members of the Legislature elected the State
agents. Thus they were in the second degree
from the people, and would any person tell him
they felt their responsibility to as much as if
elected directly by them?
Certainly not; for they were responsible to
those who put them in power, and could say lo
the people we have nothing to do .with you,
others put us here and we will answer to them. Now
we propose to bring these officers one degree
nearer to the people, to elect them by, and make
them responsible to the people, and could any
person doubt the beneficial results of such a
change from the present system? He thought
not. It was too plain for doubt.
How was it in New York, Pennsylvania and
Ohio? Did their legislature? elect their canal
commissioners and board of public works? No,
sir, the electors of the State made the selection.
They practised the doctrine of direct responsi-
bility to those most interested.
True it is, that we do not own any internal
improvements, as they do, we only hold stock in
them, but that in one company, at least, gave us
the entire control, and did not effect the great
principle he was discussing.
He would not have spoken were it not that
he came from a section of the Slate deeply inter-
ested in this subject, and on that account it was
proper that he should make known his views
here. It was most judicious to adopt the propo-
sition of the gentleman from Frederick, and
wherever circumstances would permit, elect all
officers by the people.
Mr. BROWN said:
If the gentleman from Frederick, [Mr. Thom-
as,] was in his seat he would not have had a sin-
gle word to say, nor occasion to allude to what
was said by the gentleman from Washington.
It, therefore, in some degree, devolved upon him
to take care of that measure. When he accept-
ed the nomination for a seat in this Convention,
he set forth his views in a communication, which
he published in a newspaper in Carroll county,
on the subject of Constitutional reform, and men-
tioned, at the same time, orphans courts, and de-
signaled many of the changes and next features
that ought to be introduced in the new Consti-
tution.
Mr. HOWARD asked the gentleman from Car-
roll to give way lor one moment?
Mr. BROWN bowed assent—when
Mr. HOWARD said:
That with the permission of the gentleman
from Carroll, who had kindly yielded him the
floor, for a moment, he begged leave to submit an
amendment which he thought might meet the
views of gentlemen all round.
He moved to amend the substitute by inserting
after the word "stockholders," in the fifth line of
first paragraph, the following:
"And shall appoint the directors in every rail
road or canal company in which the State has
the power to appoint directors, it shall also be the
duty of this Board to review from time to time,
the rate of tolls adopted by any company, and use
all legal powers which it may possess, to obtain |
the establishment of a rate which may prevent
an injurious competition with each other to the
detriment of the interests of the treasury of the
State, and report their acts annually to the leg-
islature."
The PRESIDENT. The amendment cannot now
be received. It will go upon the journal, and be
received when in order.
Mr. BROWN continued. He was about to say
he was committed to the people of his county, in
the late canvass for delegates to this Convention,
through the medium of the public prints, in
winch, as he had already stated, he had published
his views about constitutional reform. He had
also committed himself in the same communication
to vote to give the people the election of all
officers, that hold offices of such importance as
to justify it, or that could be elected without too
much inconvenience to the people. He, there-
fore, was in favor of the proposition of the gentleman
from Frederick. Now, the gentleman
from Washington, [Mr. Schley,] who first ad-
dressed the Convention, and whom be did not see
in his seat, took exception to language which
was absolutely not in the report itself, it was
not called a "board of public works," It was the
substitute for the printed bill that contained that
language.
Mr. SCHLEY explained, that the language
which he had cited was contained in a resolution
in relation to the public works.
Mr. BROWN then read the resolution and' pro-
ceeded by saying that the argument, as far as the
language of the report was concerned, was not
applicable. The heading, as thus expressed,
would not be inserted in the Constitution—that.
only which was on the journal would find a place
there. He was in favor of the proposition for
another reason, and which to his mind, was very
conclusive on the subject. He did not want to
leave any patronage whatever in the hands of
the Legislature—none—not in the smallest de-
gree, nor did he desire to leave any power to the
Legislature to amend the Constitution, or by the
exercise of any particular legislation, or action,
to effect a change in the relative political power
of the State. He was opposed to any patronage
whatever, beyond that which belongs to the pre-
siding officers of both branches of the Legisla-
ture, as in his opinion, it would have a corrupt-
ing and baleful tendency. And another reason
he had, was that the exercise of it would con-
sume their time. They were to hold a session
once only in two years, and he wanted their time
to be wholly devoted to making laws, and let the
people exercise all the power they could conveni-
ently to themselves. There was another reason
conclusive to his mind. The people were par-
ties in interest, and they could exercise the power
as easily as the Legislature. They were the tax-
payers, and they had a right to the power. The
gentleman from Washington ran a parallel be-
tween the case of the President and Vice Presi-
dent of the United States and those men—he
meant the board of directors of the public works
—and in relation to the electors of the two offi-
cial persons he had named. Now the people
who elected them, would take good care to learn |
