there was a difficulty in his mind. What was to
become of other classes of claims besides those
mentioned in the proposition? It seemed to him
that they would be thrown out entirely. He
thought that the proposition was right in itself,
and he was in favor of it on the broad principle
that if a man died, and his real estate would pay
the debt and interest, it should be done without
sacrifice to the heirs at law. But if they pro-
vided merely for judgment or other liens, they
made no provision for promissory notes or other
accounts. He desired the phraseology so altered
that. all the debts would be provided for.
Mr. RANDALL was of opinion that this matter
should be very carefully considered. He be-
lieved, though he could not speak with certainty,
that similar laws in Kentucky and Virginia had
been repealed, and he was satisfied, from those
who had experienced the inconvenience of it,
that it had been attended with litigation and loss
in every respect. What was the condition of the
landed interest in this State? Was not the Con-
vention aware that there was the utmost difficul-
ty in obtaining money on landed security, with all
the facilities now afforded by sale of the land to
pay the debt? He knew it personally. As the
gentleman from Baltimore city had said, it would
injure the very persons whom it was intended
should be benefitted by this measure. But the
answer to the whole proposition is this: The
parties can now, by contract, do this very thing-
give this very security. Now who has ever been
unwise enough to lend money by contract on such
terms as you propose to require of all. The pro-
-vision as to the future would be a dead letter—as
to the past it would be void. Were there not
judgments and mortgages now existing, under
which parties had contracted their obligations to
pay, and securing the creditor by a right to sell
the land? Could the Legislature impair these
contracts ? Under the Constitution of the United
States, no law could be enacted by a State, im-
pairing the obligation of a contract. Here were
mortgages made by individuals, securing to their
creditors a right to sell the land to pay the debt
when due. If it should be attempted to prevent
that, those who appealed from such a decision
would certainly have it reversed, and the action of
this Convention annulled, because, under the Con-
stitution of the United States, they could pass no
law impairing the obligation of a contract. He,
therefore, saw great difficulty in that point of
view.
Besides, how were they to determine whether
an estate, in seven years, would pay the judgement
or lien, as proposed ? This would require
preliminary investigation of some court of jus-
tice, at great expense, additional to all costs now
incurred. He thought the Convention should be
cautious how they incorporated into the Consti-
tution a provision entirely unknown to the laws
of this State, and which might be productive of
loss and litigation to the people of the State, and
certainly would essentially injure the very class
of people whom it was intended to benefit. By
adopting this provision, they required the Legis- |
lature to do what was directly in conflict with
the Constitution of the United States.
Mr. DORSEY considered this as a very extraor-
dinary proposition, to be seriously agitated in this
Convention at the present day. He recollected
that some forty or fifty years ago, a somewhat
similar measure was pressed upon the Legisla-
ture at atime of unexampled public and private
distress and pecuniary difficulties; and even then
it was stigmatized as unjust and impolitic, and
as indicating a great want of sound morality, if
not of common honesty. It soon became odious
in the eyes of the public, and subsequently was
universally condemned.
For the introduction of such a proposition at
the present day, no apology can be offered. He
regretted that under the present despotic ruling,
or as it is called the gag law of this Convention
he had not time to state the innumerable objec-
tions he had to this proposition. If it was in-
tended to apply to any contract now in existence
it was unconstitutional, and therefore, null and
void. It appeared to him it would operate most
injuriously to a gentleman whose fortune con-
sisted in real property. Money could not be bor-
rowed on mortgages, judgements or leins of any
kind. If a man died, his property could not
be sold for the payment of his debts. They
could not pass a provision that would ope-
rate more injuriously and unjustly upon land-
holders. A Chancery court could not then pass
a decree to sell property. They could not grant
any such relief, although it might be indispen-
sably urgently necessary, where minors were
concerned. The heirs of a deceased person would
be kept seven years without their money, no mat-
ter how urgently creditors, heirs and all persons
concerned might desire a sale, and thus they
might be ruinously injured by it. In his mind,
there were insuperable objections to the engraft-
ing of such a provision in the Constitution. By
it they would put an end to all mortgages and all
liens, founded upon large, real or other estates.
As the Legislature had ample power to pass laws
in relation to this subject, they should leave it to
them, to act upon it if the people required it.
They should not permit an article in the Consti-
tution which might operate injuriously, because
it could not be remedied without the calling of
another convention.
Mr. GRASON said:
That next Monday had been fixed for the day
of adjournment, and he thought the Convention
would be able to complete their labors by that
time, if members would refrain from submitting
propositions that more properly belonged to the
Legislature. A new measure was now intro-
duced, and if others of a like character were sub-
mitted and all of them discussed, the Convention
would be in session till harvest. The scheme of
renting instead of selling real estate, had been
occasionally under discussion in the Legislature
for more than twenty years. If, during that long
period, the policy of such a law were considered
doubtful, would it be wise to adopt it now as a
constitutional provision? It is supposed that
many real estates might be saved by applying the |
