The Jasper weekly courier. [volume] (Jasper, Ind.) 1858-1922, 1892-09-16
REPUDIATING
HIS VOTE.
S-ocklcy, the Demogoguc, De-
nounccs the Tax Law,
But voted for 1t on Final Vote in
the Senate.


Forced 70 Rcpudiatc Ills Legislative
Record by millionaire Candidate for
the United states Senste-what Onicial
Records Disclose.
The Republican candidate for lieuten.
mt governor, ex-senator Shoclmey. is
etumping the state. combining himself
chiefly to the tax question. denouncing
the new tax law and the Democratic
members Of the Legislature for having
enacted it.
II Senator Sherman should 60 about
the country denonncing the Mckinley
tariff law. he would be no more inconsist.
tent than il Mr. Shockney for his present
opposition 70 the new tax law. why
did you vote for the Mckinley bill,
then I? would he asked Of John Sher-
man.
Mr.. Shockney was a prominent mem
Der Of the last senate. He was one Of
che principal speakers on the Republi-
T can side; he never allowed his voice to
remain silent when any measure came
I mp that he did not approve. The In
dianapolis Sentinel. Journal and News
reported the proceedings Of the legisla-
ture fully. On all important questions,
eynopses Of the speeches were Published
~ those papers. If there was a time
for Mr.. Shockney to oppose the law,
that time was when house bill No 4s7
came up in the senate for final DISPOSE
tion. Yet reference to the files Of tho
indianapolis papers does not show that
1r. Shockney uttered word in the OPP
Dosition Of the passage Of the Open
heim bill (tax law.
What does the senate journal shows
+ Il discloses the fact that Mr.. Shock
hey voted for the bill on the final roll
call. the vote that sent the bill TO the
governor.
Mr.. Shockney can not dodge at the
o(zicial records.
BY turning to page 039 Of the senate
Durnal for 1891. the Republicans who
have heard Mr.. Shockney denounce the
~ law, will find the following records:
The special order for this hour fli3g 4.
~ }. the consideration Of the report Of the
<Cnffrence committee on engros~ed house
AL No. 49, tax bib senator Howard
loved that the report u the committee be
oncufred In. md on that motion he de-
handed the previous question
The question being. Shall the senate
-cond the demand for the previous qucs-
&0nf
The demand was seconded by the senate
The question then being, Snail the main
Question be now puty
The question recurring on the adoption
che report Of the conference committee
y cngrossed house bill No 4ss aud the
yes and noes being demanded b. Senator's
burke and Howard
The roll was called, which resulted az
Blows:
Those voting IN the affirmative were:
Senators Akin. Boyd tR), Carver CR).
oster. k.) CHANDLER, Clemens (R.), Eli
ross iR y 7HanIey iR.j. Harlan ' 1R'5. Hay,
"a, Hays k), liobson lR.), Howard,
mes KENNEDY, kerth. kopelke, Love
nd ut). McGregor, MclIugh. Mcgee.
cgEnn: Moor, Mount Sk:l: shank1
arion, Thompson Of Huntington. Thomp-
IA Of Pulaski and Wigs. Total 81.
Those voting IN the negative were:
Senator's Burke, Holcomb. Lynn and
Feeney. Total 4.
% the report WAS c0ncurrcd In.
The four negative votes were cast by
6mocrats. All the Republicans. Boyd.
|hxver, Casters, Clemans, Gilman,
lose, Hanley, Harlan, Hays, Hobson,
cveland, Mount and Shockney voted in
- affirmative.
The tax bill originated in the house
4 e passed the senate with various
cndmcnts. The house refused to ac-
ot the amendments and under the
lcs D conference committee was ap-
intsd, composed Of three members
1m the senate. and three from the
use. The conferrecs on part Of the
10 were: Beaslcy, Oppenheim and
nypool; and on part Of the senate,
ree, Howard ard Hubbel. On Feb
this committee agreed and reported
each house. recommending the bill
~ various changes. One being the
o. tax commissioners; another,
rnging the appointment Of the tax
nmissioners by vesting the power in
governor; another. BY leaving out
treasurer and ATTORNEY general fran