Click image to open full size in new tab
Article Text
where the House had not confined themselves
strictly to the technical question of law.
The motion to recommit pending, on motion of
Mr. Kellog, the House adjourned.
FRIDAYY, October 29.
SENATE. Mr. Everts called up Senate Bill for
the surrender of fugitives from service, and it was
made a special order for Tuesday next at 11 o'clock
A. M.
Correction. In the Senate Reports of yesterday
morning it appears that Mr. Chittenden moved a
recommitment of bill for the relief of the St. Al-
bans Banks, to committee on Banks. It should
have read, Mr. French of Windsor. Mr. Chitten-
den opposed the bill on the ground of establishing
a dangerous precedent, and it was so reported, but
by mistake at the office it appeared otherwise.
Leave was granted to the committee on Roads to
sit during the afternoon session.
Mr. Stark moved to reconsider the vote indefi-
nitely postponing Senate bill relating to witnesses,
and the motion was agreed to. On motion of Mr.
Chittenden, the bill was made the special order for
to-morrow morning.
Reports. By Mr. Chittenden, for committee on
Judiciary, adverse to Senate bill extending the ju-
risdiction of the constables, and the third reading
was refused. By Mr. Stark, for Judiciary com-
mittee, in favor of House bill to avoid delays in
suits at law; ordered to a third reading.
Public bill referred. Making further appropria-
tion for the Ethan Allen Monument; to committee
on Finance.
HOUSE. On motion of Mr. Deane, the committee
on Roads had leave to sit during the sessions of
the House.
The Senate came in and the joint assembly elect
ed Wm. G. Shaw. Esq., of Burlington, Reporter of
the decisions of the Supreme Court.
Reports. By Committee on Agriculture, bill to
incorporate Connecticut Valley Fair Ground Co.,
and it was ordered to 3d reading. Also, bill for
the encouragement of agriculture, exempting one
yoke of oxen and certain farming tools from at-
tachment.
On motion of Mr. Hebard, the House went into
committee of the whole on this bill; and the
chair was assigned to Mr. Hebard.
Mr. Olmstead moved to exempt one horse for
every machanic; and Mr. Slayton moved to amend
this proposition by adding one horse for each
mechanic and lawyer, but the the chai ruled the last
out of order at this time. Mesers Webber and
Billings of Mt. Holly, favored the bill as reported,
and on motion of Mr. Kellogg, the committee
rose.
Reports. By committee on Claims, bill to pay
Geo. P. Marsh and John N. Pomeroy, for services
in the supervision of the erection of the monument
to Ethan Allen, in Burlington. Mr. Bridgman
stated the facts in the caso, and Mr. Randall, of
Roxbury, moved to dismiss; lost. And on motion
of Mr. Hebard, the bill was laid on the table.
By committee on Banks, bill for the relief of the
St. Alban's Bank, (remitting the fine for temporary
non-redemption of its bills in Boston and New
York.) This bill was supported by Messrs. Ran-
dall of Roxbury, Hebara and Deane, opposed by
Messrs. Linsley of Rutiand, Rounds and Olmstead.
This bill presents the simple question whether
the alternative of paying a tax, instead of redeem-
ing the bills of the bank as provided by Statute,
shall be enforced in cases of exigency like that of
last autumn. The House determined to enforce
the Statute, by refusing the third reading of the
bill.
SATURDAY, October 30.
SENATE. Mr. Gleed called up Senate Bill, re
lating to witnesses.
He thought the main objection to the bill was the
fear of witnesses committing the crime of perjury;
and in that he must disagree with other Senators.
