salary to $2000, were placed in the executive
chair, he would find it impossible to resist the
example of his predecessors. No Governor can
save any thing out of his salary. Whatever he
receives, is distributed in some form or other
among the people of the State. But the gentle-
man from Anne Arundel complains of the heavy
taxes under which the people are suffering, and
desires to relieve them from their burdens by
taking away a part of the Governor's salary
This would, indeed, afford considerable relief,
as it would appear, by an accurate calculation,
that each tax payer would save annually at least
one-fifth of a cent. But a few weeks ago. the
gentleman viewed our system of taxation in a
different light. He then described the prosperity
of the State in glowing colors; and spoke of the
alacrity with which the people of every county,
and especially of his own district. paid their tax-
es; and of the regret they would feel at any re-
duction of their burdens till the public debt was
entirely extinguished. The gentleman compares
the salaries of the executive and judges, and, of
course, is of opinion that the superior abilities
of the latter entitle them to a higher compensa-
tion. Admitting this superiority, indeference to
the gentleman from Anne Arundel, it must be
remembered that judges have been appointed for
life, and have never been under the necessity of
increasing their expenses, or changing their residence;
whereas the Governor is elected for a
short time, and subjected to great additional ex-
penses, which do not always cease with a termi-
nation of his salary. And what, after all, is a
salary of $4000. The clerks of many of the
counties receive as large a compensation, and
the cashiers of banks half as much, without be-
ing under the necessity of increasing their expenses
or neglecting their private business. Why,
then, should we reduce the compensation of the
Governor, whose salary is expended in hospitali-
ty, while the profits of other offices are added
to the private fortune of the incumbents. The
Governor of Maryland is exposed to an expense,
from which the Governors of other States are
exempt. Ships of our own navy, as well as for-
eign vessels of war, frequently anchor in Annapolis
roads; and whatever might be the opinion
of members, the people of the State expected the
hospitality of the State to be exercised on every
such occasion, and that the Governor should in-
cur the necessary expense. The gentleman from
Calvert, (Mr. Sollers,) had clearly shown, that
a material reduction of the salary, would exclude
men of limited means from the office. The pro-
position to reduce the salary to $2000, ought to
be entitled a bill to prevent a man, without a
fortune, from being Governor of the State.
Mr. PHELPS vindicated the part of the Eastern
Shore, which he represented from the charge of
desiring to establish the doctrine that five hun-
dred dollars was a sufficiently high salary for
any public officer. He and his colleagues were
in favor of the reduction of the number of offi-
cers, but they were equally in favor of giving
sufficient compensation to those who were necessary.
62 |
Mr. TUCK would not prolong the discussion.
He believed that the opinion of the Convention
was that the salary of the Governor should be
liberal, and that he should reside in Annapolis.
He moved the previous question.
Mr. CHAMBERS requested the gentleman from
Prince Georges to withdraw the motion for a
moment to enable him to offer an amendment.
Mr. TUCK waived the motion for the moment.
Mr. CHAMBERS then moved to amend the sec-
tion by striking out "four thousand," and insert-
ing in lieu thereof "thirty-six hundred."
The previous question was then seconded.
The question being on the first branch of the
amendment on striking out,
Mr. SAPPINGTON called for the ayes and noes
on the question, and they were ordered
The question was then put on striking out,
and decided as follows:
Affirmative—Messrs. Dent, Lee, Chambers,
of Kent, Dorsey, Dalrymple, Brent, of Charles,
Lloyd, Dickinson, Sherwood, of Talbot, Cris-
field, Dashiell, Williams, Eccleston, Phelps,
Dirickson, McMaster, Fooks, Shriver, Gaither,
Biser, Sappington, Nelson. Carter, Hardcastle,
Schley, Fiery, John Newcomer, Harbine, Davis,
Brewer, Weber, Slicer, Smith, Parke, Shower
and Cockey—35.
Negative—Messrs. Blakistone, President, pro
tem., Hopewell, Mitchell, Donaldson, Wells,
Randall, Kent, Sellman, Weems, Sollers, Jeni-
fer, Buchanan, Bell, Welch, Chandler, Hicks,
Hodson. Chambers, of Cecil, Bowie, Tuck, Gra-
son, McHenry, Magraw, Gwinn, Stewart, of
Baltimore city, Brent, of Baltimore city. Presst-
man, Ware, Kilgour, Waters, Hollyday and
Brown—32.
So the motion to strike out was agreed to.
The question was then put on the motion of
Mr. CHAMBERS to insert $3,600, and it was de-
cided as follows:
Affirmative—Messrs. Blakistone, President,
pro tem. Dent, Hopewell, Chambers, of Kent,
Mitchell, Donaldson, Wells, Randall, Kent, Sell-
man, Weems, Sollers, Brent, of Charles, Jenifer,
Buchanan, Bell, Welch, Chandler, Lloyd, Dick-
inson, Sherwood, of Talbot, Hicks, Hodson,
Phelps, Chambers, of Cecil, Miller, Bowie, Tuck,
Grason, Shriver, Biser, McHenry, Magraw,
Gwinn, Stewart, of Baltimore city, Brent, of
Baltimore city, Presstman, Ware, Kilgour,
Brewer, Waters, Hollyday and Brown—43.
Negative—Messrs. Lee, Dorsey, Dalrymple,
Crisfield, Dashiell, Williams, Eccleston, Dirick-
son, McMaster, Fooks, Gaither, Sappington, Nel-
son, Carter, Hardcastle, Schley, Fiery, John
Newcomer, Harbine, Davis, Weber, Slicer,
Smith, Parke, Shower and Cockey—26.
So the blank was filled with "thirty-six hun-
dred "
The question then being on the adoption of the
section as amended;
Mr. DIRICKSON asked for the ayes and noes on
the question, and they were ordered. |
