the committee, required provision to be made
for this additional judge in the city of Baltimore.
For one, therefore, I shall oppose any addition-
al aid afforded to the city of Baltimore alone—
because she is better provided for than my own
and the adjoining districts. But I am quite willing
to reconsider this whole judiciary department,
and correct the multitude of its errors and
defects.
Mr. BRENT, of Baltimore city. I did not mean
to lake part in this discussion, because I feel
mentally incompetent to discuss questions, when
fatigued and worn out by an afternoon session.
The gentleman from Calvert [Mr. Sollers,] has
said that this proposition for a judiciary is a part
of the all-grasping spirit manifested on the part
of Baltimore city in this Convention. I would
like him to specify how, where and when Baltimore
city has manifested any grasping spirit?
Mr. SOLLERS. I will answer, with pleasure,
"when Baltimore city wished representation ac-
cording to population"—
Mr. BRENT. In the first place, her delegation
was not united.
Mr. SOLLERS. I should think not.
Mr. BRENT. In fact, a portion of us compro-
mised on that subject; but we were all united in
the principle. This the gentleman calls an all-
grasping spirit—to desire equal rights! If this is
the only charge against Baltimore, we are very
willing to confess it, and plead guilty. I contend
for equal rights and equal justice, and I will also
give to every gentleman in the counties what I
think is right, proper and just. This Convention
has agreed to make Baltimore city one separate
judicial district. I think the action of her dele-
gation, united on that subject, ought to be re-
spected. I, for one, am perfectly willing to vote to
any other district of the State just such a judiciary
as her united delegation shall desire. If a united
delegation say that they need an additional judge,
I am perfectly willing to extent to them the same
measure of justice we ask for ourselves. I only
rise for the purpose of saying that the delegation
of Baltimore city is united on this subject—that
it is necessary that we should have a third judge.
Mr. SOLLERS. I have a. single observation to
make, and that is sufficient for Baltimore city.
When I stated here that this was but carrying
out the system of the all-grasping ambition of
Baltimore city, (and perhaps I ought to have said
that before to that city,) I said it deliberately,
and if was not with malice aforethought, but af-
ter due and proper consideration. If gentlemen
will recollect, at an early stage of the Conven-
tion, in the first place, Baltimore wanted representation
according to population. That is one
of the evidences of her disposition to grasp all
the political power of the State.
Mr, BRENT. I confess it.
Mr. SOLLERS. It will also be recollected that
she wished lo absorb and appropriate to herself
the school fund of the State set aside. Does she
confess to that?
Mr. BRENT. She wished an equitable share.
Mr, SOLLERS. The gentleman has confessed |
enough now to bang him, [Laughter.] These
ire two things. I say, after the most perfect
deliberation, I have no hesitation in saying, that
this is a part of the disposition on the part of the
people of Baltimore city, to grasp the political
and judicial power of the State, and no man out
of the city of Baltimore will deny it, I am sure,
They also wish to elect all the judges of the
Court of Appeals by general ticket throughout
the State. Does the gentleman confess to that?
Mr. BRENT. Yes, sir.
Mr. SOLLERS. Well, there is the third crime
in the. category. According to my idea, it is
criminal. If the various measures proposed by
the gentleman from Baltimore city had been car-
ried out, I do not hazard any thing in saying
that she would have had the entire political con-
trol of Maryland from one extremity to another.
The Board of Public Works was proposed to be;
elected in the same way as the judges of the
Court of Appeals, giving to the city that tremen-
dous political power for which the gentlemen has
contended. I do not say all of them, for there
has been some little dissension among them on
particular subjects, and I have nothing to do with
family quarrels.
I have said, and I repeat, we have, in one sin-
gle county, as many causes to determine as they
have in Baltimore county court. Yet I am told
this is no evidence of a disposition to grasp on
the part of Baltimore, when they ask for an ad-
ditional judge. I will not, cannot believe it. I
am a plain common-sense man, and take a com-
mon-sense view of things. It is evident, it is self-
apparent; and yet the gentleman says, that he
goes in for equal rights: Ah! Madame Roland
once said how many crimes have been committed?
And well may I say, how many crimes are com-
mitted, in this country, in the name of the sov-
ereign people? If the people were let alone on
these subjects, if it were not for the ambitious
and insidious designs of demagogues, who cor-
rupt the public sentiment, and then speculate on
it—if it were not for these, we would have a hap-
py people. Dr. Johnson says, it matters little
under what government we live; so far as indi-
vidual happiness is concerned. According to my
ideas of a republican representative government.
I cannot agree to that. But I do assert that
these demagogues do more harm, more injury
by attempting and frequently succeeding in cor-
rupting public sentiment, and speculating upon
it, than any others.
[The President's hammer here fall, the gen-
tleman's time having expired.]
Mr. BRENT of Baltimore city. It is not in my
power to reply to the eloquence of the gentleman
from Calvert. I cannot compete with him in
that But what is "the head and front of the offence"
of Baltimore city—what is her crime?
She demands nothing but equality. Her "offence
hath this extent no more."
Mr. SOLLERS. I said that she claimed more
than she is entitled to.
Mr. BRENT. I asked the gentleman to specify
what she clamed, and he said that she claimed
representation according to population. Is not |
