before its second session, after the adoption of
this Constitution, to provide for the establish-
ment of efficient common schools, adequate to
the education of every white child of this State."
Mr. McHENRY said:
It seems to me that we will not meet the ex-
pectations of the people of the State, if we do
not insert in the Constitution some provision on
the subject of education. I have drawn up one
which will interfere with the predilections of no
portion of the State, and which will jostle no
system at present in operation, but merely pro-
vides that the benefits of adequate instruction
shall be extended to children in those portions of
the State now destitute of any well constructed
plan of education. The greatness of every State
depends not upon its size, not upon the number
of its inhabitants but upon the virtue, intelligence
and patriotism of its people. There is no system
of police comparable to that furnished by an effi-
cient common school education, which trains up
the children of a community to be good citizens,
and dispense with a great portion of the cost of
government, as well as with much of the penal
machinery otherwise necessary; but, in its com-
plicated operation, inconvenient, discreditable
and enormously expensive. There never did
exist, nor never will exist in this world, any
state or distinguished in peace or war,
or illustrious in any respect, in which the educa-
tion of the young was not considered a matter of
primary importance and of paramount public ob-
ligation. I really think, that if the Convention
will give heed to the proposition, it will be found
to contain nothing objectionable to any member;
nothing likely to encounter the prejudice of any
portion of the community, and I ask a vote upon
it; being unwilling at this period of the session to
consume the precious time of this body, even in
reference to a topic involving the most vital in-
terests of our constituents, the promotion of
which, to the best of my judgment, untramelled
by personal or partizan considerations, has been
the polar star guiding my every vote movement
and action, so far as I have participated in the work
now nearly consummated by this Convention.
Mr. BOWIE moved to lay the article on the
table.
Mr. McHENRY moved that the question be
taken by yeas and nays,
Which being ordered,
Appeared as follows:
Affirmative-Messrs. Lee, Weems, Sollers,
Howard, Bell, Ridgely, Lloyd, Sherwood, of
Talbot, Colston, Williams, Goldsborough, Con-
stable, McLane, Bowie, Sprigg, McCubbin, Bow-
ling, Spencer, Wright, Jacobs, Thomas, Shriver,
Biser, Thawley, Ware, Schley, Neill, John New-
comer, Harbine, Michael Newcomer and Brown
-31.
Negative-Messrs. Chapman, Pres't, Morgan,
Blakistone, Dent, Hopewell, Ricaud, Chambers,
of Kent, Donaldson, Dorsey, Wells, Kent, Bond,
Brent, of Charles, Buchanan, Welch, Chandler,
Dashiell, Hicks, Eccleston, Phelps, Dirickson,
McMaster, Fooks, Sappington, Stephenson,
McHenry, Carter, Stewart, of Caroline, Hard- |
castle, Gwinn, Stewart, of Baltimore city, Brent,
of Baltimore city, Sherwood, of Baltimore city.
Fiery, Davis, Kilgour, Brewer, Waters Ander-
son, Weber, Hollyday, Smith and Ege-43.
So the Covention refused to lay the article on
the table.
Mr. BRENT, of Baltimore city moved to amend
said article by adding at the end thereof the
following proviso:
"Provided the expense of such education be
assessed on the several counties and city of Bal-
timore, for the schools within their limits respectively."
Mr. GWINN moved the the previous question,
which was seconded.
Then question recurred on the amendment
offered by Mr. BRENT, of Baltimore city.
Mr. BRENT, of Baltimore city moved that the
question be taken by yeas and nays,
Which being taken,
Appears as follows:
Affirmative—Messrs. Howard, Buchanan, Bell,
Welch, Chandler, Ridgely, Lloyd, Sherwood, of
Talbot, Colston, Dashiell, Constable, McLane,
Bowie, Sprigg, Bowling, George, Thomas, Shriver,
Biser, Annan, Sappington, Stephenson, Magraw,
Nelson, Gwinn, Stewart, of Baltimore city,
Brent, of Baltimore city, Sherwood, of Baltimore
city, Presstman, Ware, Schley, Fiery, John
Newcomer, Harbine, Michael Newcomer, Weber,
Hollyday, Fitzpatrick, Smith, Parke, Ege,
Shower, Cockey and Brown—44.
Negative—Messrs. Chapman, Pres't, Morgan,
Blakistone, Dent, Hopewell, Ricaud, Chambers,
of Kent, Donaldson, Dorsey, Wells, Weems,
Dalrymple, Bond, Sollers, Brent, of Charles,
John Dennis, Williams, Hicks, Goldsborough,
Eccleston, Phelps, McCubbin, Wright, Dirick-
sod, McMaster, Hearn, Fooks, Jacobs, Carter,
Thawley, Stewart, of Caroline, Hardcastle, Da-
vis, Kilgour, Brewer, Waters and Anderson—37.
So the amendment was adopted.
The question then recurred upon the adoption
of the article as amended.
Mr. BLAKISTONE moved to lay the article on
the table.
Mr. EGE moved that the question he taken by
yeas and nays,
Which being ordered,
Appeared as follows:
Affirmative—Messrs. Chapman, pres't.; Mor-
gan, Blakistone, Dent, Hopewell, Ricaud, Lee,
Chambers of Kent, Dorsey, Randall, Bond, Sol-
lers, Brent, of Charles, Howard. Bell, Lloyd
Dickinson Sherwood of Talbot, Colston, John
Dennis. Dashiell, Williams, Hicks, Goldsborongh,
Eccleston, Phelps, Miller, Bowie. Sprigg, Mc-
Cubbin, Bowling, George, Wright, Hearn, Ja-
cobs, Thomas, Shriver, Gaither, Biser, Thaw-
ley, Stewart of Caroline, Hardcastle, Stewart,
of Baltimore city, Presstman, Warp, Schley,
Neill, John Newcomer, Michael Newcomer,
Davis, Kilgour. Waters, Anderson, Hollyday,
and Brown—53.
Negative— Messrs. Donaldson, Wells, Weems,
Buchanan, Welch, Chandler, Ridgely, McLane,
Dirickson, McMaster, Fooks, Annan, Sapping- |
