none from our. But this injustice cannot con-
tinue, we must not flatter ourselves, if we tax the
property of our citizens within their limits, that
they will not also tax the property of their citi-
zens within our State, It is not just to those
States who only levy taxes on property within
their limits. Where is the justice of making our
citizens pay taxes for lands and slaves or other
property, in another State, when they can derive
no consideration in return from our State in the
way of protection or other advantage. That
property of our citizens is already taxed in the
State where it lies. An injustice also is done to
our citizens, because by imposing a tax on the
property, we lessen the value of the property
where it is situated, and thus the same property
pays double taxes—taxes to the community in
which it lies—taxes to this State where its owner
resides. Again such a system will provoke retali-
ation—nothing ought to be done by us which may
have the effect of provoking jealousies between
States or a conflict of laws which will tend to
destroy the harmony of our State laws. Let
each State tax only the property within its own
limits over which it has a more direct and com-
plete control, and whose action and protection
justify such an exercise of power.
But there was another view in which he de-
sired to place this subject. It would be found
impracticable to execute this law. It is wise to
abstain from the exercise of a power which it
may be difficult or impracticable to carry into
effect. How is this property to be rated ? With-
in the State we have a mode of assessing the
value of real or personal estate. But how can
this be done in Mississippi or Europe ? How can
you send there and have assessments made of the
value of property? With regard to the property
which consists of public stocks—although the
value of these stocks are more easily known by
the market price, how is it possible, or by what
process could we proceed, to discover what citi-
zens of Maryland are the true owners of such
stocks. The laws and courts of Maryland are
called upon to exercise no jurisdiction there, its
citizens are not cognizant of what takes place
there. And there can be devised no mode of
taxing such property, the carrying out of which
would but open the door to frauds and perjuries
innumerable. A few years ago, a law was en-
acted to collect an income tax within this State;
but it entirely failed. It was only in one or two
of the counties, that the effort was made to ex-
ecute its provisions when it was abandoned, and
the act imposing it was shortly afterwards re-
pealed, because of its inquisitorial character, its
impertinent scrutiny into the affairs of private life
and of other difficulties which it had to encoun-
ter, and the frauds and impositions it caused, and
above all, and the combined effects of all—its
utter failure to produce a sufficient sum. He
stated this fact for the purpose of illustrating the
probable result of any attempt to impose a tax
when there was such difficulties in carrying out its
execution as in this now contemplated.
Mr. SPENCER moved that the farther consider-
ation of the bill of rights be postponed, in order

that it might be printed with the several amend-
ments.
Mr. PARKE said he was absent when the first
part of the bill of rights was under consideration.
If it was now to be printed, he would offer an
amendment, (with a view that it might be print-
ed with the other amendments,) upon which he
desired to have a vote of the Convention.
Some conversation followed as to the proprie-
ty of the postponement, in which Messrs. MA-
GRAW, SPENCER and JENIFER took part.
The result was, that
Mr. RANDALL proceeded with his remarks.
It would be perfectly acceptable to him, what-
ever course the House might determine on. The
question was a very important one, and he hoped
it would be examined carefully. He bad no
doubt the Convention would come to a correct
decision upon it. He had endeavored to show
that the change was both unjust and impractica-
ble. He would now call attention to its policy.
He had no means of knowing the extent of the
property lying out of the State, which would be
liable to taxation, if the measure was to be
carried into effect. He presumed it was now
very limited in its extent, although it could not
well be ascertained what it was. But if the
principle should be carried out in the other
States, and surely we are not to expect that we
can carry out a law taxing the property of our
citizens in other States, without exciting retalia-
ting legislation by other States, in taxing the pro-
perly of their citizens lying in the State of Ma-
ryland. They surely will do so in relation to
any property their citizens may have within our
limits. It is mere justice to themselves to do
this. What position then, will Maryland take
if all the other States adopt this principle of re-
taliation, and say that the property of their citi-
zens lying within the limits of this State, shall be
taxed? Then all the citizens of those States hav-
ing property lying in the State of Maryland, will
be liable to double taxation on such property, as
if citizens of the State of Maryland, by our laws,
and as citizens of the respective States in which
they reside, by the laws thereof. We must con-
cede the same propriety and policy to other
States which influence ourselves—what will be
its operation? The stock of the State of Ma-
ryland is relatively larger in proportion to its
population and resources perhaps, than any State
in the Union—certainly not far from it. Let
other States whose citizens hold your State stocks
impose another tax upon it in addition to that
which you impose, and its value would be essen-
tially impaired; vast quantities of it are held by
citizens of other States, in our canals, rail roads,
mining companies, and in our city stocks, bank
stocks, &c. We have an immense banking capi-
tal, and a good deal of it is owned out of the
State. We have numerous stocks of companies
associated for internal improvements, agreat deal
of which is held by citizens out of this State. In
Allegany, I understand, the stock of many com-
panies is held almost exclusively by persons liv-
ing out of this State.
If we impose a tax. on these capitalists, and
they are taxed also by the States in which they