clear space clear space clear space white space
A
 r c h i v e s   o f   M a r y l a n d   O n l i n e

PLEASE NOTE: The searchable text below was computer generated and may contain typographical errors. Numerical typos are particularly troubling. Click “View pdf” to see the original document.

  Maryland State Archives | Index | Help | Search
search for:
clear space
white space
Proceedings and Debates of the 1850 Constitutional Convention
Volume 101, Volume 1, Debates 72   View pdf image
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space
72
charge. It seemed, however, to be a matter of
general notoriety that these frauds did exist.
The gentleman from Cecil, (Mr. MCLANE,)
had referred to the 54th article of the Constitu-
tion of 1776, by which it would be seen that the
framers of that instrument did not refuse to en-
tertain a suspicion that frauds of this bind might
exist, because the design of that article was to
prevent their commission. That such frauds did
begin to prevail to a much greater extent about
the year 1838, was manifest from the ordinance
passed in May of that year, by the corporation of
Baltimore. The enormity of the evil had then
become so apparent that, in addition to the Con-
stitutional provisions and to the acts of Assem-
bly upon the subject, the corporation passed an
ordinance imposing pains and penalties upon
persons twice voting, or voting in the city of
Baltimore without the legal right to do so.
It had been said, that the Convention was about
to impose new restrictions. Surely, as the in-
crease of population demanded such restrictions,
they ought to be enacted. Previous to the year
1802, these evils did not exist to any serious ex-
tent. The property qualification was such, that
owing to the permanent and known abodes of
the voters, the same necessity for such enactments
did not exist. Since then, the aspect of
things had greatly changed. He, however, was
not one of those who believed in primitive puri-
ty—and none other. He believed that there was
as much purity now in the world, as there ever
had been; but a different condition of things exis-
ted at the present time. There had been a great
increase of population, the exigencies of which
had now to be provided for. He referred to the
various laws which had been passed by the Leg-
islature at various periods to meet the require-
ments of the times.
So much for the prevalence of the frauds. What
then was the remedy? The evil was plain and
palpable—manifest to the eyes of all men, stalk-
ing abroad at noon-day before the eyes of men,
and calling loudly for a remedy. Where was it
to be found ? In public opinion and in criminal
laws, some gentlemen said. Were they in ear-
nest? Had not public opinion been arrayed, and
penal statutes been fulminated against this crime,
and of what avail had they been ? No more than
so much waste paper.
When a mode of redressing one of these evils
was presented, gentlemen answered: "That is not
the great evil; it is some other, by which we
are defrauded of our rights and illegal votes ad-
mitted." When a remedy for another fraud was
presented, the same answer was given. And thus
every measure looking to the cure of the disease
was voted down. He had no doubt of the sin-
cerity of gentlemen who opposed these various
propositions. Their error was, that each gentleman
regarded one particular mode as the only
{node by which the evil was to be reached. And
his friend from Charles (Mr. JENIFER,) erred
with others, in his, (Mr. R's,) judgment. That
gentleman thought that a Registry Law was the
remedy—another found it in criminal laws; yet
if we had them all, they would scarcely accom-
plish the object. We needed them all. He cared
not what party was to be built up or put down
by them, he would vote for all measures calculated
to effect the object to any extent. All
these measures were calculated to do so; no one
of them could. But that something must be done
was obvious.
He referred to the passage of the single dis-
trict law by Congress—to the fact that Baltimore
must hereafter be entitled to at least two repre-
sentatives in that body, and thence argued the
necessity of the resolution as to that city, in or-
der that the intent of the law should not be de-
feated by persons in one of these districts calling
votes in the other. He alluded to the course
which had been adopted by Frederick county in
regard to the election of certain officers there ;
and contended that some general restriction of
the kind must be imposed. Five days, he admit-
ted, would not accomplish the object as effectually
as a longer period, but, as had been remarked
by a gentleman who had preceded him, if he
could not get a whole loaf he would take half a
loaf, since " half a loaf was better than no bread."
He desired that every restriction which promised
to accomplish the great object in view, should
be imposed, and even the restriction of five days
residence would give an opportunity to detect
and expose the false statements of men who
might otherwise fraudulently attempt to vote.
He should, therefore, vote in favor of that re-
striction, limited as it was, and should at the
proper time offer the proviso of which he had
given notice,
Mr. DORSEY rose; not, he said, to make a
speech, but to show what seemed to be a matter
of dispute, that these frauds and corruptions did
exist in the State of Maryland, and had, from
time to time called forth the action of the Legis-
lature for their suppression and punishment.—
He agreed with the gentleman from Baltimore
county (Mr. BUCHANAN,) that frauds did note exist
in that county. But what was the reason ? The
gentleman had claimed that it was because the
people themselves were immaculate and incor-
ruptible, beyond the reach of temptation or the
seductions of fraud. Now, perhaps. he (Mr.
D.) might assign a very different reason. In
Baltimore county there was a Democratic ma-
jority of some eight or twelve hundred votes,
or more. At all events, it was so enormous,
that no party would throw away its money in
attempting to colonize it or to commit frauds
upon the franchise. (Laughter.) Therefore, it
was, that these frauds did not exist in Balti-
more county, or in the other parts of the State.
(Renewed laughter.) He disclaimed any inten-
tion to make imputations on the city. He had
never seriously heard the charge of bribery there,
although be had heard of illegal voting.
But he had risen to show that this illegal vo-
ting had been a progressive kind of crime, and
that it ought to be prevented. He then read
from the Acts of Assembly the provisions appli-
cable to the point, and argued that the cor-
poration of Baltimore in the ordinances which
they had made, had not kept pace with the evil


 
clear space
clear space
white space

Please view image to verify text. To report an error, please contact us.
Proceedings and Debates of the 1850 Constitutional Convention
Volume 101, Volume 1, Debates 72   View pdf image
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>


This web site is presented for reference purposes under the doctrine of fair use. When this material is used, in whole or in part, proper citation and credit must be attributed to the Maryland State Archives. PLEASE NOTE: The site may contain material from other sources which may be under copyright. Rights assessment, and full originating source citation, is the responsibility of the user.


Tell Us What You Think About the Maryland State Archives Website!



An Archives of Maryland electronic publication.
For information contact mdlegal@mdarchives.state.md.us.

©Copyright  October 06, 2023
Maryland State Archives