And the question being, "Shall the foregoing amendment be adopted?" it was decided in the affirmative. Mr. Strattan offered the following amendment, viz.: Amend the title by adding "on the grounds or in house within any incorporated town or village, church, school house or fair ground." And the question being, "Shall the foregoing amendment be adopted?" it was decided in the negative. Mr. Strattan offered the following amendment, viz.: Amend by inserting after the word "grounds" in the fourth line the words "or the premises occupied thereby." And the question being, "Shall the foregoing amendment be adopted?" it was decided in the affirmative. Mr. Johns offered the following amendment, viz.: Amend by striking out all of section five (5) down to and including the italicized word "provided," excepting the words or character "S 5." And the question being, "Shall the foregoing amendment be adopted?" it was decided in the negative. The question now being, "Shall the bill as amended be engrossed and placed on the order of third reading?" it was decided in the affirmative. By unanimous consent, on request of Mr. Funk, House Bill No. 50, for "An act to appropriate the money turned into the State Treasury, by the Board of Live Stock Commissioners, the proceeds of the sale of healthy carcasses of cattle slaughtered in Chicago by order of the board on account of exposure to pleuropneumonia, for the payment of damages for animals slaughtered under the provisions of law," was taken up for consideration and read at large a second time. And the question being, "Shall the bill be ordered to a third reading?" it was decided in the affirmative. By unanimous consent, on request of Mr. Curtiss, Senate Bill No. 23, for "An act to amend section 2, of division 14, of chapter 38, of the revised statutes of this State," having been printed, was taken up and read at large a second time. And the question being, "Shall the foregoing bill be ordered engrossed for a third reading?" it was decided in the affirmative. At 12:17 o'clock P. M., on motion of Mr. Evans, the Senate adjourned. WEDNESDAY MARCH 16, 1887.-10 O'CLOCK A. M. Senate met, pursuant to adjournment. Hon. John C. Smith, President of the Senate, presiding. The journal of yesterday was being read, when, on motion of Mr. Shutt, the further reading of the same was dispensed with, and it was ordered to stand approved. SPECIAL ORDER. The reading of the journal having been completed, the President of the Senate announced it as the time for the special order, being the further consideration of Senate Bill No. 285, being a bill for "An act to indemnify the owners of property for damages occasioned by mobs and riots," which was taken up for consideration and read at large a second time. Mr. Crawford offered the following amendment, viz.: Amend section one (1) by striking out the words "incorporated town or incorporated village," and insert in place thereof the words "or if not in a city, then the county." The question being, "Shall the foregoing amendment be adopted?" it was decided in the affirmative. Mr. Crawford offered the following amendment, viz.: Amend sections two (2), four (4) and five (5) by striking out the words "incorporated town or incorporated village" where they occur, and insert the words "or county." The queston being, "Shall the foregoing amendment be adopted?" it was decided in the affirmative. Mr. Hadley offered the following amendment, viz.: Also amend by adding after the word "damage," at the end of section 3, the following: "And shall have notified the mayor or one alderman of such city, or the sheriff or a deputy sheriff of such county, immediately after being apprised of any threat or attempt to destroy or injure his or their property by any mob or riot, of the facts brought to his or their knowledge, and upon the receipt of such notice it shall be the duty of such officer to take all legal means to protect the property attacked or threatened." And the question being, "Shall the foregoing amendment be adopted?" it was decided in the negative. Mr. Crabtree offered the following amendment, viz.: "Section 7. Any city or county may settle with, and pay, the owner of any such property the damages so sustained; and any such city or county which shall have paid any sum under the provisions of this act, whether by voluntary settlement or otherwise, may recover the same with all costs paid by it from any or all the persons engaged in the destruction or injury of the property so paid for." And the question being, "Shall the foregoing amendment be adopted?" it was decided in the affirmative. Mr. Forman, offered the following amendment, viz.: Amend by striking out the words in line five (5) in section 1 to word "in" and insert the word "county;" strike out in line 3 of section 2 all after word "such" to word "in" and insert word "county." The question being, "Shall the foregoing amendment be adopted?" it was decided in the negative. Mr. Hill offered the following amendment, viz.: Amend by adding to section 1 the following: "Provided such city or county by the exercise of proper diligence might have prevented the destruction or damage of such property.' The question being, "Shall the foregoing amendment be adopted?" it was decided in the negative. Mr. Cochran offered the following amendment, viz.: Amend by striking out all after the word "corporation" where it occurs the first time in 5th line of printed bill in section three. And the question being, "Shall the foregoing amendment be adopted?" it was decided in the negative. Mr. Chapman offered the following amendment, viz.: Amend by striking out the words "the same" in line 3, paragraph 