with great propriety of a mode of controlling
these companies. He, [Mr. D.,] thought it was
only a few years ago, since the Susquehanna rail
road company, did not pay when the executive
officer thought that it should pay. That officer
conceived it to be his duty to look into the mat-
ter, and the result had been a payment into the
State Treasury since.
This was more broad. A guarantee law was
passed by the State of Virginia, to guarantee the
bonds of the Chesapeake and Ohio canal com-
pany. The Governor thought it was not consis-
tent with the company's chartered powers, to give
this guarantee, and he wrote to the President
asking information on the subject. When the
answer was made, he referred the letter to the
Attorney General, who decided that the company
had a right to exercise what they proposed to
do. He merely mentioned this to show that: the
Governor had the control, or thought it his duty
to look into the matter—a control which, in his
humble judgment, ought to rest on this
single head—the Executive officer of the State.
He would not lesson his responsibility by divid-
ing it with any board.
Mr. HOWARD thought that the gentleman was
unfortunate in selecting the case he had brought
up. The Governor suggested a violation of duty
on the part of the Susquehanna Railroad Compa-
ny, and the Legislature appointed a committee
to examine into it. The ground which was ta-
ken was, that the company had no right to apply
any portion of their accruing revenues to the en-
largement of the means of conveyance or trans-
portation, never mind how much the wants of
the community required it. That was the dis-
tinct point of accusation brought against the
company. The Committee of the House of Dele-
gates who went to Baltimore to examine into
the matter, composed of gentlemen of both politi-
cal parties, unanimously reported that the Gov-
ernor was wrong and the company right. The
idea that the Governor suggested was abandon-
ed on all sides. The company went on to pro-
vide the necessary means of transportation, out
of the revenues of the Company, before they paid
it into the treasury of the State How did the
remarks of the gentleman apply to the case be-
fore them? He, (Mr. H.,) did not understand
that there was any proposition before them to
vest the power in the Governor. How did the
Directors of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad
hold their places? Had the Governor any su-
pervisory power over them ? Unless some change
had taken place recently in the legislation of the
State, of which he was ignorant, they held their
places by a. tenure which was equivalent to a ten-
ure for life or good behavior—by the concurrent
votes of the two Houses. They who were legis-
lated in must be legislated out.
Mr. BROWN said, that they were appointed by
the Legislature, and not by concurrent vote.
Mr. HOWARD considered that as they were
elected by both Houses, that therefore it was by
concurrent vote. This had been the condition of
the directors for the last twelve years. There
had been no changes except occasionally of some |
individuals; they had remained there undisturb-
ed, because both branches of the Legislature had
never been able to agree to appoint others. So
that in fact these directors held their power en-
tirely independent of the Governor, of either
House, or of the Stockholders. This state of
things was not right.
He did not wish to find fault with the direc-
tors. He had no doubt but that they had labored
assiduously to carry out the important duties
devolved on them. But no one had any control
over them, and he desired to put a supervisory
power somewhere. Suppose that they should
not agree to the plan proposed for equalizing the
tolls—in such case they must remove them and
appoint somebody else who would. They were
vesting power here fully in the various depart-
ments of government. They bad confided to the
people vast power. They might, abuse it if they
choose, but who could help it? They placed
the pardoning power in the hands of the Govern-
or; he might abuse it All power was liable to
be abused. He would say plainly, that he be-
lieved that this power might be misused for po-
litical ends. He hoped it would not. But under
the conviction that wherever they placed pow-
er, it might be abused—he was inclined to sup-
port this proposition. He was in favor of exer-
cising a control over all these directors. His
sole object was to vest them with such control
as they could; place in their bands all the power
of the State; and if they could not do it, they
could appeal to the Legislature to carry out the
view with a single eye to benefit the treasury,
and to stop this ruinous competition of these
respective companies with each other.
Mr. SCHLEY moved to amend the amendment
of Mr. HOWARD, by inserting after the word
"canal," the words "or banking."
Pending the question this amendment,
At five minutes past 3 o'clock, P. M.,
Mr. DAVIS moved the Convention adjourn,
Which motion he waived to enable Mr. THAW-
LEY to renew the notice, that on to-morrow he
should move to reconsider the vote of the Convention
on the resolution adopted in favor of
Henry G. Wheeler, the reporter to the Con-
vention.
The Convention then adjourned until to-mor-
row morning 9 o'clock.
TUESDAY, April 15,1851.
The Convention met at nine o'clock.
Prayer was made by the Rev. Mr. GRIF-
FITH.
The roll of the members was called,
And a quorum being present,
The journal of yesterday was read and ap-
proved.
Mr. THAWLEY, (in accordance with the notice
given by him on yesterday,) moved to reconsider
the vote of the Convention on the resolution adop- |
