our public works of internal improvements occu-
pied most of the time of the Legislature. But
for these, the sessions might be terminated in six
weeks. He had no objection to the amendment
proposed by the gentleman from Queen Anne's,
(Mr. Spencer.) He was not entirely satisfied
that the State had yet got through her pecuniary
difficulties. The failure of two or three crops
would disable the farmers from paying the taxes,
and in that case, we may find that the " dark
clouds" spoken of by the gentleman from Dorches-
ter, might still be hanging over us. He was op-
posed to all extravagant expenditures, and he was
against some of the expenditures which had been
incurred by this Convention.
Mr. WELLS rose to make a few remarks, and
in the outset he would express his regret that the
gentleman from Dorchester should have deemed
it necessary to make any party allusions. He did
not think that party considerations should at any
time be connected with the subjects before this
Convention. He was himself a party man, but
he intended to vote on every proposition submit-
ted here, on its own intrinsic merits, regardless
of all party obligations. As he had been antici-
pated by the gentlemen who had preceded him on
his side of the question, in most of the points of
argument which had suggested themselves to his
mind in reference to this subject, he would not
attempt to repeat what had been argued with so
much superior ability by those gentlemen, but
would confine his remarks to a very few thoughts
connected with one or two aspects of the case,
which had not, he believed, been discussed by
any one. Much stress, Mr. President, has been
laid by the gentleman from Dorchester, on the
fact that by biennial sessions some money would
be annually saved to the Treasury. I will not
stop to argue that this is a very narrow view of
the subject, or to shew, that if it was right to be
governed by such considerations here, that a
mere saving of money is not the true principle
that should direct the operations of an intelligent
economist, who will always act with reference
to the truth of experience—that a judicious ex-
penditure of money is the true and only econo-
my. I will not stop, sir, to shew, as I think 1
could shew, the injurious tendency to which such
a doctrine would lead in all the pursuits of life,
but I must protest against the application of such
a rule as this to our proceedings. Does not the
gentleman see, that the necessary result of his
argument, if it can apply now, will apply to
every article affecting every department of the
Government, and that the rule by which he must
measure the value of the Constitution which we
may form is the rule of mere dollars and cents.
Sir, the idea of consulting cheapness in the for-
mation of our Constitution, I utterly repudiate,
for there is nothing in our political existence of
which I have a greater horror, than I have of a
cheap Constitution, Is it possible, sir, that gen-
tlemen, who have been placed in the elevated
position of members of this Convention are to be
governed bypecuniary considerations ?—that they
are to be influenced in the estimate which they
shall place upon the value of the Constitution
which they shall make, b considering its value |
in money ? He trusted not, and hoped, that our
action would not be guided by such influences,
and that we should rise to the dignity of the ex-
alted position we occupied, not by estimating the
value of our work by a standard of dollars and
cents, but by the high privileges and the inesti-
mable benefits which it was to confer upon us and
upon our posterity whom it was to bind, and by
the great security which it was to afford to the
lives, the liberty, and the property of our citi-
zens. That was the animating principle with
him, and to the obtainment of which, all other
considerations should yield. But, sir, the gentle-
man has told us that a majority of all the States
of the Union had adopted the system of biennial
sessions of the Legislature.
Mr. PHELPS remarked, that he had said four-
teen States had adopted that system.
Well, sir, (continued Mr. W.,) there is no
great difference in the two statements. The gen-
tleman has said, that because fourteen States of
the Union had adopted the biennial system, that
we ought to adopt it; but does that necessarily
follow ? Are there not provisions in the Consti-
tutions of many of the States of the Union that it
would be manifestly improper for us to adopt,
because they would be entirely unsuited to our
condition and in every way injurious to us?
Ought not the gentleman then in selecting the
examples of our sister States which he would
hold up to us as worthy of our imitation, to shew
us, in order to make them applicable, that there
is a similarity between those States and ours in
regard to their commercial and other interests—
and in regard to the locality of capital and popu-
lation ? Sir, if he will turn to the Constitutions
of States having; like ours, a large commercial
emporium, and like ours a large concentrated
capital and population, he will find that of those
Stiles, New York, Massachusetts and Pennsyl-
vania have annual sessions of the Legislature.
And why, sir ? Because the relations which those
large cities bear to the rest of the State by reason
of a great concentration of capital and popula-
tion, and their great trade and commercial influ-
ences affecting as they do every part of the State,
render it indispensably necessary for the due pre-
servation, in equilibrio, of those diversified in-
terests that make up the sum of human pursuits
in those States, that the "meetings of the Legis-
lature should be frequent," as well as for "the
redress of grievances and for amending, strength-
ening and preserving the laws." It has been
said that the reason for resorting to biennial ses-
sions when the change was made, was because it
was at a time when the State was so deeply in-
volved in pecuniary embarrassment as to cause
her failure to meet her engagements, and that
this condition of things made it an imperative
duty on the part of all to adopt measures of re-
trenchment in order to wipe off the stain from
her escutcheon. But what is our condition now ?
Our financial difficulties have been overcome,
a large surplus is annually in the Treasury, and
that reason, therefore, no longer continues to be
applicable.
Another reason with me for desiring to go back
to annual sessions, and I believe this view of the |
