The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1901-01-05
The Law Prepared by the Subcom-
mittee Gone over i'm All
Its Details.
AN ABSTRACT OF THE BILL
SALIENT FEATURES OF THE NEW
REFORM LAW SET OUT.
The Penalties Provided I'm the Draft
of the Bfll-Some Changes
Suggested.


was discussed for nearly three hours in
the rooms of the Commercial Club last
night by delegates from the State Board
of Commerce, the State Federation of La
Dor, Commercial Club and members of
| the Legislature. The bill. which was pre-
pared by a subcommittee. consists of sixty
five sections, and 1t was read before the
meeting last night. There were discussions
of many Of the sections and several amend
ments were recommended. After discus
sions pro and con it was voted to recon-
| mend the bill to the Legislature for con-
sideration. The meeting was presided over
by Chairman II. S. New.
Those who figured most prominently in
the discussions were Merrill Moores, City
Attorney Kern, Attorney James E. McCul-
Tough, Frank Singleton of Martinsville,
j. S. Barcus of Terre Haute, Frank Grubbs
of Lafayette. Fred E. Matson, Joseph A.
Minturn, Senator Lindley and others.
BUYING AND SELLING.
As was predicted. the principal discussion
was on the section relating to the buying
and selling of votes, in which Mr.. Barcus,
City Attorney Kern, Attorney Mccullough
| and Mr.. Matson Were the principal speak
mOllOn
of Mr.. Barcus to amend the section By
striking out the part regarding the penalty
against sellers of votes and making the
buyer subject to the penalty. In the dis
cussion that followed some were i'm favor
of leaving the section as 1t stood, while
others were in favor of amending il by
striking out the part regarding the buyer
instead of the seller. Mr.. Matson said that
with both liable to punishment there would
| never be a conviction, there was sort
| of honor among thieves and neither would
testify against the other. Mr.. MinturE
suggested that the section be left intact
allowing the General Assembly to act on il.
The vote on Mr.. Barcus's motion was 10 to
s against 1t.
Mr.. Kern then moved that immunity be
given to both the buyer and seller of votes
and a reward offered Tor the conviction
| OF either. This carried
Merrill Moores said it would be inexpedi-
ent Tor every candidate TO name watchers
at the primary election, and suggested that
the candidates for the highest Offices have
| the privilege of naming the watchers, but
this did not meet with the approval of
| those present.
In Section q Mr.. Moores suggested that
| the word school be stricken out, as the
only city in the State where a school board
| Is elected is Indianapolis, and with the
section not amended there would be trouble
in selecting a board which would be non
partisan. Mr.. Mooress views met with the
approval of those presents. Section 60 was
| amended by striking out the words ''at
such election
A STRONG OBJECTION.
Mr.. Kern raised a strong objection to the
section that compels both parties to hold
their primaries at the same time. He said
that under this law the party in the minor
ity would have the worst of it, He said
the object of a primary law was to get
the best men to run for office, and under
the section named this would be impossible.
He explained his attitude on the section
by saying that primary elections held at
different times would do more good, for
should one party nominate a man who did
not bear good reputation the other party
could then come out with a strong candi-
date, as such a man could be selected to
run for an Office IL 1t was shown there
would be possibility of the place being
filled by a man unfit for the office. He
said with the primaries held on the same
day there would be no chance to induce
the best men TO be candidates. He also
took exception to the section re-
counties where one party was in the
minority it would be a hard matter to in
duce candidates for nomination to pay
their assessments. Mr.. Barcus, however,
argued the other side, of the question, say
ing that with the primaries held on the
same day the politicians could not manip-
old system. Regarding the assessments
Mr. Barcus suggested that the basis of So
stand, and in counties where one party is
decidedly in the majority the candidates
of that party should pay so per cent. more
than the standard and the minority so per
cent less. No action was taken on these
suggestions.
Mr. Barcus also suggested that there
should be section in the bill which would
make provision for contests of elections:
He cited the case in Vigo county. and said
if the ballots had not been burned there
would be no trouble in carrying on the con-
test. The committee was instructed to
make provision for contests.
1t was also moved that the bill shall pro-
vide for the naming of the day when jul
dcial and joint senatorial conventions shall
be held. He said the law did not provide
safeguard for conventions selecting con-
SreSSmen. senator's, representatives and
judges. There were many other minor dis
cussions. but 1t was suggested that the
bill could not be passed by those present
and an adjournment was taken.