The Committee on Judiciary made the following minority. report on House Bill No. 2: MR. SPEAKER: Your Committee on Judiciary, to which was referred House Bill No. 2, introduced by Mr. Erwin, have had the same under consideration, and beg leave to report the same back to the House with the recommendation that said bill do not pass. The bill was read a second time. J. B. COLLINS, The question being, Shall the minority report be substituted for the majority report? Mr. Passage demanded the previous question. The question being, Shall the demand for the previous question be seconded? The demand was seconded. The question being, Shall the main question be now put? It was so ordered. The question being, Shall the minority report be substituted for the majority report? Messrs. Fippen and Hench demanded the ayes and noes. Those voting in the affirmative were: Messrs. Allen, Atkinson, Bain, Bassett, Beane, Binkley, Bryant, Collins, Cravens, Creigmile, Cullop, Cunningham, Dailey, Davis, Deery, Dinwiddie, Duncan, Foster, Gregg, Haggard, Hench, Higbee, Hunter, Johnson of Marion, Jordan, Kamp, Kauffman, Lindemuth, Lyons, Manwaring, Megenity, Meredith, Merritt, Morris, McCaskey, McCorkle, McIntyre, McMullen, Newhouse, Newlin, Passage, Reeves, Schaff, Sexton, Stakebake, Stark, Stephenson, Stover, Suchanek, Sulzer, Swope, Thornton, Van Buskirk, White, Wilson of Dubois and Martin, Wilson of Marion, Mr. Speaker. Total, 58. Those voting in the negative were: Messrs. Askren, Barnes, Baugher, Bethell, Behymer, Blair, Blue, Brown, Clauser, Cooley, Dalman, Erwin, Farlow, Fippen, Franks, Gill, Grossart, Guthrie, Hamrick, Harmon, Heagy, Hesler, Hord, Johnson of Dearborn, Kester, Lowe, Moutoux, McCallister, McMahan, Redman, Rodabaugh, Schrader, Smith, Teal, Terhune, Washburn, Williams, Wright. Total, 38. So the minority report was substituted for the majority report, and the further consideration of said bill indefinitely posponed. Mr. Dailey moved to reconsider the vote on House Bill No. 2. Mr. Passage moved to lay Mr. Dailey's motion on the table. Which motion prevailed. The Committee on Judiciary made the following report: MR. SPEAKER: Your Committee on Judiciary, to which was referred House Bill No. 20, introduced by Mr. Newhouse, have had the same under consideration, and beg leave to report the same back to the House with the recommendation that said bill be indefinitely postponed. MCMULLEN, Chairman. The bill was read a second time, the report of the committee concurred in and the further consideration of said bill indefinitely postponed. The Judiciary Committee made the following report: MR. SPEAKER: Your Committee on Judiciary, to which was referred House Bill No. 11, introduced by Mr. Guthrie, has had the same under consideration, and beg leave to report the same back to the House with the recommendation that said bill be indefinitely postponed. MCMULLEN, Chairman. Mr. Fippen demanded the previous question. The question being, Shall the demand for the previous ques tion be seconded. The demand was seconded. The question being, Shall the main, question be now put? The question being on the adoption of the report of the committee. The bill was read a second time, the report of the committee concurred in and the further consideration of said bill was indefinitely postponed. The Committee on Judiciary made the following report: MR. SPEAKER: Your Committee on Judiciary, to which was referred House Bill No. 15, introduced by Mr. Ader, have had the same under consideration and beg leave to report the same back to the House with the recommendation that said bill be indefinitely postponed. MCMULLEN, The bill was read a second time, the report of the committee was concurred in and the further consideration of said bill indefinitely postponed. The Committee on Judiciary made the following report: MR. SPEAKER: Your Committee on Judiciary, to which was referred House