peated the reply he gave yesterday, that it was
as well to have a crib for printers, as one for
lawyer?. In the framing of a Constitution, we
ought not to be looking to see who were to be fed;
it is our duty to feed the people by giving them
a wholesome code of laws, under which they
may be satisfied, and grow in prosperty. By a
proper codification and a good index, any man
will then be able to find what the law is.
Mr. SPENCER said he believed the proposition
of the gentleman from Caroline, was about the
same in principle as that offered by the gentle-
man from Prince George's, (Mr, Sprigg,) except
that it was a little more in detail. He compared
the two amendments to shew that they were, in
fact, one and the same. There was a portion of
the proposition, for which he was willing to vote,
while he could not give his vote for the other part.
He wished to have the amendment divided. Re-
ference had been made to the Constitution and
laws of Louisiana, but if he were not mistaken,
they were formerly printed in French, that being
the language of the inhabitants when it first be-
came part of the United States. The change
which had taken place in the character of the in-
habitants of that State, combined with other cir-
cumstances, furnished good reason for printing
them now in the vernacular. But what might be
sound policy in the State of Louisiana, might be
very imprudent in Maryland. Their position
was entirely dissimilar.
Mr. PRESSTMAN asked if all the testamentary
system was embraced in the laws which were
within the contemplation of the amendment of
the gentleman from Caroline?
Mr. STEWART repiled that it was all embraced
in the laws.
Mr. PRESSTMAN said, that in that case the amend-
ment was altogether impracticable. If a gentle-
man desired to look into a particular law, it
would be necessary for him to examine the whole
mass.
Mr. HICKS, (in reply to Mr. Presstman,) said
he happened not to be a lawyer. He might, there-
fore, be considered as perfectly disinterested in
this matter. He agreed with the gentleman from
Caroline, in all he had said on the subject of sim-
plifying, collating, and codifying our whole body
of laws, so as to make it intelligible to the peo-
ple. A large portion of the people of his county,
did not possess a great deal of legal learning, but
they were plain, intelligent farmers, merchants,
mechanics, &c., perfectly competent to under-
stand common sense matters. Instead of making
it necessary to go to these lawyers with a fee of
five dollars, ten dollars, or fifty dollars, for law-
years know how to charge, as well as other peo-
ple, he would put the people in a condition to
know for themselves what is the law. He looked
upon lawyers as being a highly respectable class of
men; had no prejudice against them, though some
say they are necessary evils, for we cannot do with-
out them; and he yet would go to them as seldom
as possible. The testamentary system had been
referred to by the gentleman from Baltimore,
( Mr. Presstman. ) That system contained seve-
ral branches, but it would not be necessary to go
40

through the whole system, in order to look ii to
the branch concerning inventories, or the laws of
descents, individual wishes to perfect his title to
land which he has purchased. Sometimes it is
covered with mortgages. He examines the re-
cords, and thinks he is going to make out a clear
title, when he finds some supplement enacted
fifty years back, which at once comes in conflict
with his hopes and clouds over what seemed pre-
viously to be clear. Then he is compelled to go
to the lawyers, and they do not always know every
law that has been passed on the subject. As to
the charges for printing, he had no doubt that his
people would be more willing to pay a small additional
tax for the printer, than to give a fee of
perhaps five hundred dollars to a lawyer, to tell
him what he would understand himself. The
money would be well laid out, if it produced the
effect of simplifying the law, so that every business
man might be able to judge for himself of the
validity of his title, when made. He hoped the
amendment would be passed, as great good would
inure to the people from it.
Mr. SPENCER called for a division on the sub-
stitute, which was ordered.
Mr. S. also asked the yeas and nays, remark-
ing that the question was one of infinite importance
and that he hoped, therefore, the Convention
would give them.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
Mr. HARBINE desired, he said, to move an
amendment.
The amendment was not now in order.
Mr. HARBINE briefly stilted, that his view of
the effect of the amendment of the gentleman
from Caroline, (Mr. Stewart,) was not altered.
He had heard no reason to change the opinion
he yesterday expressed. A state of things might
occur, in which it would be highly politic and
popular, but that could only arrive after acodifi-
cation of the statutes of this State, and
until then, the amendment, if adopted
would produce evil consequences and great
confusion in legislation. Alter a codification of
our laws, there were many powerful considera-
tions in favor of the effect of the amendment, and
the cost of printing, which seemed to be the main
objection to it, would have to give way to these
considerations. It would be better to pay to
printers large sums of money, in order to make
the laws plain to every man, than to pay thrice
the sum to lawyers to have them explained and
understood. But his object in rising was to say,
that if the proposition pending should be adopted
he intended to offer an amendment which would
postpone its effect, until our statute laws were
codified. He regarded a codification as a matter
of great public utility, and when the proper pe-
riod arrived, if no one else did, he would submit
a proposition to that effect.
The question was then stated to be on the first
branch of the amendment, as follows:
"All laws shall be passed by original bill, and
not by supplement."
Mr. SPENCER said he did not ask the yeas and
nays on that branch.
Mr. DIRICKSON asked the yeas and nays, and
they were ordered.