The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1895-01-01
MAN WHO CHANGED IT
NEW DEVELOPMENTS REGARDING
THE FEE AND SALARY BILL.
Acknowledgement Ketcham After
Comparing Handwritings of Legis-
tive Clerks, Files a Suit.

in the Marion Circuit Court Attorney
general Ketcham has found, by tracing
down the history of the measure and COM
pairing handwritings, the man who made
the changes in the bill. He will be brought
forward a witn less in the case when it
comes to trial. The suit is entitled The
State on the relation of Claude Mat
thews, Governor, VS.. William r. Myers, Sec
rotary of State, Henry Meer John Mar
shall Wilson, Charles T.. Amsden, Erasmus
T.. Carson, William e. Shilling, Harry B.
Smith, Sterling r. Holt and William H.
Schmidt. The defendants, where not other
wise designated are the county officers of
the counties Of Shelby and Marion. The
suit will be conducted by William A.
ketcham, Attorney-general. The story of
this case is more or less familiar having
been recently retold in connection with the
decision of the Supreme Court declaring
the fee and salary law of 1891, as far as
it related to the treasurers, the recorders
and the auditors unconstitutional. This
decision has not yet been certified down,
the sixty days for appeal for a. rehearing
not having expired. The decision was given
in the case of the treasurer from Benton
county. The ground of the decision was
that the omission to include compensation
for the treasurer, auditor and recorder of
Shelby county made the law ununiform and
therefore invalid under the Constitution.
This made an additional interest in the
mooted question of who was guilty of the
omission and whether it was by intent or
careless copying. The delay in the
prosecution of this litigation has
caused, Private Secretary King
says, the criminality of the act
to expire by limitation. and the only good
that can be accomplished, since punish
| ic M ;v
public of the imputation that it winks at
such things as political tricks, thereby as
senting to acts Of legislative serv-
p petsnce who per1 fer s ahe an by nsom
Of the people of Indiana, meeting in
General Assembly. 1t will also arouse the
lature, 1T is declared. to the fact that the
organization of the county officials con-
thing that win strengthen their hold Id UPON UPON
the revenues.
HISTORY OF THE BILL
This bill was known in the Legislature of
1891 as No 275. It reached it's various stages
by slow processes. being hampered at every
step. 1t finally became evident, Just as
the Legislature was about to adjourn by
limitation, that the bill was missing and
would fail of passage because it
the night before this time Rep
resentative Niblack and others found
that the bill was missing. They tried to
find the clerk, Thomas Newkirk, or some
OF his assistants but they were out of
correct nas tbaf fhe @ IN the
side, and in breaking in the lid bottle of
h Ink was upset and the bill was badly
hurried into the legislative. halls. passed
on final reading. At this time it
the. test Of the. highest court, as is now now
positively known. Between that time and
the time it. REACHED the Secretary of State,
was either purposely or carelessly altered
SO as to give 1t the unconstitutional defect.
This might have been done by. the substi-
clerk might have been careless. It was gen
was the case. owing to the character of
the lobby influence at work to harass and
his the sa S # vesr
day Is what L propose to find out later.
! /. do net see how it is possible that mis-
know OF no reason why a false record,
whether of court or of matters of State,
is not the slightest doubt in the world that
when this bill was passed 1t was letter per-
located the effect will be to restore the
law law, as II ITS eonstitutionality had never
THE COMPLAINT.
The law provides no penalty for making
erasures in copying enrolled bills. The bill
in question shows a number of places
where errors have been made by the COPY
ist and the word erased and written over
The Dill is in the handwriting or several
different persons and cannot be traced now
to the writer's Secretary King says it was
secured for the public printer only after
a weeks effort, and that as it had the
Governors signature in proper form, the
omission was not noticed. The bill of COM
pant nled by the Attorney general is as
ioIlows:
THE State of Indiana OH the relation of
Claude Matthews, who is Governor of said
State, piantIn, complains of William r.
Myers. who is Secretary of said State of
Indiana and, as such,, custodian of the
laws of said State. and the other named
defendants and says that heretofore at
and prior to the =. day of March, 1891,
of Representatives of the General AS
sembly of the State of Indiana, an act en-
titled An act fixing the compensation and
county officers and providing penalties for
the violation of its provisions, which had,
been transmitted to the Senate for its con-.
SfderatiOn and such action as said Senate
might desire to take in relation thereto
That in said Senate divers and sundry
amendments TO said bill were introduced
and pending, and said bill, with the amend
been enacted by said Senate, and such pro-
ceedingS were thereupon had that the
House failing to concur in the amendments
proposed by the Senate, a committee of
conference was duly appointed as the re-
suit of which said conference committee
made it's report whereby the House agreed
to certain of the amendments and the
Senate receded from certain other amend
ments and said bill was thereafter, to-wit
the - day of March, 1891, engrossed
the constitutional rule suspended the till
read a second and third time and put upon
its passage. and was by said Senate and
House of Representatives, said - day
of March, 1891, duly passed. The said bill
passed, contained, among other pro-
visions. the following:
!" Section SO. In the county Of Shelby the
annual salary of the clerk of the Circuit
Court shall be twenty-three hundred dol
lars, of the auditor, twenty-five hundred
and fifty dollars; of the recorder, thirteen
hundred dollars: of the treasurer, twenty
hundred and fifty dollars, and of the sher-
iff, twenty hundred and fifty dollars
GOVERNORS VETO
''That thereupon said bill was duly pre-
scented to the Hon. Alvin P. Hovey, he be-
ing then and there the Governor of the
State of Indiana, for such action as he
might desire to take in relation thereto;
and thereupon afterwards, to-wit on the
- day of March, 1891, the same was by
said Governor returned to the House in
which it originated with the objections
thereto; whereupon said bill was re-
considered by said House and passed by a
vote of - to - Notwithstanding the.
Governors objections thereto and the
thereupon transmitted to the