Bill No. 38, introduced by Mr. Cullop, have had the same under consideration and beg leave to report the same back to the House with the recommendation that said bill be amended by striking out section 4 thereof and when so amended that said bill pass. MCMULLEN, Chairman. The bill was read a second time, the report of the committee was concurred in and the bill ordered engrossed. Mr. Cullop moved to suspend the constitutional rule, which requires bills to be read by sections on three several days, and that House Bill No. 38 be read a third time by sections and put upon its passage. Mr. Hench demanded the previous question. The question being, Shall the constitutional rule be suspended? The roll was called and resulted as follows:, Those voting in the affirmative were: Messrs. Ader, Allen, Barnes, Baugher, Bethell, Brown, Bryant, Clauser, Collins, Cooley, Cullop, Cunningham, Dailey, Erwin, Foster, Franks, Grossart, Guthrie, Haggard, Hamrick, Harkins, Hench, Hesler, Hunter, Johnson of Dearborn, Johnson of Marion, Jordan, Kamp, Kester, Lindemuth, Lowe, Manwaring, Megenity, Meredith, Merrit, Moutoux, Morris, McCorkle, McIntyre, McMahan, McMullen, Newhouse, Newlin, Passage, Redman, Richter, Rodabaugh, Schaff, Schrader, Sexton, Stakebake, Stark, Stover, Suchanek, Sulzer, Swope, Teal, Van Buskirk, Washburn, Wilson of Dubois, Martin, Mr. Speaker. Total, 59. Those voting in the negative were: Messrs. Askren, Atkinson, Bain, Bassett, Beane, Behymer, Binkley, Blair, Blue, Cravens, Creigmile, Dalman, Davis, Deery, Dinwiddie, Duncan, Farlow, Fippen, Gill, Gregg, Harmon, Hay, Heagy, Higbee, Hord, Lyous, McCallister, McCaskey, Reeves, Smith, Stephenson, Terhune, Vermillion, White, Williams, Wilson of Marion and Wright. Total, 37. So the constitutional rule was not suspended. The bill was ordered engrossed. The Committee on Judiciary made the following report: MR. PRESIDENT: Your Committee on Judiciary, to which was referred House Bill No. 18, introduced by Mr. McMullen, have had the same under consideration and beg leave to report the same back to the House with the recommendation that said bill pass. MCMULLEN, The bill was read a second time, the report of the committee was concurred in and the bill was ordered engrossed. The Committee on Judiciary made the following report: MR. SPEAKER: Your Committee on Judiciary, to which was referred House Bill No. 9, introduced by Mr. Williams, have had the same under consideration and beg leave to report the same back to the House with the recommendation that said bill be indefinitely postponed. H. D. MCMULLEN, Chairman. The bill was read a second time, the report of the committee concurred in, and the further consideration of said bill indefinitely postponed. The Committee on the Organization of Courts made the following report: MR. SPEAKER: Your Committee on the Organization of Courts, to whom was referred Senate Bill No. 15, have had the same under consideration, and beg leave to report same back to the House with the recommendation that said bill do pass. FRANK D. ADER, Chairman. Mr. Ader moved to suspend the constitutional rule, which requires bills to be read by sections on three several days, and that Engrossed Senate Bill No. 15 be, considered engrossed, read a third time by sections and put upon its passage. The question being, Shall the constitutional rule be suspended? The role was called, and resulted as follows: Those voting in the affirmative were: Messrs. Ader, Allen, Askren, Atkinson, Bain, Bassett, Beane, Bethell, Behymer, Binkley, Blue, Brown, Bryant, Collins, Cooley, Cullop, Cunningham, Dailey, Davis, Dinwiddie, Duncan, Erwin, Foster, Gill, Gregg, Grossart, Guthrie, Haggard, Hamrick, Harkins, Hay, Hench, Higbee, Hunter, Johnson of Dearborn, Johnson of Marion, Jordan, Kamp, Kauffman, Kester, Lindemuth, Lowe, Lyons, Manwaring, Megenity, Meredith, Merritt, Moutoux, Morris, McCallister, McCaskey, |