The argument that many a rogue would get clear
by coolness, and innocent men suffer through em-
barrassment, was one of the strongest presented by
the Senator from Windsor. His experience was dif-
ferent from this theory. Witnesses testifying un-
der embarrassment, generally have their train of
circumstances so connected that the embarrassment
has a favorable effect upon the jury, and he be
lieved that no criminal could go upon the stand,
who was quilty, and have his story so well connect-
ed, as to deceive a court and jury. By adopting
the views a iverse to this bill we must exclude every
witness on the stand, for all are liable to the
crime of perjury. He thought the criminal code
of the State was clearing itself of barbarism and
approaching a plain system. The bill before the
Senate proposed a further advance in the same di-
rection. The change giving both parties the pri-
vilege of testifying in civil cases had produced a
most salutary effect. So it has been in our legis-
lation, first to last, and this progression to im-
provement is desirable. The law allowing the
complainant to testify and excluding the respondent
je a ludicrous one. By our law, as it now stands,
a man of established character, for truth, can tes-
tify in the case of another party, but when he
himself is interested and is the best witness in the
case, our statute excludes his testimony. Per-
sons who have been confined in a Penitentiary for
a criminal offence are allowed to testify against
others, but where a man is arraigned on trial for
a supposed crime, though of the best moral char-
acter, by the present law, he must be excluded
from vindicating his innocence. He was in fa-
vor of this bill on the score of justice, and believ
ed the time was not far distant when the change
would be effected.
Mr. Davis said that this bill with the amend-
ment, provided that the respondent might testi y
and be subjected to the usual cross examination:
but he questioned the law, that will compel a
witness to criminate himself. At that point the
witness would claim his constitutional right and it
was very strange that the State should allow the
criminal to tell his own story, when he can fall at
any moment upon his constitutional right and re-
fuse any cross examination affecting his guilt-
Such being the case with this bill, he was strongly
opposed to it. Too often we should find men of
previous good character go upon the stand, urged
on by great excitement or personal interest, and
commit the crime of perjury. He would not hold
out such a temptation.
The motion to indefinitely postpone was car-
ried by 19 to 11.
Reports. By Mr. Butier for committee on
roads, bill to amend the charter of the Vermont
and Canada railroad company, with amendment,
substituting a new bill.)
Mr. Buttler in explanation said that this char-
ter expired to-morrow, and the committee offered
the amendment, to extend the charter to the 5th
of Nov. 1858, that further legislation might be
had. The amendment was adopted and the bill
passed.
This bill was concurred in by the House in the
afternoon.
TUESDAY, Nov. 2.
Senate Bill for the relief of the St. Albans
Bank, being the special order, was taken up, the
pending motion being to reconsider the vote by
which the third reading was refused.
Mr. Bartholoinew said he was one who voted
against the bill and had not yet seen anything to
change his vote upon it, but he was for a recom
mitment, understanding that further facts would
be presented, having a favorable bearing upon the
bill.
Mr. Chittenden called from the chairman of the
bank committee a statement of facts.
Mr. Smith said he had heard a statement in cir-
culation that the bank had bought up its own cir-
culation at a di count, which, if true, would have
a serious effect upon the bill. He denied the
charge, and was desirous of annearing, that
the Senate might have a detailed statement of the
condition of the bank at the time it was thrown
out, and to present all the facts before the Senate
before its final action.
Mr. Chittenden did not desire to hear any fur-
ther statement to correct the report that the Bank
had bought up its bills at a discount. No Sens-
tor, upon the denial of the report by the chair-
man of the committee, could desire any further
examination. Upon the bank committee is an
officer of the St. Alban's Bank, and the friends of
the bill had had an opportunity of making a full
showing of facts. If the object to re-commait is to
produce further facts which will have a tendency
to clear up this case, and not to connect it with
other matters, he would vote to reconsider; but
until something was presented to that point he
could not vote to recommit. The question wheth-
er or not the bank did buy up its bills has no-
thing indeed to do with the present question. All
the precedents are one way on this matter, and
there was not a case which had been presented
but which had been granted; but none of these
precedents apply to the Bank of St. Albans.
When the Legislaiure interfered in these cases, the
South Royalton Bank was in the hands of a Re-
ceiver, and the Stark Bank and Bank of Castleton
had impaired their capital by losses, so that a
necessity existed, requiring it to be made up by the
shareholders.
Now the St. Albans' Bank does not ask a release upon
grounds of insolvency, but while it is in a sound
condition. Is it equitable, is it just that this bank
should be so favored? This bank asks that a
