by party obligations. Mr. J. said, he by no
means intended to reflect upon the course of any
gentleman here or elsewhere, who took a differ-
ent view of this subject from him. He was aware
that in most of the counties, they were borne
down by popular feeling, and could not resist
the infections of party—therefore all may be
presumed to be acting according to the positions
in which they have placed themselves All that
he asked was, an equal charity to be extended
to him.
There were three propositions, or plans of ap-
portionment, before the Convention, amongst a
number of others, one of which, with or without
amendment would probably be adopted. The
first proposition upon which a vote was
taken, was the one of the gentleman from
Washington, [Mr. Schley,] which was re-
jected by a vote of 77 to 4. The next that of
his colleague, [Mr. Merrick,] by 78 to 4. The
next that of the gentleman from Kent, [Mr.
Chambers,] from the minority committee on re-
presentation, by a vote of 44 to 39, and others
have shared a similar fate.
Now, it appeared to him, as far as this showed
any thing at all, that after all those votes had
been taken, the Convention was as tar off from
a settlement of the question as when it commenced.
The three propositions which might
be considered before the House, although two of
them had been defeated, were the proposition of
the gentleman from Anne Arundel [Mr. Dorsey]
the proposition of the gentlemen from Wash-
ington, (Mr. Fiery,) and the proposition of the
gentleman from Kent [Mr. Chambers] which lat-
ter two, will come up under motions to reconsider
If any plan was adopted, it would be in proxim-
ity with one of those. Now, he meant to say
in relation to all those propositions, with a pro-
per modification, which he believed ought to be
made, in order to meet the true interests of the
State of Maryland—he would stand ready to
support of either of them.
He did not mean to lake the extreme ground of
the gentlemen from Worcester, (Mr. Jacobs,)
or Dorchester, (Mr. Phelps,) or Somerset, (Mr.
Dennis,) on the one side, or the gentlemen from
Baltimore city, (Messrs. Brent and Gwinn,) and
the gentleman from Carroll, (Mr. Brown,) on
the other. He did not mean to say, as had been
said there, that if certain gentlemen could not
have representation according to their views,
this Convention would be broken up in dis-
order.
He, (Mr. Jenifer,) did not mean to say that
if he could not get such a representation as he
desired for his own county that he was ready to
break up this Convention and go home. Far
from it. He came there, as he trusted every
member did, to do his duty, and frame a Consti-
tution, and although it might not embrace all his
peculiar notions, ye if it reformed abuses, justly
complained of, and did justice to all parts of the
State, to give it his support.
Mr. J. said, he had indicated the course he
preferred in the votes he had given on the proposition
of the gentleman from Kent, of the mi-
16 |
nority of the committee on representation. This
came nearer to his views than any other yet voted
on. He believed that his constituents would be
better satisfied with it, than any other before the
Convention. But that had been rejected, and
the question now was, after voting down so many
plans—what shall be done?
A portion of the representation from the city
of Baltimore, and some of the counties still hold
on for representation according to numbers.
Whilst some from the other counties desire no
change in the present system. Mr J. thought
both extremes wrong, and by no means calculated
to promote the interests of their respective
constituents. He was unwilling to place himself
in the position of either, but was in favor of a
lair and liberal compromise.
He had voted against the proposition of the
gentleman from Washington, (Mr. Fiery,) be-
cause he did not accept the amendment, he, (Mr,
J.,) offered, which would, in his opinion, have
obviated most of the objections to that plan, by
bringing up the representation of the smaller
counties in the House of Delegates, to three from
each which would make the House of Delegates
consist of eighty-two members—its present num-
ber—have placed it in it true light and position
before the people of the whole State. And, be-
fore he went further, he would say, that he would
not look at the ground upon which it was based
—whether it was population, or territorial; pro-
vided the result was such as came up to his
views.
Some gentlemen might call it one thing, and
some another, but if the whole, upon the result,
came up to what ought to be the representation,
to protect the interests of the smaller counties,
and the larger counties, and at the same time, do
justice to Baltimore, he was prepared to go for
it. And here he would say to the gentleman
from Worcester, (Mr. Jacobs,) who so ably ad-
dressed the Convention, and to whom he had lis-
tened with much pleasure, that he, (Mr. Jenifer)
could not stand rebuked by the declaration, "that
it was wrong to advance an opinion in favor of
compromise, until all other efforts to obtain the
desired object had failed." Belligerent powers
might assume that ground, hostile negotiators
might reserve their ultimatum until pushed to
the extreme.
But does it become a community of friends,
of freemen, of statesmen, assembled together to
frame a Constitution for the good of the whole,
to stand, it may be, forages, where all portions
of the State have adeep and abiding interest—by
acts of diplomacy to endeavor to gain apetty ad-
vantage over our own brethren? He thought
not.
The true and manly course was, for each sec-
tion of the State to have its interests and its wishes
made known, and upon a comparison of each
with the other, should they appear different—an
opportunity may be afforded of reconciling those
differences. Much has already been done by this
expression of open, honest opinions. When we
first met here, representation according to popu-
lation was claimed on the one side for the city of |
