But when not instructed, he must suppose that
his constituents designed to place some confi-
dence in his judgment, to clothe him with some
discretion.
It was his duty to vote now, not as his consti-
tuents had voted four years ago, when this Con-
vention was not contemplated by them; but as
he, (Mr. T.,) believed, they would decide, if the
question were now submitted to them. He was
of opinion that they would decide differently if
they were here and could see the difficulty we
have experienced in forming a Constitution; and
the probability that many things will be left to
future legislation.
Gentlemen have stated time and again that
they would not encumber the Constitution, with
what they considered legislative provisions.
This, he, (Mr. T.,) said, was his own opinion.
Though belonging to a party which receives
scant credit with our adversaries, for confidence
in the people, he might say for himself, that when
he witnessed the efforts that are sometimes made
throughout the land, to inflame the passions, and
excite the prejudices of the people for political
ends, he ever turned with an abiding trust to
their intelligence, virtue and patriotism, as the
lasting foundations of our republic. He was
willing to leave many things to be considered—
much to be done by the legislature, who could
better ascertain and follow the wishes of the
people than we can.
It we lay down correct principles in the Con-
stitution, the people will follow them out. If we
furnish a good plan of government, the legisla-
ture will fill up the details as may best promote
the interest and prosperity of the State.
Mr T. said, be thought that annual sessions
would be necessary for some years at least, be-
fore the machinery of this new government
could be properly set in motion. He was in fa-
vor of annual sessions, and short sessions of fifty
or sixty days at most. He had, himself, last win-
ter witnessed what he never before saw in legis-
lation. He had seen bill after bill passed with-
out having been read at all; when he was satis-
fied that very few of the members knew what
they were voting upon. This was in consequence
of the number of bills before the body
He had seen much confusion and haste at the
close of the annual sessions—but nothing to compare
with what he saw last winter. He was
not a member, but he saw enough as a mere
spectator at the lobby, to satisfy him that the
biennial bill had been purchased at a fearful cost
—the hazard, if not the loss of sound, deliberate
and judicious legislation.
Gentlemen had argued against leaving too
much power to the legislature. What is "too
much ?" Here we may differ. In one breath we
are told thatwe must obey the potent will of the
people, because they have expressed it favorably
to biennial sessions. In the next breath it is
said that the legislature must not be trusted again
with this power, although they come from the
people.
If we acknowledge this duty ourselves, why
shall we impute a different sense of duty to (hose
who may come after us as representatives of the

people. They obeyed the people on this subject
in 1846; why will they not obey again, if this
question goes a second time before that high tri-
bunal as is now proposed by the amendment.
Gentlemen had warned the friends of reform
that if this biennial feature is not retamed, the
Constitution will be rejected by the people. This
warning might properly enough come upon those
who rejoiced in the name of reformers; but he
was at a loss how to account for such a voice
from Dorchester and Worcester counties. The
gentleman from Dorchester, (Mr. Hicks,) had
said sometime ago, if he remembered, that the
basis of representation and some other features
in the present Constitution, suited him. Mr. T.
inferred that if the basis and these other features
were materially changed, the rejection of the
Constitution would not be disagreable to that gen-
tleman. The gentleman from Worcester, had
said he voted for the Convention in June last,
and therefore claimed to be a reformer. Yet, the
reformers do not take him as one of their brother-
hood. His two Eastern Shore friends might go
for triennial sessions without risk of being deemed
any better reformers than they would be called
if they went even for annual sessions. Annual
and biennial session« have little to do with the ques-
tion of reform, as it is understood by those who
claim to be its peculiar friends. Some of the
stoutest reformers here are advocating annual
sessions. Carroll county goes for them, as carry-
ing out a cardinal democratic doctrine—' 'frequent
elections and strict accountability; " while Frede-
rick county is divided. Mr. T. supposed that his
friends from Frederick, (Messrs. BISER and SHRI-
VER,) considered themselves none the less good
reformers because they happened to disagree
with their colleagues on this question of legisla-
tive sessions.
But suppose the warning he heeded. It may
operate the other way at last. Mr. T. was no
prophet, and he gave no warnings to others. He
had quite enough—may be too much—on hand in
endeavoring to keep right himself. He would,
however, venture to suggest, that twenty-five
thousand five hundred voters cast their ballots in
1846 against the biennial bill. Suppose all, or a
large portion of these, were to cast their votes
against the Constitution, if they are not gratified
by having the annual sessions incorporated as
part of the instrument—it may be rejected. We
are not to suppose that these twenty-five thou-
sand five hundred are not of the same mind now,
any more than we are to presume that the other
thirty thousand, who were for biennial sessions,
have not changed their opinion. In about fifty-
five thousand votes, there was a majority for biennial
sessions of about four thousand six hundred.
While, therefore, the reformers are taking
warning, they bad as well remember, that in 1846,
there were nearly one half of all the voters—
only twenty-three hundred, less than half—opposed
to biennial sessions, and that these same,
for aught we know, may make this very feature
the ground of invincible repugnance to the ratification
of the Constitution.
This was not altogether conjecture, for one of
the delegates from St. Mary's states that one rea-