rent to the payment of creditors till the debts of
the owners were entirely extinguished. But if the
profits of a farm were applied to that purpose,
what would become of the family who owned it,
while it was passing through this course of re-
demption? They would be under the necessity
of contracting debts, on the credit of their rever-
sionary interest; and by the time a farm was re-
leased from old liabilities, it would be necessary
to place it under the management of new trus-
tees for the payment of another set of creditors,
In the mean time, it would be going out of repair
and becoming of less value; and, if sold at last,
Would bring considerably less than if sold in the
first instance. He hoped the Convention would
dismiss this subject, aswell as all others that
ought to be left to the Legislature, and proceed
in the consideration of such articles as ought to
find a place in the Constitution.
Mr, MICHAEL NEWCOMER moved the previous
question, which was seconded :
The question was then put on the amendment
offered by Mr. TUCK; and was agreed to
The question then recurred upon the adoption
of the section as amended;
Mr. PHELPS moved that the question be taken
by yeas and nays, which being ordered appeared
as follows:
Affirmative.—Messrs. Blakistone, Pres't pro tem.
Hopewell, Lee, Sellman, Weems, Bond, Sollers,
Sherwood, of Talbot, Dashiell, Hodson, Phelps,
Bowie, McCubbin, George, Dirickson, McMas-
ter, Fooks, Jacobs, Carter, Thawley, Stewart of
Caroline, Hardcastle, Brewer, Weber, Fitzpatrick,
Smith and Ege—27.
Negative.—Messrs. Ricaud, Chambers of Kent,
Donaldson, Dorsey, Randall, Howard, Buch-
anan, Bell, Welch, John Dennis, James U. Den-
nis, Williams, Constable, McCullough, Miller,
McLane, Tuck, Spencer, Grason, Wright, Shri-
ver, Gaither, Biser, Annan, Stephenson, Magraw,
Nelson, Gwinn, Brent of Baltimore city, Sher-
wood of Baltimore city, Ware, Schley, Neill
John Newcomer, Harbine, Michael Newcomer
Davis, Anderson, Parke, Cockey and Brown—41.
So the amendment was rejected.
Mr. SOLLERS moved to amend the report of
the committee on the legislative department, by
adding at the end thereof, as an additional sec-
tion, the following:
"The Legislature shall grant no charter for
banking purposes, or renew any banking corpo-
ration now in existence, except upon conditi
that the stockholders and directors shall be liable
in their individual capacity for all of said res-
ponsibilities of said corporations, whether upon
note, bill or otherwise, and upon the further con-
dition that no director or other officer of said corporation
shall borrow any money from, or have
any accomodation at, or otherwise deal with said
corporation, except as to salaries, and if any of
said directors or other officers shall upon convic-
tion in any court of law in this State, be found
guilty of having borrowed or dealt with said corporations,
except as to salaries as aforesaid, the
person so offending shall be punished by confinement
in the penitentiary for such time as the
96 |
Legislature may hereafter prescribe, and the
charter of said banking corporation shall be for-
feited forever,"
Mr. SOLLERS said:
That he offered this proposition in sincerity,
and with a deep sense of the responsibility which
he owed to a portion of the people of the State.
He called for the yeas and nays on the adoption
of the proposition.
Mr, BRENT, of Baltimore city, referred to the
constitution of the State of Louisiana, to show
that that State had gone much further in this
matter than was proposed by the amendment of
the gentleman from Calvert. He was in favor
of creating a competition in this business as well
as in others, and believed that the community
would bejust as well taken care of by the intro-
duction of a well regulated system of free bank-
ing.
Mr. BUCHANAN considered this as one of the
very best propositions that had been offered to
the Convention from the day of its commence-
ment to the present hour, and of course he
should vote for it with cheerfulness. But he
rose to make a suggestion, which he hoped
would be adopted. This amendment proposed,
among other things, that the stockholders should
ha held responsible in their individual capacity,
for all losses sustained by the corporation. Very
often widows and minors were stockholders, and
he thought that such stockholders and others of
a like character, should not be made responsi-
ble. He would offer an amendment to meet this
state of the case. If the gentleman would accept
it—well. If not, he would offer it as an indepen-
dent proposition,
Mr. SOLLERS could not accept the suggestions
and desired to know if any objection could be
made to his proposition? He stood here pre-
pared to repudiate any objection that might be
offered to it. Why was it that stockholders and
corporations should not be responsible as wall
as individuals. He would give his reasons why
they should be. He knew that these gentlemen
—officers of the banks—(he did not say of all
the banks,) made panics and speculated upon
them. He knew that when the cashier presen-
ted an account before the directors, and told
them that a certain amount had been discounted
that day, that the directors shared it among
themselves, and shaved the honest people. He
appealed to the democracy of this house, (they
were all democrats in one sense,) to vote for
his preposition. It was his desire to make
these bank officers honest, and keep them from
speculating on the miseries) necessities and pov-
erties of other people.
Mr. WEEMS was exceedingly sorry to differ
with his colleague on this subject.
Mr. SOLLERS. Is not the gentleman a direc-
tor of the Farmers' Bank of Maryland ?
Mr. WEEMS. I am, and will further answer
the gentleman, that although I am a director in
that bank, I am not actuated by any sinster mo-
tives.
Mr. SOLLERS. Not at all, sir. |
