upon my friends from Queen Anne's county to
answer the plain question—whether they are re-
presenting the wishes of their constituents, both
Whigs and Democrats. There are too many of
us, I tell you, sir, anxious to be Governors, and
Senators and Members of Congress. [Laugh-
ter.] We are pandering to the interests of the
city of Baltimore in order to secure a few votes.
A gentleman here, from the Eastern Shore of
Maryland, assured me, and not me alone, but sev-
eral of his constituents, that he would be found
battling upon this subject by the side of Joe
Mitchelll [Great Laughter.]
Mr. SPENCER. Will the gentleman state to
whom he alludes ?
Mr. MITCHELL. Not to you, sir. But the
gentleman to whom I allude, stated that he would
be found battling with me, and upon this ques-
tion particularly. I call upon him now, and not
only upon him but upon his colleagues, and upon
all gentlemen whose interests are identified with
the Eastern Shore—will you give to the West-
ern Shore and the city of Baltimore, that power
which you have always possessed—and which
you have so nobly and generously exercised? I
call upon the Eastern Shore of Maryland to
pause in this matter—to pause before she—
[Here the hammer fell.]
Well, Mr. President, I have got some more
amendments to offer presently, [laughter,] I will
withdraw this one.
Mr. DORSEY moved to strike out "three-
fourths," and insert "one-half," so as to give a
representative for a fraction over "one-half" of
the ratio. An able argument, he said, had been
made by the gentleman from Allegany to show
that in other States the federal or white basis
ought to be adopted. He had cited, as examples,
to be followed by us, the cases of North Carolinia,
South Carolinia, Alabama, Georgia and
Louisiana, &c., where the basis was the white
population. Nobody knew better than the gentle-
man from Allegany, the great dissimilitude be-
tween the condition of the States referred to and
this State, and that consequently what was a pro-
per course for them to pursue, was no example
for us to follow. There the free and slave, black
and white population existed in nearly in the same
propositions in every portion of these States, In
Maryland, comparatively speaking, all the slaves
are located in some of the counties on the Eastern
shore and the more southern counties of the
Western shore. Nothing but a basis of repre-
sentation founded on the aggregate population,
was adapted to the condition of Maryland, or
could afford protection and security to the slave-
holding interests But in the States referred to,
all rights and intereats were equally protected
and guarantied, whether the federal basis, the
black or the white, the slave or the free popula-
tion were assumed as the basis of representation.
in either selection of a basis, the rights of all
were equally preserved. Far different would be
the condition of Maryland.
The adoption of the federal basis in the Con-
22 |
stitution of the United States, is relied on to
prove that the same basis of representation should
prevail in Maryland. Sir, there is not the weight
of a feather in such an argument; the cases are
wholly dissimilar. The lights of masters to their
slaves, are paramount to all powers transferred
to the Congress of the United States. Whether
Congress adopted the slave basis, the free basis,
or the white basis, was perfectly immaterial as
regards the rights of the master to his slaves, his
interest on that subject would have been in no
wise effected thereby. His rights to his slaves
depended upon the Constitution and legislation of
his own State. No power over them had been
granted to the United. States, and no basis of re-
presentation fixed by the Constitution of the United
States, or any legislation of Congress, could
in the slightest degree effect them. The federal
basis provided for by the Constitution of the Uni-
ted States, furnishes no rule of action for us, and
has not the slighest bearing upon the question
now before this Convention.
The practice heretofore adopted in all cases
was that any excess above one-half' the basis, gave
the right to an additional delegate, and the only
object in taking three-fourths as the basis or
ratio, was to take from Frederick county, and
from Baltimore county, each a delegate most un-
justly, and giving to Allegany and Washington
counties, the greatest delegation of which their
numbers were practicable, and continuing this
unjust inequality as to all the counties for the
longest practicable period. [Here the hammer
fell ] I submit to the gag law, sir—my five
minutes for explanation of my amendment have
expired.
Mr. DORSEY demanded the yeas and nays,
which were ordered, and being taken, resulted
yeas 29, nays 63, as follows :
Affirmative—Messrs. Chapman, President, Ri-
caud, Lee, Chambers, of Kent, Mitchell, Don-
aldson, Dorsey, Wells, Randall, Kent, Sellman,
Weems, Dalrymple, Bond, Brent, of Charles,
Merrick, John Dennis, James U. Dennis, Cris-
field, Williams, Hicks, Goldsborough, Eccleston,
Phelps, Bowie, Sprigg, McCubbin, Bowling and
Waters—29.
Negative—Messrs. Morgan, Blakistone, Dent,
Hopewell, Sollers, Jenifer, Howard, Buchanan,
Bell, Welch, Chandler, Ridgely, Lloyd, Colston,
Constable, Chambers, of Cecil, Miller, Mc-
Lane, Tuck, Spencer, Grason, George, Wright,
Dirickson, McMaster, Hearn, Fooks, Jacobs,
Thomas, Shriver, Johnson, Gaither, Biser, An-
nan, Sappington, Stephenson, McHenry, Magraw,
Nelson, Thawley, Stewart, of Caroline, Hard-
castle, Stewart, of Baltimore city, Brent, of Bal-
timore city, Sherwood, of Baltimore city, Presst-
man, Ware, Fiery, John Newcomer, Harbine,
Michael Newcomer, Kilgour, Brewer, Anderson,
Weber, Hollyday, Slicer, Fitzpatrick, Smith,
Parke, Shower, Cockey and Brown—63.
So the amendment was rejected.
Mr. DORSEY moved to strike out "six" and in- |
