408 



INDIANA. 



counties of the State, to be loaned out for the 

 benefit of schools ; and ope reducing the tax 

 levy for State purposes from 25 cents to five 

 cents on the $100 of property valuation. 



The bill on which the House broke up pro- 

 vided for redistricting the State for the pur- 

 pose of apportioning the representation ac- 

 cording to the last census. It was claimed by 

 the Eepublicans that the bill was unconstitu- 

 tional, as the State had been divided into dis- 

 tricts but four years ago, and the constitution 

 declares that a new apportionment shall not be 

 made oftener than once in six years. Finding 

 that the bill was likely to pass, nevertheless, 

 it was determined in a caucus of the Republi- 

 can members of the House to defeat it by a 

 resignation of thirty-four of their number, 

 the Governor, it is .said, urging that course in 

 the caucus. This plan was carried out on the 

 23d of February, and, though the two Houses 

 continued to meet until the 27th, they could 

 transact no business, and finally adjourned 

 sine die. 



Several of the most important measures be- 

 fore the Legislature were still pending at the 

 time of the adjournment. An act to tax the 

 stock of banks for municipal purposes had 

 passed the House by a large majority, and 

 would undoubtedly have received the sanction 

 of the Senate also. It was a measure which 

 had been earnestly recommended by the Gov- 

 ernor. An act regulating insurance companies 

 was also pending, which would, according to 

 the statement of one of the members whose 

 resignation broke up the session, have brought 

 into the Treasury from $80,000 to $100,000, be- 

 sides protecting the people from the operations 

 of irresponsible insurance companies. 



Among the other acts pending was one pro- 

 viding for a more equitable assessment of rail- 

 road property, one regulating local freight 

 charges on railroads, one protecting the pub- 

 lic against patent-right swindlers, one making 

 better provision for the care of the insane, 

 and one reforming the laws on the subject of 

 divorce. The last-mentioned had been urged 

 in emphatic terms by the Governor, who de- 

 clared that the existing laws had "brought 

 reproach upon the State," and caused Indiana 

 divorces to be "advertised in the Atlantic 

 cities as marketable commodities." An act 

 had been carefully framed on that subject, 

 and had already passed the Senate by a vote 

 of 37 to 3. This would undoubtedly have ef- 

 fected a very important reform. The first sec- 

 tion provided that divorces might be decreed 

 by the Circuit and Common Pleas Courts of 

 the State on petition filed by any person who, 

 at the time of the filing of such petition, and 

 for one year previous, had been a bona-fide 

 resident of the State, and of the county where 

 such petition was filed. But if the act com- 

 plained of as a ground for divorce had been 

 committed while such parties were non-resi- 

 dents of the State, then such residence must 

 be for three years previous to the filing of such 



petition, which lona-fide residence shall be 

 duly proven. It was provided, further, that 

 no divorces should be granted for any act com- 

 mitted while the parties were not residents of 

 the State of Indiana, unless such act was also 

 a good cause for divorce under the laws of the 

 State where the same was committed. Section 



2 provided that the seventh section of the old 

 act should be amended to read as follows: 

 " Divorces shall be decreed upon the applica- 

 tion of the injured party only for the follow- 

 ing causes : First, adultery ; second, impoten- 

 cy ; third, abandonment for one year ; fourth, 

 cruel and inhuman treatment ; fifth, habitual 

 drunkenness of either party, or failure of the 

 husband to make reasonable provision for the 

 support of his family ; sixth, the conviction, 

 subsequent to the marriage, in any country, of 

 either party, of an infamous crime. Provided 

 that no divorce shall be decreed except for the 

 first and sixth clauses above enumerated until 

 after the expiration of three years from the 

 date of the marriage of the parties." Section 



3 amended the eleventh section of the old law 

 by providing that, when it shall appear, by the 

 affidavit of a disinterested person, that the de- 

 fendant has once been a resident of the State, 

 but has become a non-resident, and by the affi- 

 davit of the petitioner that the defendant's 

 place of residence is unknown to such peti- 

 tioner, the Clerk shall give notice of the pend- 

 ency of such petition for three weeks ; in all 

 other cases the defendant shall be personally 

 served with summons, and no divorce shall be 

 decreed without personal service if it should 

 be disclosed on trial that the defendant's place 

 of residence was known to the plaintiff at the 

 time of filing the petition, or had since become 

 known. 



The acts passed in 1847, providing that the 

 property of the W abash & Erie Canal should 

 be transferred to trustees for the benefit of 

 holders of the bonds by which money had 

 been raised for its construction, thereby re- 

 lieving the State of all liability for one-half 

 the debt, had provided that the old bonds 

 should be surrendered, and a new issue made 

 to take their place. A suit, which had been 

 pending for several years, to recover from the 

 trustees payment of the bonds which holders 

 had neglected to surrender, was decided in the 

 Circuit Court of Carroll County, in February, 

 in favor of the bondholders holding the prop- 

 erty of the canal liable for the payment of 

 the old unsurrendered internal improvement 

 bonds of 1852. The case was appealed to the 

 Supreme Court. 



This canal, which has caused so much trouble 

 in the finances of the State, has not been kept 

 in repair, and the Legislature of the State of 

 Ohio at its last session appealed to the Indiana 

 Legislature to make provision for keeping it in 

 navigable condition. A portion of the canal 

 lies within the limits of Ohio, and an agree- 

 ment was made in 1834 which bound the two 

 States to keep their several portions of the 





