the yeas and nays just taken, also asked to be
excused from voting, which was agreed to.
Mr. CHAMBERS, of Kent, moved that the Con-
vention reconsider their vote on the 9th section
of the report, which was agreed to.
Mr. CHAMBERS, of Kent, then moved to amend
the section by striking out in the 1st line, these
words, "No priest, clergyman or teacher of any
religious persuasion, society or sect," and in-
serting in lieu thereof, "No minister or preacher
of the Gospel of any denomination."
Mr. MAGRAW said that he would suggest to
the mover of the amendment, to insert the word
"Ordained."
Mr. CHAMBERS observed that his amendment
was precisely in the words of the old constitu-
tion.
Mr. DORSEY thought the gentleman, by his
amendment, was opening too wide a field, for
he only excluded preachers of the gospel.—
Now, suppose there were Mahometans, or Pa-
gans, or Jewish Rabbis, omnes est id genus, they
might hold office under the gentleman's amend-
ment.
Mr. CHAMBERS would leave the matter pre-
cisely as it stood. He had no connection with
Mahometans, or any of the description of peo-
ple alluded to by the gentleman.
Mr. DORSEY supposed the gentlemen from
Kent opposed to letting in Jews, and in saying
so, he (Mr. D.) formed his opinion from the rec-
ord; for he well remembered that several years
ago, 1825, when the Senate of Maryland passed
the bill confirming the right of Jews who be-
lieved in a future state, to hold office, his friend,
(Mr. Chambers,) who was opposed to it, did not
even call the yeas and nays on the passage of the
bill.
Mr. CHAMBERS said the bill did not read ex-
actly as the gentleman had described it,
Mr, DORSEY remarked that after the passage
of the bill in the House of Delegates, it went to
the Senate, and was passed by acclamation—no
yeas and nays being called for; and his friend,
(Mr. Chambers,) it appeared by the yeas and nays
taken during the session, was in the Senate that
day.
The question being taken on the amendment.
it was adopted.
And the 9th section, as amended, was agreed to.
Mr. DONALDSON gave notice of his intention
to move to reconsider the vote of the Convention
on the 4th section of the report.
On motion of Mr. TUCK,
The Convention took up for consideration the
24th section of the report, which had been passed
over informally, as will be seen by reference to
Journal, February 17th, viz:
"No Senator or Delegate shall, during the
term for which he shall have been elected, be ap-
pointed to any civil office in this State which shall
have been created, or the salary or emoluments
of which shall have been increased during such
term) and no Senator or Delegate, during the
time he shall continue to act as such, shall be
eligible to any civil office."
Mr. TUCK then offered as a substitute for said
lection, the following:
28
|
No Senator or Delegate of the Assembly, if
he shall qualify as such, shall hold or execute
any office of profit under executive appointment,
or receive the profit of any office exercised by
any other person under executive appointment,
during the time for which he shall be elected, ex-
cept that of Justice of the Peace,"
Mr TUCK said the object of his amendment
was to restore the provision on this subject, which
was in the Constitution prior to 1836. He
thought there should be an entire separation be-
tween the Executive and other departments of
the government. This was the theory of the
government, and he wanted it carried out prac-
tically. Since the amended Constitution of
1836, persons holding seats in the Legislature
had received Executive appointments. Of
course, he did not make any personal applica-
tion of his remarks. But he wished to prevent
what might become a source of contention. If
was easy to see that the Executive might exert
an improper influence in the Legislative Halls
if he could hold out inducements to members—
and where inducements were not held out, mem-
bers who were applying for, or who intended to
apply for office, would feel less freedom of ac-
tion when they knew that they might give votes
not quite acceptable to the Executive. There
should be no sympathy between the occupants
of these departments. In these times of office-
hunting, when men look to them as means of
support, and educate their sons in the expecta-
tion of filling similar places, corruption can
scarcely be avoided. Office-seeking is one of
the great evils of the day. The universal de-
sire for office, makes every appointing power a
petty despotism—and the officers or office-seek-
ers, the slaves almost of those above them. Dis-
appointment seems to have increased the num-
ber instead of diminishing it. They never give
over. Defeated in one point, they assail some
other—all the while eking out a scanty subsist-
ence on hope deferred, while, perhaps, an in-
teresting family is suffering for the necessaries
of life. Hence the greater necessity for guard-
ing this power by all the protections against
abuse that can he invented. Between the Gov-
ernor and Senate, there is a more immediate
sympathy—because they constitute the appoint-
ing power. No man can foresee the mischief
that might ensue if the Executive were to ex-
ercise in that body the unseen and yet powerful
influence of members on whose support he could
always rely—a reliance made safe and certain
by the obligation which a sense of one's own in-
terest sometimes imposes,
Mr. JENIFER thought the gentleman, (Mr.
Tuck,) was incorrect in his deductions. When
the appointing power was almost exclusively
in the Governor, or in the Legislature, a provision
of this kind might have been proper. But
under the new Constitution, all power will be
vested in the people.
He (Mr, J.) did not know that the Governor
would be left the power of any appointment
save his clerk and some few others of little im-
portance. One section will have the patronage,
perhaps, of issuing militia commissions. He |
