clear space clear space clear space white space
A
 r c h i v e s   o f   M a r y l a n d   O n l i n e

PLEASE NOTE: The searchable text below was computer generated and may contain typographical errors. Numerical typos are particularly troubling. Click “View pdf” to see the original document.

  Maryland State Archives | Index | Help | Search
search for:
clear space
white space
Proceedings and Debates of the 1850 Constitutional Convention
Volume 101, Volume 2, Debates 797   View pdf image
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space
797
Mr. PRESSTMAN made a few remarks, which
will be published hereafter.
Mr. BRENT, of Baltimore city. I do not rise
for the purpose of making any more remarks by
way of argument, nor to discuss the matters relative
to the claims of Baltimore city upon the
justice of the State. If gentlemen are not sat-
isfied new that Baltimore city has claimed noth-
ing but what is equitable, all I can say is, that
"He who is convinced against his will,
Is of the same opinion still."
The gentleman from Calvert, (Mr. Sollers,)
says, in regard to a quotation I had the honor to
make at some early period of the session, aboat
"Spirits of Fire"—
Mr. SOLLERS. You recollect it now; repeat it.
[Laughter.]
Mr. BRENT. In regard to that quotation, the
gentleman says he thought I referred to the Bal-
timore battalion, and he said that Gen'l. Twiggs
could tell about that battalion. If the gentleman
means to cast any imputation upon the courage
of that battalion,—
Mr. SOLLERS. I have not—I had no such idea.
Who would cast any imputation upon that batal-
ion, or even a section of it ? [Laughter.]
Mr. BRENT. I have no doubt the gentleman
would be rash to make any charges. I only say
this—that it did seem to me that the gentleman
made the remark for the purpose of imputing—
at least the imputation might be inferred from
it—that the courage of Baltimore city was as
much below par as he supposed its sense of jus-
tice; but I am glad that he has disclaimed such
imputations. I could, if necessary, refer the gen-
tleman to the monuments of Baltimore—to the
field of North Point, to Fort Henry, to her Wat-
son and Ringgold, as evidences of her courage,
her sense of honor and patriotism. I will not
permit the gentleman to class me as a mere local
representative. I am not contending for the rights
of Baltimore alone. I am contending for the
rights and equality of the whole State—not that
Baltimore is to wage war against the counties,
and the counties lo wage war against Baltimore,
but that every man in the State should have an
equal participation in the benefits of the govern-
ment and in the treasury of the State. I will
not agree to be represented as merely contending
for the local rights of Baltimore city. That is
least of it, and it would not even be policy here,
because this is an anti-Baltimore Convention. I
say that every vote given here has been to draw
an invidious distinction between Baltimore city
and the counties, and the distinguished gentle-
man from Kent, (Mr. Chambers,) stated the
other day that we already had passed a compro-
mise bill on the subject of representation, which
drew a distinction between counties and the city,
unfavorable to the latter. It is too true, sir, that
such a bill has passed, and I know full well that
is too late in the day to try to open the eyes of
this Convention to what is due to equal rights
and equal justice.
Mr. SOLLERS. I disclaim, utterly disclaim,
intending to cast the slightest imputation upon
the courage of the Baltimore battalion. I meant
no such thing, and I desire to be distinctly re-
corded. Under the shadow of the monuments
in the city of Baltimore, it would be rashness,
foolishness. I recollect something about North
Point and Fort McHenry, and I have seen the
inscriptions upon the monuments in Baltimore.
My opinion is, that the heroic deeds there com-
memorated will never be repeated by any peo-
ple now in that city. [Laughter.]
Mr. MORGAN. I only desire to say one word.
I endeavored when I was up before, to show by
reference to a single district—(I intended to con-
fine my remarks to the subject under considera-
tion)—that the basis adopted by this Convention ,
was founded upon no principle at all. And that
in carrying out the provisions of the Judiciary
bill, we would give to Baltimore city infinitely more
liberally than we have given to other sections of
the State. When the gentleman from Baltimore
city rose and stated to this Convention that with
the aid of the Chancery court, they could transact
their business in the city, I warned gentlemen
(and the Convention will bear me witness of it)
that they only had to abolish that court and then
a similar jurisdiction would be claimed for Balti-
more alone. I asked them to come forward and
remodel the system, if they desired it, and they
should have may assistance. This they refused to
do. Upon this refusal, those who have acted with
me, told the gentleman from Baltimore, in the
language of the gentleman from Frederick, (Mr.
Thomas,) that the symmetry of the system should
he carried throught the counties and cities, and
what was proper for the city of Baltimore should
in fairness and justice be extended to the coun-
ties.
I showed that in the first district there were
eight hundred and sixty-three original civil cases
and in the second district, one thousand and
thirty-one original civil cases, without counting
the equity causes, amounting to eleven hundred,
and that when the chancery court should be
abolished, it would be impossible for one judge
to discharge our business. I also showed that
Baltimore city, acccording to the returns, had
one thousand three hundred and thirty-six cases
leaving five hundred and seventy-eight of our ex-
cess over Baltimore city; and I asked, then, if
you gave us but two judges for the transaction of
our business, common law and criminal, how
could gentlemen claim for Baltimore city more
than two judges, divided into separate organizations,
with criminal and orphans' court officers?
But, sir, for fear that complaints were well
founded, we went further, and voted for a proposition
which has passed this Convention, that if
their necessities required it, the Legislature should
give them another judge, and that now is a part
of the Constitution. That if these two judges
cannot dispose of five hundred eighty-four cases
less than we have in the districts in which I
practice, they will have the privilege over us
(for we have denied the privilege to ourselves) of
coming here and claiming a judge of the Legislature.

The answer given to that, by the gentleman
from Baltimore city, (Mr. Brent,) was that it was
useless for Baltimore to come here and ask the


 
clear space
clear space
white space

Please view image to verify text. To report an error, please contact us.
Proceedings and Debates of the 1850 Constitutional Convention
Volume 101, Volume 2, Debates 797   View pdf image
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>


This web site is presented for reference purposes under the doctrine of fair use. When this material is used, in whole or in part, proper citation and credit must be attributed to the Maryland State Archives. PLEASE NOTE: The site may contain material from other sources which may be under copyright. Rights assessment, and full originating source citation, is the responsibility of the user.


Tell Us What You Think About the Maryland State Archives Website!



An Archives of Maryland electronic publication.
For information contact mdlegal@mdarchives.state.md.us.

©Copyright  October 06, 2023
Maryland State Archives