Negative—Messrs. Chapman, Pres't:, Mor-
gan, Dent, Lee, Mitchell, Donaldson, Randall,
Kent, Sellman. Lloyd, Sherwood, of Talbot,
Colston, John Dennis, Williams, Hodson. Golds-
borough, Eccleston, McCubbin, McMaster,
Hearn, Fooks, Thawley, Hardcastle, Kilgour,
Waters and Hollyday—26.
So the 5th section as amended was adopted.
The 6th section was then read, as follows:
SEC. 6. All offices for the weighing, guaging,
measuring, culling or inspecting any merchan-
dize, produce, manufacture or commodity, what-
ever, except tobacco, are hereby abolished, and
no such office shall hereafter be created by law;
but nothing in this section contained, shall abro-
gate any office created for the purpose of pro-
tecting the public health, or the interests of the
State in its property, revenue, tolls or purchases,
or of supply ing the people with correct stand-
ards of weights and measures, or shall prevent
the creation of any office tor such purposes here-
after.
Mr. JOHN NEWCOMER moved to strike out this
section. He did not think it prudent to change
the present system of inspections, and in his
opinion, if they should abolish it, it would be
injurious to the State at large.
Mr. TUCK offered as a substitute for said sec-
tion, the following:
"All offices by Executive appointment for the
weighing, guaging, measuring, culling or inspec-
ting any merchandize, produce, manufactures or
commodity whatever, except tobacco, live stock,
hay and straw, shall be abolished after the first
day of January next; and no such office shall
thereafter be created by law; but nothing herein
contained shall abrogate any office created for
the purpose of protecting the public health or
the interests of the State in its property, reve-
nues, tolls or purchases, or of supplying the
people with correct standards of weights and
measures, or shall prevent the creation of any
office for such purposes hereafter; and it shall be
the duty of the Legislature at its first session
under this Constitution, and from time lo time
thereafter, to pass such laws as may be deemed
necessary or expedient for licensing persons to
weigh, guage, measure, cull or inspect any mer-
chandize, produce, manufacture or commodity
whatever, except tobacco, live stock, hay and
straw."
Mr. TUCK judged from certain indications that
this clause would meet with no little opposition,
and from quarters whence it was least to have
been expected. The time allowed under our
rules was too limited for a full discussion—but
he would briefly state some reasons in support of
the measure. It is by no means certain that ad-
vantage had resulted from all our inspections—
though I believe there have been exceptions.
We know that these appointments are political,
and being rewards for services rendered, capacity
has not always been one of the qualifications. It
is notorious that men have been appointed under
all administrations to these and other offices who
had their duties to learn after receiving their |
commissions. During this season of tutelage, we
might as well have had no inspections at all.
The official mark or brand was no evidence that
the article had been well examined, and judici-
ously passed upon. I believe that government
patronage begets more corruption and vice than
all other causes combined. I mean corruption
and vice as connected with elections and offices.
Gentlemen have said here that they were in favor
of stripping the Governor of all patronage. We
shall see when the vote is taken how nearly
practice approaches profession. We shall see
whether the party in power are willing to sur-
render the lever by which the political character
of the State is too often determined. We
shall see whether they will do any thing to rid the
Governor of the hordes of office seekers, who
annually infest the avenues to the executive de-
partment—calling aloud to be rewarded for their
very disinterested and patriotic exertions in his
behalf—either at ward or district meetings, or at
the polls. It would be a great service rendered the
people—a great promoter of harmony and peace
in society—if this end could be accomplished.
Free inspections have been introduced into
New York, and some other States. Some gen-
tlemen say the plan has worked well—others say
the contrary. But there is this difference between
that system an the one we propose. In New
York the law does not regulate the matter at all.
We propose that inspections shall be made under
authorised licenses. Instead of a man becoming
an inspector by executive patent, we say let him
take out his license, and let skill, judgment, and
merit be his passports to patronage and support.
In all branches of business a man must depend
for success on these tests; and where there is any
business, no man can fail to obtain employment
who has such claims to favor. No man would
dream of taking out a license who did not know
that he possessed the necessary qualifications. He
would not be employed if he did not possess them.
We know in every community who excel in the
different branches of business. Persons holding
these licenses, even if their work did not make
them known, would not hide their merits under
a bushel. Indeed this was illustrated only a few
years ago. Governor Pratt appointed two or
three lumber inspectors, who had held office un-
der some of his predecessors. Being well known,
as acquainted with their duties, these few soon
obtained all the work. But as each of the others
had earned his commission—it would not do lo let
it prove an empty honor—and hence, when they
found they could not procure work to support
themselves and families, they resorted to an ex-
pedient to obtain support without work. They
procured the passage of a law requiring the fees
received by all the inspectors to be brought into
a common fund, and then equally divided among
all. Skill, and capacity, and labor were to pay
tribute to ignorance and idleness, or the public
must put up with the services of men who did not
command their confidence.
But it is objected that licensed inspections will
give no value to our brands—that our inspections
will lose their "State character." Must this |
