|
|
|
The bill was then passed by yeas 73, nays 30—Messrs.
Carmichael, Alvey, Archer, Brown, Carter, Cunningham,
Devries, Dobbins, Evans, Farnandis, Franklin, Gill, Hay-
den, Hollyday, Horsey of Frederick, Horsey of Somerset,
Howard, Jones, Kennedy, Lee, Mackubin, McCormick, Mc-
Kaig, McMaster, Merrick, Page, Parker, Pleasants, Pole
and Walsh.
The President (Mr. Carmichael) explained his vote in
the negative by saying that he was opposed to forming
new counties, and also because the formation of this coun-
ty would derange the basis of representation as fixed by
the constitution.
Mr. Alvey voted in the negative for the same reasons as
given by the president. He thought this measure would
be an injustice to the city of Baltimore and the larger
counties.
Mr. Hayden was opposed to the measure, not only for
the reasons that had been stated, but because there had
been incorporated in the constitution a general feature
providing for the formation of new counties, and under it
a new county could always be formed. He was opposed
to special legislation unless for some good reason, and he
had heard of none for this.
Mr. Jones entered a protest against this measure as
without a parallel in the whole history of Maryland. The
voice of seven-tenths of the people of both counties was
opposed to it.
Mr. Kennedy could not vote for this measure, for the
reasons which had been so well stated. It was estab-
lishing a most dangerous precedent.
Mr. Maulsby had opposed this whole bill from first to
last, but as the majority of the Convention had decided
in favor of it, he had voted for it on its second reading.
He was either to retain his own personal convictions or
to fuse himself with the will of the majority. For the
reason that he thought it the duty of the minority to fuse
itself with the decidedly expressed will of the majority
he should vote yea.
Mr. Stoddert desired to preserve the equilibrium of
power in this State, to protect the rights of the minority.
463
|
|
|
|
 |
