did not make some protest against those efforts,
which tend to fasten upon us, of the southern
counties, a total disability to protect our peculiar
interests; without the power to do which, we
shall be a mere cypher in a legislative point of
view, in comparison with other portions of the
State. I cannot witness these efforts and hear
our counties and interests thus practically de-
nounced, as small, trifling, and unimportant,
without feeling a disposition to repel these attacks,
even though, I may be fully aware, that the de-
fence which I shall make, will be lame, feeble,
and insufficient for the accomplishment of any
desirable object.
These efforts come mainly, from a quarter,
from which, we expected them. We are not
without a warning, before hand given, that this
object, though smothered and evaded, in a mea-
sure, in the discussions which took place before
the people, more especially, in the less populous
counties of the State, was the leading object of
a large majority of the self styled, exclusive Re-
formers of this Convention. And it has been re-
iterated again, and again, by such gentleman,
that they do not regard as Reformers, those mem-
bers of the Convention, who refuse to come to
their aid; but who perseveringly and rightfully
too, stand by those principles of conservatism,
which they deem imperatively necessary for the
preservation and protection, of their just and equal
rights, privileges and interests. If to be opposed
to representation according to population, or to
such a plan of representation, as will place it be-
yond our power to protect certain local and pe-
culiar interests, which are attached, or belong
almost exclusively to the southern counties of
the State, constitutes an anti-reformer, then am
I, Mr. President, proud to be called an anti-
reformer; and even though, it may be a little
stigmatizing so to be considered, according to the
fastidious tastes of some gentlemen, still sir, I
claim to be an anti-reformer, if this is the stand-
ard rule, by which the title to the name of re-
former is to be tested.
The leading features of reform, as canvassed
and agitated before the people, have frequently
been repeated and referred to by gentlemen, in
the course of the present discussion, and invari-
ably, with very few exceptions, the question of
apportionment of representation was treated in
those canvassings, by those who now call them-
selves the only reformers, as a minor feature of
reform—one to which so much importance was
not attached, and was not due, as was attributed
to it by those gentlemen, who are now charac-
terized as anti-reformers, and who, in their dis-
cussions, warned the people of the importance
that would be attached to this question, by these
same self-styled reformers, when the Conven-
tion should come to act upon it To the very
letter, sir, these predictions have been verified.
How often has this question been referred to in
discussions here, by these "soi-disant" reformers,
as the all-absorbing question of the ses-
sion? How often have we been told that unless
the more populous portions of the State get what
they desire on this subject, they will reject the |
Constitution which we shall form? They there -
by make the settlement of this question, accord-
ing to their own peculiar notions, a "sine qua
non" upon which, the instrument which we shall
frame, shall be accepted. Here, then, is a gross
inconsistency on the part of many, between the
positions assumed before the people in canvass-
ing for an election to this body, and the portions
now occupied by those gentlemen, and to be oc-
cupied by others, who have not as yet made any
open demonstration, but who have shadowed
forth in various ways their intentions on this
subject.
There are in this body of reformers two
classes. One class is in favor of represen-
tation according to population, to the fullest ex-
tent; and the other for representation according
to population in the counties, with restrictions
upon Baltimore city. I regard both positions as
untenable and inappropriate, when applied to
the peculiar situation of Maryland.
Precedents which establish principles, as ap-
plicable to measures of policy, or any other mat-
ter, which are found by subsequent experience to
work well and prove worthy of adoption, are
well worthy of the favorable consideration of all
men. Consequently, we have frequently heard
precedents and examples, quoted and referred
to, by gentlemen, for the purpose of sustaining
the positions which they have assumed, and they
have been generally dilated upon, and regarded
as strong arguments in favor of such position. It
is right that it should be so—more especially,
when we have the evidence, that the establish-
ment of such principle, or the adoption of such a
measure of policy was prompted by pure, devoted
and disinterested patriotism. Founded on pre-
cedent, is the maxim in law, "res judicata pro
veritate accipitur."
Having this maxim in view, I will suppose,
and for the purpose of sustaining his position of
representation according to population, the gentleman
from Frederick, [Mr. Johnson,] has made
reference to the chartered privileges enjoyed by
the first settlers of the colony of Maryland. The
gentleman caused much of that old charter to be
read in the hearing of the convention, and seemed
to congratulate himself, that he had found some-
thing so ancient, upon which to sustain his doc-
trine But in his review of the charter, he
failed to show the applicability of the principle
and doctrine of equal rights, as established by
that charter, and conferred upon the first settlers
of the colony, to the circumstances and condi-
tion of the people of Maryland now. There is
something slavish—something that smacks of the
relation of master and servant, in the manner in
which these rights were conferred and received,
which is irreconcilable with the gentleman's pre-
viously expressed opinions of the people's sov-
ereignty, by virtue of which alone, they are enti-
tled to equal rights.
Again, sir, when that charter was so graciously
granted—when these boasted rights and privi-
leges were so kindly conferred, there were many
considerations, not applicable in our day, which
operated upon the grantor of the charter, as in- |