6 of printed bill and insert the following after the word "unless" in same line "notice of claim for damages be presented to such city or county, within thirty days after such loss or damage occurs and such action." And the question being, "Shall the foregoing amendment be adopted?" it was decided in the affirmative. The question being, "Shall the foregoing bill as amended be ordered engrossed and placed on the order of third reading?" And the yeas and nays being demanded, it was decided in the affirmative by the following vote, viz.: Yeas, 26; nays, 14. Those voting in the affirmative are: Messrs. Bacon of Will, Berggren, Chapman, Crabtree,Crawford, Curtiss, Darnell, Evans, Funk, Garrity, Gibbs, Greenwood, Hogan, Humphrey, Johns, Knopf, McGrath, Pearson, Pierce, Reinhardt, Shutt, Strattan, Sumner, Thompson, Washburn, Wheeler-26. Those voting in the negative are: Messrs. Adams, Burke, Cochran, Forman, Hadley, Higgins, Hill, Johnson, Leman, Orendorf, Reavill, Seiter,, Stephenson, Streeter-14. PRESENTATION OF PETITIONS. Mr. Adams presented a petition from the Forty-fourth Senatorial District requesting that the Senator and Representatives of said district support no bill appropriating an amount for the Soldiers' Home at Quincy exceeding the actual demands of the Home. Which, on motion of Mr. Adams, was referred to the committee on appropriations. Mr. Strattan presented a petition from Dix, Illinois, in regard to the dog law. Which, on motion of Mr. Strattan, was referred to the committee on agriculture and drainage. REPORTS OF STANDING COMMITTEES. Mr. Curtiss, from the committee on appropriations, introduced a bill, Senate Bill No. 333, for "An act to provide for the ordinary and contingent expenses of the State government until the expiration of the first fiscal quarter after the adjournment of the next regular session of the General Assembly," with the recommendation that the bill do pass. The report of the committee was concurred in, and the bill was read at large a first time, under the suspension of the rules, and ordered to a second reading and to be printed. Mr. Curtiss, from the committee on appropriations, to which was referred a bill, Senate Bill No. 289, for "An act making an appropriation for the payment of the officers and members of the next General Assembly, and for the salaries of the officers of the State government,' reported the same back with the recommendation that the bill do pass. The report of the committee was concurred in, and the bill was ordered to a second reading and to be printed. Mr. Crawford from the committee on judiciary, to which was referred a bill, Senate Bill No. 106, for "An act to provide in what manner and to what extent aliens may hold real estate, and to repeal an act therein named." And also Senate Bill No. 211, for "An act in regard to aliens, and to restrict their right to acquire and hold real estate, and to provide for the disposition of the lands now owned by non-resident aliens," reported the same back with a substitute therefor, with the recommendation that the original bill be laid on the table, and that the substitute do pass. The report of the committee was concurred in, and On motion of Mr. Crawford, the original bills were ordered to lie on the table, and the substitute, being Senate Bill No. 334, a bill for "An act in regard to aliens, and to restrict their right to acquire and hold real and personal estate, and to provide for the disposition of the lands now owned by non-resident aliens," was ordered to a first reading, and On motion of Mr. Crawford, the rules were suspended, and the bill was taken up and read at large a first time, and On his motion, was ordered to a second reading and to be printed. Mr. Crawford, from the committee on judiciary, to which was referred a bill, Senate Bill No. 108, for "An act to amend an act entitled 'An act to revise the law in relation to recorders,' approved March 9, 1874," reported the same back with amendment thereto, and recommended that the amendment be adopted, and that the bill as amended do pass. Under the rules, the bill was ordered on file for a second reading, and to be printed with the amendment. Mr. Crawford, from the committee on judiciary, to which was referred a bill, Senate Bill No. 109, for "An act to amend an act entitled 'An act to revise the law in relation to clerks of courts, approved April 25, 1874," reported the same back with a substitute therefor, with the recommendation that the original bill be laid on the table, aud that the substitute do pass. The report of the committee was concurred in, and On motion of Mr. Crawford, the original bill was ordered to lie on the table, and the substitute, being Senate Bill No. 335, a bill for "An act to amend section sixteen (16) of an act entitled 'An act to revise the law in relation to clerks of courts,' approved March 25, 1874, in force July 1, 1874," was ordered to a first reading, and On motion of Mr. Crawford, the rules were suspended, and the bill was taken up and read at large a first time, and On his motion, was ordered to a second reading, and to be printed. Mr. Crawford, from the committee on judiciary, to which was referred a bill, Senate Bill No. 180, for "Act to amend an act entitled "An act to enable non-residents of this State to hold the office of trustee in colleges, universities and other institutions of learning not under the control of officers of this State,' approved April 2, 1875, in force July 1, 1875," reported the same back with the recommendation that the bill do not pass. The report of the committee was concurred in, and the bill, on motion of Mr. Crawford, was ordered to lie on the table. |