The Indianapolis journal., 1897-03-09
THESE BILLS ARE DEAD
GOVERNOR SENDS THREE VETO MES
sAGEs TO THE SENATE.
Heron VIII Hill and Bill LegaIizing
County Settlements Fail-An
Three yetoes Sustained.

So far as any untoward legislation is con-
cerned the 100000 Heron bequest to the
indianapolis Art Association is safe, as
Governor Mount returned the Newly bill
providing that heirs who are poor persons
may bring suit 10 set aside will without
giving a cost bond with his veto. and the
Senate sustained the Governor. The dis
cussions over this bill were the only serious
features about the proceedings of the SEN
ate yesterday. The Governor returned the
bill with the following message:
Il herewith return Senate enrolled act
No. 353 without my approval.
This tsll seeks to amend Section 2597 of
the Revised Statutes OF lSsl. This statute
requires the contestor of a will to file an
adequate bond for costs. This statute is
intended to protect wills that have been
admitted to probate from attacks by ire
sponsibie persons.
IF parties aggrieved by the provisions
of any VIII have just cause for grievance
and the attorneys for such contestoTS have
probably would be little difficulty expert
enced under existing laws III securing am
pie provisions for costs.
'Testators have legal rights in the maxi
ing of wills, and the presumption IS that
such are legally made: Does 1t not then
follow just proposition that irresponsi-
bic persons should be required TO give bond
as evidence of good faith before contesting
Wills in our courts?
'All laws designed to benefit poor per-
sons whose cause is just should be ap-
proved, but law which Willingly or unwit-
tingly opens the way for irresponsible per-
sons to attack wills. regardless of the
meri $ of the action in the premises, are
not deserving OF favor.
EFFORT TO PASS 1T.
Senator Hubbell spoke in opposition of
the Governors veto. He said that in all
other legal proceedings poor person was
exempted from giving bond. He asked
.I,,t CHI
be discrimination against poor persons in
will cases. All over the State, he said.
there were cases where children were cut
off by wills in favor of second wife who
bad no part in accommodating the estate
Il apprehend that the press of this city
IS looking at a single instance" he said
is that a reason why this bill, general in
its provisions. should be defeated?"
Senator Gilbert spoke against the veto
Because there a will contest ih the
Marion county courts was no reason why
the bill should not pass. he said.
Senator New, in reply TO Senator Hub
bell. said that the gentleman from Elkhart
had said that the press seemed TO have in
bill He apprehended that this assertio was
in sense true. AT the same time he i,led
attention TO the fact that the ,fIIi bill was as
reaching the situation in that particular
ease. case in which the late John Heron
dianapoIis Art Association some eighteen
months ago. Subsequently a suit TO set
aside his viii was brought by persons in
during his life, persons whom he had prob
ably never met. and who at best We're but
were reversed, if John Heron had been the
poor relation and if he had been about to
die in the poorhouse. from the inform%1ion
he had on the subject. he doubted very
much whether these persons would have in
terceded in his behalf. When he had died.
leaving a large estate, they had come for
but that the bill was drawn with this par
ticular case in mind. In conclusion, Sena-
tor New said that he sincerely hoped that
the Governors veto would be sustained.
SENATOR NEWLY FOR THE BILL.
Senator Newly, who introduced the bill,
by request" as he says undertook to ex-
plain his position with reference to it. The
senator from Marion county would pro- :
bly, bear him out in the assertion that there
was always a flood of requests for the in
PRODUCTION of bills. He admitted that it
probably true that the bill was drawn
with this particular case in mind, but un-
dertook 10 say that the Governor had
vetoed the bill under 81 miSa pprehenSiOn o.
the facts In the case. He renewed his plea
10 the effect that Ii was intended to afford
renei 10 poor persons and place contestants
of wills on the same basis with plaintiffs in
other civil cases where they were not re-
quired to give bonds. Senator Newby de-
MED that he had done anything to get the
bill passed surreptitiously; said that he had
not called il up and that Ii had been dis
cussed twice before its passage. He de-
clared that it would not operate to the dis
advantage of the Art Association. and said
that If John Heron had any right to make
the will he did, this bill would not tend to
set il aside.
Senator Alexander said he voted for the
bill because he believed IL was
just, and after hearing the explanation of
Senator New he still believed it was just
He had known John Heron when he lived
4 hare h. III
money. He came away from there leaving
| his poor relations behind. Senator Alex
ander regarded the bill as one that would
| secure the carrying out of the ends of
| justice.
Senator Shively said the veto ought to be
sustained. The law had been on the stat
| ute books since 1852 During all that time
| there was no case in which there was a
valid reason for contesting will but what
| never case in which there was a valid
reason for eontesting will but what it
| was possible for the contestant TO get some
| body TO sign the bond.
Senator Wood spoke against the Veto He
| did not think that the fact that one man
| by the name Of Heron left an estate to an
| art gallery or something of that sort was
any reason why the veto should be sus-
| tained.
| When the vote was taken the Governors S
veto was sustained by a vote of Is to IS.
LEGALIZING BILL VETOED.
The Governors veto of Senate Bill 451, in
troduced by Senator Johnson, of Madison,
by request was also sustained This is
| a bill to legalize certain settlements here
| tofore made by boards of county commits
| siOners with county treasurers. The Gov
ernor's veto message this bill said: II
herewith return Senate bill No. 4J1 without
| my approval. This bill seeks to Iegalize all
| settlements made by boards of county COM
| missionerS with county treasurers between
| Nov. y, 1894, and June p. 1895. The fee and
| salary law or 1891, under which these county
| treasurerS Were elected and served is the
| law by which settlements should be made
| If the constitutionality of the law of 1891
| was in question when these settlements
were made, and the county commissioners
and treasurers, presuming that the Su-
preme Court woud not uphold the law upon
settlements were made at their peril and
| should stand or fall by such decision The
court having upheld the law of 1891, it is
| manifest that all settlements made under
| the law of 1879 are unlawful Money re-
ceived under a misapprehenson of what
! the law is should be returned when that
misapprehensiOn is removed. If any officer
| draws too much money by mistake or mis-
| apprehension of the law must ii follow as
| a sequence that, because the mistake was
| honestly made, therefore he should keen
l the money? Many thousands of dollars iu
! our State have been paid 10 county treas
! urers in the manner above mentioned. Srall
/ the taxpayers be subjected TO this wrong.
| This bill seeks 10 establish an unsafe pre-