Mr. MORGAN moved to amend the 14th sec-
tion, by striking out from the word "court," in
the third line, to the end of the section.
Mr. THOMAS moved further to amend the sec-
tion by striking out, in the third line, the words
"the Chancery Court."
Mr. THOMAS. I desire to say in offering this
amendment that it is in exact accordance with
the view of the Convention determining that
they will not have a separate chancery court for
the city of Baltimore. I am not prepared to say
that I would not now, instead of clothing the
Legislature with power to create a court here-
after commensurate with the wants of the city
of Baltimore, vote for three courts instead of
two. For the present, I shall vote for this part
of the bill, as it now stands, clothing the Legis-
lature with this power hereafter to be exercised
in the event of the increase of business and popu-
lation. Those who concur with me in saying
that we will not destroy the symmetry of the ju-
diciary system of Maryland by creating a chan-
cery court in the city of Baltimore, will not put
any obstacle in the path of those who desire to
review and reform our whole system of special
pleading. But I will not now establish a chan-
cery court in Baltimore to be left hereafter, per-
haps, without any jurisdiction at all, if common
law and chancery proceedings are blended. I
am willing to hear from the gentlemen from
Baltimore city what they require. I wish their
courts to be, as far as may be, organized upon
principles precisely analogous to those of the
county courts in the State.
Mr. GWINN, I move to postpone. I think it
material that we should note, as we go along, the
progress of the charity of this Convention to-
wards the city of Baltimore. We have demon-
strated, as we think, the utter incapability of
those two courts to perform the business of our
city. It is now proposed to make that helpless
which was incapable before. Can gentlemen,
for one moment, imagine that we conceive this
to be reform, and that we shall receive it as a
boons' Gladly would I return to the judiciary
system of the old constitution, rather than to
engraft upon our system that which leaves no
room for the enlargement of our business, and
which will plunge our commercial affairs into
inextricable confusion. To transfer the estates
of 908 insolvent debtors to a court which will
have to dispose of 600 and odd suits at common
law in the course of the year, gentlemen must
imagine that legal men in Baltimore possess
powers far beyond those of any county judge in
the State.
Mr. THOMAS. I shall be obliged to renew the
motion to postpone. My public acts, I think, will
justify me insaying that I have ever proved my-
self to be one of the most faithful friends of Bal-
timore. But sufficient for the day is the question
we have before us. Are we not about taking from
the judges of the courts of Baltimore city the necessity
or attending the Court of Appeals? Are
we not diminishing their duties in that respect?
Are we not abolishing imprisonment for debt,
and thus diminishing that branch of the duties |
of our courts growing out of insolvencies? I
anticipate that the Legislature will provide for
trying questions of fraud somewhat in this form
A., if be thinks B. has defrauded him, brings his
action in the county court for damages, by reason
of that fraud. If there is property, he can
reach it, and if not, there is no remedy. The
abolition of imprisonment for debt will dispense
with a large amount of business. When gentle-
men find that there is an honest difference of
opinion, they ought not to say that we are tram-
pling upon the rights of Baltimore. I stand
here ready to hear that delegation with the ut-
most cheerfulness, as to what their necessities
require. In the section from which I come, we
have but one judge for sixty-odd thousand people.
We have given to the Legislature express
power hereafter to give Baltimore another judge,
who is to be paid out of the State treasury, and
in that respect have given to that city a possible
privilege that no other portion of the State is to
enjoy.
Pending the question on these amendments,
At five minutes past three o'clock, P. M.,
Mr. JOHN NEWCOMER moved that the Convention
take a recess until five o'clock, P. M.
Mr. CHAMBERS, of Kent, moved that the Con-
vention adjourn.
Mr. JOHN NEWCOMER moved that the question
be taken by yeas and nays, which being ordered
resulted as follows:
Affirmative—Messrs. Chapman, Pres't, Morgan,
Dent, Hopewell, Lee, Chambers, of Kent
Mitchell, Donaldson, Dorsey, Wells, Randall,
Weems, Bond, Brent, of Charles, Merrick,
Howard, Bell, Chandler, Ridgely, Jas. U. Dennis,
Dashiell, Williams, Hodson, Goldsborough,
Eccleston, Phelps, Miller, Sprigg, McCubbin,
Bowling, Wright, Dirickson, McMaster, Hearn,
Fooks, Jacobs, Shriver, Biser, Thawley, Gwinn,
Stewart, of Baltimore city, Sherwood, of Bal-
timore city, Ware, Schley, Neill, Davis, Kil-
gour, Waters, Anderson, Holliday, Smith and.
Shower—52.
Negative—Messrs. Blakistone, Kent, Buchan-
an, Lloyd, Dickinson, Colston, Crisfield, Hicks,
Chambers, of Cecil, McLane, Spencer, George,
Thomas, Gaither, Annan, Sappington, Stephen-
son, McHenry, Magraw, Nelson, Fiery, John
Newcomer, Harbine, Michael Newcomer, Brewer,
Weber, Slicer, Parke, Cockey and Brown,
—29.
So the Convention adjourned until to-morrow
morning at 9 o'clock.
DEFERRED DEBATES.
THE SCHOOL FUND.
Remarks of Mr. Chambers, April 29th, 1851.
Mr. CHAMBERS said, when the opinion of the
House had been heretofore expressed by a vote
of 51 to 11, be had supposed this question had
been put to rest. He had then brought to the |
