to fraud.
Mr.. Youcne-There are several reasons that
satisfy me this is good bill. No possible fraud
can be perpetrateG under it that cannot be
guarded against We have been advancing in
the direction of this kind of law for many
years There is not State know of that has
not adopted law that priority shall date from
the time of putting on record
Mr.. Overstreet-If this bill is passed it seems
to me there would be greater temptation to
commit fraud. would be willing to bring the
time for recording mortgages down to ten days
the time for chattel mortgages.
Mr.. Fowler-In the interest of honesty and
fair dealing hope this bill will not pass. 1t sa
snare. To say the one that gets in the record
ers Office first shall have priority over ali others
this bill by the Judiciary committee, with in
structions to amend by making the time ten
days.
Mr. McCullough-The practical effect of the
bill would be very different from what some SEN
ators think. A man loaning money and taking a
mortgage may frequently require an affidavit,
but, as general thing, the word of the borrower
Is taken in ninety nine eases out of hundred
may be known in very few days whether there
was mortgage issued before this and put upon
record. The opportunities greater for
fraud under the present law than they would be
unQ6f EntS Oil. Inc very TACT LnaG q man knows
he has forty five days time in which to put a
mortgage on record is a reason for carelessness.
Mr. Willard demanded the previous question
The Senate seconded the demand, and under it's
operations the motion to recommit was rejected
Mr.. Foulke made an Intellectual mOtion-yeas 20,
nays 25-to order the bill engrossed. Mr.. Fowler
moved to indefinitely postpone the bill.
Mr. Foulke-I know the great real estate
interests of New York could not be carried on
under our law. know a large amount of CAPT
tall aS haa Rap mt of Sfafa tbnr
that titles are not so good. This bill cannot
work harm to single man. 1t is the man who
has his mortgage recorded early that's protected,
and not the man who sleeps upon his rights.
Mr., Sellers-The theory-of law is to protect
the diligent man. At first j did not look so
favorablv upon this bill, but now I am in favor
of the bill and hope it will not be indefinitely
postponed.
fraud could be made between the MORTGAGE and
the mortgageor. The senator from Huntington
voted against my motion to recommit l with
draw the motion to indefinitely postpone.
Mr. Weir moved to recommit the bill to q
special committee of three, with instructions to
fix the limit for recording mortgages at ten
days. The motion was agreed to by yeas "a,
nays 8. The Lieutenant governor made the
committee to consist of. Senators Hilligass
Drake and Willard. The bill was afterward re-
turned changed so as to require the recording of
mortgages within ten days, aud was passed
yeas SO, nays g.
On motion by Mr.. Macy his bill rs. 89l re-
quiring the Supreme Court Clerk to keep
record of all fees received by him. which shall
be open to public inspection, was taken up for
consideration.
Mr.. Weir-This is one of the most imprac
ticable measures yet introduced in this Legisla-
ture. According to the phraseology Of this bill,
in taking receipt of his successor he would
have to make the receipt the entire fee book and
that receipt would have to be recorded in an
other book. While a reasonable law on this SUBJ
ject would be proper one, this bill makes q
most unreasonable requirement.
Mr.. Macy-The statement has been made on
the authority of the Supreme Court Clerk or
this floor, that he now keeps just such book as
this bill requires; the bill only requiring that it
shall be kept open to the public. The statement
that the bill will require such a vast amount Of
extra work is also without foundation.
The bill passed, the yeas numbering %, the
nays II