whole community, and such a proposition would
not represent the foreigners more than under the
present system. Whenever a foreigner who was
a popular man, desired to be a candidate, and to
come to the Legislature—whenever he could get
elected to the Legislature, he was sent as any
other man would be. They did not look at his
birth, but they looked at his merits and popu-
larity.
The gentleman also said that this proposition
to district Baltimore, had nothing to do with the
rights of foreigners. They certainly would not
so understand it.
The gentleman had thought proper to refer lo
an article in the Baltimore "Argus.'' which he
said he understood had been written by a mem-
ber of that Convention, and which gave a proper
exposition of the principle of party organization.
The gentleman seemed to imply that the article
was written by himself, (Mr. B.) He was per-
fectly willing to avow the authorship of the ex-
tracts, and would state how they came to be pub-
lished. He found in the city of Baltimore, as
he supposed an attempt to misrepresent his posi-
tion in this Convention.
He had always seen, in the Convention, a man-
ifestation of party spirit, and an attempt to fast-
en that spirit upon the Constitution, although it
might not have been so designed, and he, (Mr.
B .) believed that it was party spirit which led
to the proposition to connect National with State
politics. He meant to place his situation before
his constituents, firmly and boldly upon that sub-
ject, so that if there was to be a party spirit man-
ifested in the Constitution the people of Balti-
more might understand it. For this purpose he
sent his own particular views to the organ of the
party to which he belonged, and expressly sta-
ted that he did not write them for publication,
and did not desire them to be published; but if
the editor approved his views he could express
them in his own language and in his own way.
He was greatly surprised to find them inserted.
He never concealed any thing. It was the second
time he had had anything to do with publica-
tions in newspapers. One was when he felt at
liberty to report the remarks of the gentleman
from Anne Arundel, (Mr. Dorsey,) about the
city of Baltimore—they not having any reporters
at that time.
He disapproved of this thing, and had nev-
never done it but in these two solitary instances;
once when he desired that the people of Balti-
more should know what had been said about
them, and again that his position in this Conven-
tion might be known by the party organ, and if
approved, he sustained editorially, in order to
guard against misrepresentation.
And now in regard to that article. The gen-
tleman from Charles had not construed it properly.
He did not take the position that Execu-
tive patronage must be retained in this Constitution.
What he meant was this: that before party
movements should be accomplished in the Consti-
tution, such as connecting the Presidential elec-
tion with the Gubernatorial election for party
purposes, that certain other requisites ought to
be required in the Constitution. |
The gentleman has asked if he. [Mr. B.,] was
opposed to bringing out a full vote at the Gover-
nor's election? Certainly not; he desired to see
the fullest vote—but if that full vote was to be
brought out, in order to bring national politics to
bear upon State elections and State policy, he
reprobated and condemned it.
He called upon gentlemen to read the article,
and see whether there is in the whole article,
any allusion to party considerations except to
repel and counteract party spirit appearing in this
Convention. He had always been willing to
strip the executive of his important patronage,
and desired to see the people have the right to
secure a Convention, independent of legislative
action hereafter.
He had only to say upon this question of rep-
resentation, that while he did not regard it, the
manner of its adjustment as a sine qua non, he
would not vote for any compromise in the House
of Delegates. If it passed without his vote, and
if those other measures passed, securing the right
of the people beyond legislative control, to periodical
Conventions, reforming and re-organizing
the, judiciary, and keeping separate the election
of Governor from national politics, he was pre-
pared to vote for the Constitution, and to deprive
the executive of all his important patronage.
This was the position he laid down on the fifth
February last
His friend from Charles had misunderstood
his vote on the Attorney General question. If
the gentleman had ever heard his remarks or ex-
amined his votes, the record would show that he
stated his position to be this: that he should vole
to abolish the present tenure of office, and let the
city of Baltimore and the counties elect their
prosecuting attorneys, and to let the whole peo-
ple elect by general ticket, an Attorney General
whose salary should be limited, thus abolishing
the present mode of tenure and appointment by
the Governor; and he gave his votes with this
object in view. He challenged any one to say
that he had been inconsistent.
He voted against the proposition of the gentleman
from Cecil to allow the Governor to em-
ploy counsel whenever it should be necessary,
and to leave the compensation to the legislature,
because he thought that the rate of compensa-
tion to be paid, should not be left to the legisla-
ture.
His friend from Charles had referred to hav-
ing met him before the people at the July term
of the Charles county court. He called upon
him to say whether, at that term, (when he was
merely nominated, but not elected to the Convention,)
he did not there publicly proclaim,
(being called out by his friend from Charles )
that he should, as a delegate, if elected, vote
for representation according to population in the
House of Delegates; and that if any compro-
mise was to be made, it should be made in the
Senate; that although the people of Baltimore
city, had given him no instructions, he intended
to pursue this course?
Mr, JENIFER replied that he was very happy
to have an opportunity of doing justice to the
gentleman, and he had intended, in the remarks |
