The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1901-02-27
In THE UPPER CHAMBER.
Cooper Antitrust Bill Substituted for
Agnew BiIi-Other Measures.

Senator Agnew's antitrust measure,
which was the first bill to be introduced in
the Senate, was given a Knockout blow
yesterday by the Senate, the Cooper anti
trust BILL which has been passed by the
House, being withdrawn from the commit
tee and advanced as it's substitute.
The bill came up as a special order of
business Immediately after dinner and Sen
ator Gochenour at once offered the motion
to withdraw the Cooper antitrust bill from
committee, substitute it for the Agnew bill
and advance it to third reading. All debate
on the question was cut off by the carry
ing of the previous question. which was
moved by Senator Ogborn. The Democrats
made several desperate efforts to have the
bill amended. but Governor Gilbert de-
clared all such motions out of order, hold
ing that they came within the motion on
the previous question. The ayes and noes
were then demanded by a half dozen of the
minority members at once and the motion
of Senator Gochenour was carried by a
vote of so to is.
Those voting for the substitution of the
Cooper bill were-Barlow, Brooks, Burns,
Charles, Conlogue, Crumbaker, Crum-
packer, Darby, Dausman, Gard, Gochenour,
Goodwine, Guthrie, Johnson, Joss, Keyes,
Kittinger, Lambert, Layman, Legeman,
Lindley, Matson Miller, Ogborn, Parks,
Thompson, Whitcomb, Wolcott and Wood
80.
Those who opposed il were-Agnew,
Ball. Corr. Cregor. Fleming Fortune. Har-
rison, Heller, lnman, Johnston, keeney,
Kell, Lawler, Minor, Purcell, Stilwell.
Wampler and Whitcomb-1S.
Senator Inman again offered amend
ment, insisting that according to the rules
OF the Senate, it was his right, but he was
Gilbert. He then appealed from the deci-
sion of the chair, and was defeated by
partisan vote OF 81 to IL.
Senator Stilwen then offered motion to
reconsider the vote on the original question,
but was declared out of order by the chair.
because he had not voted for the motion
| when Ii carried.
TWO REPORTS MADE.
Two reports were returned on House Bill
| 900. introduced by Representative Marshall.
which provides for the regulation of blast
ing and firing of mining shots in coal mines
The majority report was for the indefinite
| postponement of the bill, but after long
debate the minority report recommending
| its passage was adopted by a vote of Al
| to L.
The bill has the support of the State Fed
Grafton of Labor and provides that an ex-
| pert blaster shall be employed and that all
| blasting in mines shall be done after regu-
4 lar working hours. The measure is the
| purpose of eliminating accidents many of
which occur In mines through the process
| of blasting.
Aside from the discussion of this bill the
| entire morning session was spent in ad-
vancing Senate bills. Fifty bills were ad-
| vanced and the slate was cleaned of all
bills on second reading. Among the more
| important bills advanced were the one re-
| moving the city of Terre Haute from the
| provisions of the charter applying 10 the
| city of Fort Wayne. the Indianapolis kim
4 dprgartIn Evansville or
| bills, the bill OF Senator Matson providing
| for sinking fund for the city of Indian
! apolis, and others.
| The greater part of the afternoon session
| was taken up in the discussion OF a divided
| report on Senate Bill Sl9. which seeks TO
| amend the present garnishment law so that
| 20 per cent. of persons wages shall not
! be exempt from garnishment proceedings.
! The majority report was for the passage of
| the bill, and, after a spirited discussion IL
was adopted by a vote OF Is TO H. The OPP
| ponents of the bill maintained that il was
measure designed against the laboring
suit in hardship TO the families OF every
laboring man so unfortunate as TO get into
PROTECTION FOR DEALER.
Senator Wood. who introduced the meas
ure, was the first to speak in its support.
'The BILL he said. provides a protection
for the retail dealer who is willing to give
credit to the purchaser If he has some
Y.
occurs TO me that if any bill deserves the
| appreciation OF this body, 1t is this one.
| There is nothing in its provisions that an
honest man can object to. 1t is the intention
of this bill to protect honest men and en-
able those who are dishonest to become
| more honest
| Senator Stilwell was against the adop-
| ton of the report favoring the passage of
| the bin. When he signed the minority re-
| port, which was for the indefinite postpone
| ment of the bill, he believed that ne was
| signing the death knell to a bill which
sought TO destroy the homes of the poor
| In conclusion he characterized the bin as
| being of a most vicious nature and said
| that he sincerely hoped the minority repor,
would be adopted.
4 Senator Brooks maintained that the bill
was not calculated TO injure the iaborine
man. Ii was a protection, he said against
dishonesty and those who tried to escape
the payment OF their debts. II would not
harm the man. he said, down whose
cheeks there coursed the honest sweat"
Senator Kittinger against the bill
because II would cost more than mans
wages to collect It, 1.-THE sheriff and Jus,
tices OF the peace" he said. would gobbls
up the dough- and no one would receive
/ Ao~<o0f- KJn xxxofvtofpaJ tbof A. 49,