would be realizing that idea of permanency,
which Chief Justice Marshall said, should ever
characterise such sacred instruments.
At present, the finances of our State were
steadily and smoothly moving onto their consum-
mation—the liquidation of the public debt long
within the period contemplated, when that debt
was contracted. We enjoy a clear sky and a
stormless sea; but the aspect of things might
change. Emergencies might arise, requiring the
legislature to meet annually—war might be de-
clared—a suspension of specie payments might
take place. Having yet a debt of sixteen mil-
lions of dollars—the interest of which, had to be
annually provided for, in this state of prosperi-
ty—how much more arduous would be the duty
and more frequent the sessions of the legislature
in any such disastrous event. Some sudden
blight upon the prosperity of the State, such as a
failure of crops, or other signal calamity, might
fall upon the State which might imperatively re-
quire action upon the part of the legislature.
It was true, that, at present, we were paying
off our public debt, and securing it by the sinking
fund, even in anticipation of the terms of our
contract, and by larger reductions than the exi-
gencies of its present condition required.
He did not mean to intimate, that, in the pres-
ent state of things, he would change one of the
provisions by which this early blessing to our
State, of freedom from debt, was being consum-
mated. He hoped they all would be continued
in their united influence, to bring about this glo-
rious result.
But might not the emergency in any year arise
which would demand a change of the system,
perhaps a reduction of the taxes, and yet the
faith of the State be preserved—nay, be the
means of preserving it. An exigency of this kind
or of any other kind might occur, demanding a
session of the legislature, when it was inhibited
by this clause in the Constitution, and where was
the danger or the difficulty which could be ap-
prehended? The legislature, the immediate rep-
resentatives of the people, were to act on this sub-
ject—they best knew the wishes of the people,
their wants and their views, and had the strong-
est' motives of duty and interest, to execute
them. You now confide that very power to the
executive.
For one, he would never consent that the Gov-
ernor exclusively ought or should exercise the
power of calling the legislature together.
He was opposed to this mode of altering the
Constitution by the legislature. He hoped there
would be no such power given. He was opposed to
giving the power to the legislature, of constantly
tinkering with the Constitution. It has produced
this piece of patch-work, to which gentlemen have
referred. He preferred the Constitution should
be altered at stated periods, by a Convention to
be called in pursuance of a provision to be made
in the Constitution, when a majority of the peo-
ple so expressed their determination by their
ballots.
This, he thought, should be the only means of
changing it. As matters now stood, nearly one
half of the time of the legislature was spent in

discussing propositions for changes of the Con-
stitution, and the other half in the consideration
of local laws. The result was, that these gen-
eral laws of the State, which the liberties, inter-
ests and property of the people demanded, have
been almost invariably overlooked, overshadowed
and disregarded, to make way for petty acts of
incorporation, and mere unimportant local laws.
No stronger evidence of this truth was needed
than the fact that, of the whole number of laws,
passed at the last session of the legislature, (and
to which the gentleman from Kent, Mr. CHAM-
BERS, had alluded,) about ten only were designed
for the promotion of the general intereats of the
State. Last session, a new assessment law,
which would have no doubt, from the increased
wealth of the State, greatly enlarged the property
to be taxed—bringing, in all probability, a
large additional revenue into the Treasury, was
laid over for want of time. Maryland was
behind most of the States of the Union in her
general legislation. The demand for a codifica-
tion of our laws, is universal in this State and
yet it cannot be done. This general and impor-
tant interest of the people at large, had been
overlooked—whilst local matters and popular
harangues, about alterations in the Constitution,
by changing the times of their meeting, and
whether the sessions of the legislature should be
annual or biennial, occupied the time of the leg-
islature. In this proposition of the gentleman
from Queen Anne's, (Mr. Spencer,) he, [Mr. R. ]
saw a prospect of diminishing the subjects of
Constitutional discussion and amendment. Make
no provision permanently in it at all, prescribing
at what time, or how often the legislature should
convene; leave that to the legislature itself and
place it within the control of the people, who
can so change it from time to time, as suits their
wants and wishes, and the exigencies of the
State.
Another view of this matter, as suggested by
the gentleman from Dorchester, (Mr. Hicks.)
We should take care not to create a prejudice
against this new Constitution. That gentleman
had urged this view, as a reason why we should
not, by the Constitution, make the sessions an-
nual, after the vote of the people favorable to
biennial sessions. This view is capable of an-
other application. Do not cause those who favor
annual sessions, to be able to make that objection
to this Constitution. Nearly one-half of all who
voted voted to retain annual sessions. Do you
not run the risk of having this vote cast against
a Constitution, having in it a provision for bien-
nial sessions alone ?
1 believe (concluded Mr. R.) that if you place
in the Constitution a provision making the sessions
of the Legislature biennial, but at the same time
leaving it to the people themselves to make them
annual, if they should think proper to do so you
remove all objections on both sides, and to that
extent increase the chances of the final ratification
of the Constitution.
Mr. DIRICKSON said:
Regarded in any light, the principle of the
amendment of the gentleman from Dorchester,