of the State, was in the December session of
1825, chapter 166. That act constituted a hoard
of public works to consist of nine, eight of
them, named in the bill, of the most intelligent
and respectable men in the State, and the Gov-
ernor to be ex officio the presiding officer of
that board. They were under the law required
to investigate and examine all the various por-
tions of the State, to ascertain where improvements
might be advantageously made. At that
time there was a perfect mania upon the sub-
ject, spreading not only throughout the State of
Maryland, but throughout the nation. Almost
every creek in the State was examined and sur-
veyed, in order to determine how far it was
practicable to make valuable improvements.
A very short time afterwards the system was
changed, the board of public works abandoned,
and then the Treasurer was directed to vote
either in person or by proxy for the stock of
the State. In the December session of 1833,
chapter 318, we find the next action of the le-
gislature upon the subject. By that act the
Governor and Council was directed to appoint
three competent persons to represent the stock
of the State. They then fixed the compensa-
tion at $4, per diem, and itinerant charges such
as were given to members of the legislature.
They were required to vote in all the joint
stock companies of the State where the State
had an interest. That continued from 1832 To
1840.
In the December session of 1840, chapter 155,
the change was made to election by concurrent
vote. Five agents were at that time appointed to
perform all the duties which had previously de-
volved upon three. They were required in ad-
dition to report annually the proceedings of their
board to the legislature. In the December ses-
sion of 1841, there was a still further change
upon the subject; and at that time they changed
the mode of compensation from the per diem
and itinerancy to a fixed salary of $100. From
that time to the present that system has been in
operation.
[In 1847, I was chosen a member of the
board of directors. At that time the bill had
been passed for the completion of the Chesa-
peake and Ohio Canal: that bill having passed in
1844. The State had been exceedingly anxious
that that bill would be carried out, and that the
great object which the people of the State had
so much at heart, should be accomplished. Various
difficulties presented themselves. A con-
tract for the completion of the work had been
made, but the laws was very stringent, and the con-
tractors were unable within the time to carry it
out. Very shortly after I came into the board,
we were successful in entering into a contract
for the completion of the Chesapeake and Ohio
Canal. At that time the duties of the State
agents had become very arduous. They had
concurrent jurisdiction under the law of 1814
with the directors in the formation of a con-
tract lor the completion of that great work.
We were bound then, after entering into the |
contract, before it became valid, to obtain the
concurrence of the agents of the State. The conse-
quence was that we had frequent meetings, at
all of which the agents were bound to attend,
and I am happy to say the duty was performed
promptly by the gentlemen constituting the
agency. The work has happily been completed;
we hope soon to enjoy the full ad vantages which
were anticipated by the most ardent friends of
the work. And now, when the work is completed,
a change In the system of government is
proposed—for what purpose is manifest, I am
sure, to every gentleman in the Convention.
The proposed change which I shall first con-
sider, is the bill proposed by the gentleman from
Frederick, [Mr. Thomas,] and I regret that he
is not here to clay, for I should have been glad
to hear from him a further explanation of his
views. What good is to result, from the change
I cannot myself see. The whole responsibility
and control of the matter is left with the President
and Board of Directors. The agents of
the State have no further duties to perform than
merely to act at stockholders' meetings, and to
vote for the President and Directors. When
they have done this, their functions cease for the
year. They can have no supervision over the
work, because the charter gives the entire con-
trol to the President and Directors. I cannot
for my life, conceive why agents selected by the
people of Maryland, would be more likely to se-
lect competent and proper persons for the faith-
ful performance of that duty, than agents ap-
pointed in the present made. The Legislature
are as competent, and I think much more so,
to select gentlemen to perform the mere office of
'voting for the State, than the people of the State
at large. In nominations we all know how
things are effected; and we know, too, that for
the office they would be more likely to fix upon
ambitious politicians, and very frequently bro-
ken-down and hacknied politicians, for the pur-
pose of giving them some little eclat in their
ranks as politicians, than men because of their
merit.
The gentleman from Frederick proposed, al-
though not named in the bill, the salary of $100.
I would ask what gentleman would consent that
his name should go before the voters of some five
or six counties, and after he should have been
elected, to go to Baltimore or some other point,
twice in the year for the purpose of performing
the required duties, for such a salary? They are
required to meet in June, when the stockholders
appoint a committee, who examine the report
and the action of the Board during the past year.
They meet again after some thirty days, to act
upon the report and to elect President and Di-
rectors. If the officers have been faithful in the
discharge of their duty, they are re-elected; if
not, the stockholders have it in their power lo
make a change. That state of things must continue
to exist, whether the agents of the State are
appointed as at present, or elected by the people;
and I see no necessity for making a change. I am
opposed to the whole matter, as one with which |
