ency or insufficiency of the compensation, he had
not & word say. It was an electioneering hob-
by at home, and if the calibre of any man was so
slight that he could not stand a shot on this mat-
ter, he ought to stay at home.
Mr. GRASON argued that it would be impossi-
ble for the Legislature to modify the per diem of
members according to the various fluctuations in
the value of stocks or in the supposed value of money.
He declared, that his only object in the
amendment, was to take away the opportunity and
excuse for popular harangues upon the subject of
saving the people's money by reducing the pay of
their representatives. He knew something of
the people of the State of Maryland; and whilst
they were opposed to the expenditure of money
for useless or extravagant purposes, yet they
were willing to pay a full and sufficient compen-
sation to their public servants. In the city of
Annapolis, it was impossible fur a man to live
like a gentleman for less than three or four dol-
lars a day. He was in favor of fixing the sum at
four dollars a day, that being the usual compensa-
tion; that amount, he believed, was satisfactory
to the people. But, he repeated, his main object
was to get rid of the debates.
Mr. BUCHANAN said that he always listened
with pleasure to the remarks of the gentleman
from Queen Anne's, (Mr. Grason,) and never
failed to derive instruction whenever that gentle-
man addressed the Convention. He, (Mr. B.,)
concurred entirely with him, that the per diem
should be fixed in the Constitution. But there
was a good deal of reason in what had fallen
from the gentleman from Washington, (Mr. Har-
bine,) in relation to mileage.
His friend from Queen Anne's, (Mr. Grason,)
anticipated that there might be, as there had
hitherto been, rebates in the Legislature on the
subject of per diem. The gentleman, by his
amendment, had disposed of one of the bones of
contention, by providing that the per diem should
be fixed in the Constitution. But bow was it in
relation to mileage ? That was left to the law
making power. This opened the door wide; dis-
cussions would arise upon this which would embrace
the whole subject matter, and thus we
should find ourselves in the same difficulty. He
would vote for the amendment in any event; but
he would be glad if the gentleman from the coin-
age of his brain, would submit a proposition
which would enable the Convention to act upon
the subject of mileage, so as to leave the Legisla-
ture no room for discussion.
Mr. GRASON said, the two subjects were dif-
ferent. The per diem might easily be fixed with
relation to a general estimate of the value of
money. But as to mileage, the circumstances
which should control it, were constantly chang-
ing. The gentleman from St. Mary's, (Mr.
Blakistone,) had furnished some useful informa-
tion on the subject.
He, (Mr. G.,) thought it would be very diffi-
cult to fix the mileage in the Constitution. It
would be better to leave it to the legislature.
The question of mileage was not so likely to be
introduced into the House of Delegates as a

topic of debate, as the question of per diem
was.
Mr. HARBINE dissented from this opinion, and
appealed to our legislative history, to show that
the idea that mileage would not be the subject
matter of debate, was not borne out. He re-
ferred to some of the new States—Iowa, Texas,
&c.—in whose Constitutions such a provision had
been inserted to show, that, if it was practicable
there, where the facilities of communication
must necessarily be less than with us, it was
also practicable here.
He shewed that it was not quite so easy a mat-
ter for gentlemen from his county, (Washing-
ton,) to travel hither as the gentleman from
St. Mary's (Mr. Blakistone,) supposed. He
admitted, that there might be isolated cases, like
that of the gentleman, in which such a rule
would bear hard.
This, he, (Mr. H.,) regretted; but it was a re-
sult inseparable from the operation of all general
rules. He insisted that the mileage was higher
than it should be, and that it ought to be reduc-
ed. He declared that this was no Buncombe
movement, and that every single reason which
would justify the insertion of a constitutional pro-
vision, fixing the per diem, applied with equal
force to the mileage. If ten cents was not
enough, say fifteen. But, whatever the mileage
was, let it be fixed.
Mr. KILGOUR said, he thought the matter too
small to be the subject of debale in this Conven-
tion. At all events, it was too small for him to
appreciate. Probably, he might never be able
to do so, until he took a lesson in the Washington
county school of economy. As to this sum being
sufficient, it might be perhaps for those who
traveled the distance once only.
But for himself, be had some attractions
at home, [laughter,] and was glad at times to es-
cape from the dull, tread-mill round of labors,
which their duties imposed.
From first to last, efforts had been made in
this Convention, to fix upon the people of the
State of Maryland, a character for parsimony—
nay, for actual meanness—which did not belong
to them. The people, themselves, would dis-
own it. It was unworthy of them. They were
enlightened and liberal-minded, and did not al-
ways desire to weigh the services of their public
agents, to the nicety of a hair. If it were so,
probably some gentlemen in the legislature, per-
haps, even some gentlemen in this Convention,
would be found to receive more than they de-
served.
Every public servant should be paid ajust and
fair compensation. The people of Maryland were
willing to pay it, and those who desired to cry
down their character in this respect, were doing
that for which the people themselves would not
thank them. He moved that the amendment be
laid upon the table.
The PRESIDENT stated that the amendment of
the gentleman from Washington, (Mr. Har-
bine,) was not in order, without a motion to
reconsider the amendment, which had just been
engrafted on the bill.