has come here for the purpose, if possible, of
obtaining representation according to popu-
lation. I believe that this amendment enun-
ciates that principle. And if any plan could
be adopted by this convention to carry into
effect the provisions of the proposition of the
gentleman from Prince George's, I, as one
of the delegates from Baltimore city, pledged
as I am to endeavor to obtain representation
according to population, would feel obligated'
to vote for that proposition.
But the amendment of the gentleman from
Frederick (Mr. Schley,) which was adopted by
the convention last night, contains, I believe,
the principles upon which this convention
has determined to act, and the principles
upon which this apportionment is to be made.
I voted for that amendment, because it gives
Baltimore city at least a PART of what she
claims, and more than she had before, whilst
I am constrained to say that it does not give
Baltimore city all she is entitled to have.
But the members from Baltimore city have
come to this convention, and hare here parted
with a part of the representation to which I
consider she is justly entitled, in order to
produce unanimity and harmony in this con-
vention. I look upon it as a proposition
which has already been adopted by this
house. And in so far as it creates a basis of
representation up to five members, it goes
strictly upon representation according to
population; but when it leaves that number,
it does not go upon that principle. In my
opinion, it is an invidious distinction in favor
of the smaller counties as against the city of
Baltimore and the large counties. Therefore,
that is a reason why the small counties should
not object to the adoption of this provision.
They get more than I say they are entitled
to; they get it by this compromise; and
therefore the more reason why they should
favor it. Baltimore city gets less than she is
entitled to; and less than we bad any expec-
tation we would get. I am aware it is rather
hard on the larger counties; but it is much
harder on the city of Baltimore. But for the
sake of harmony, she is prepared to throw
away her increased representation; and I
think the counties should meet her ia the
same spirit of harmony, and act as a unit
upon this subject.
I have a statement here, which was prepared
bv myself, last night, and compiled from the
census, showing the great preponderance
which the smaller counties gain over Balti-
more city by this measure :
Present Proposed White
Counties and city, rep'n, rep'n. pop.
Allegany............... 4 5 27,215
AnneArundel........ 3 2 11,704
Baltimore city........ 10 18 184,520
Baltimore county.... 6 6 46,722
Calvert................. 2 1 3,997
Carroll................. 2 5 22,525
Caroline............... 3 2 7,604 |
Counties Present Proposed White
rep'n. repr'n, pop'n.
Charles................. 2 1 5,796
Cecil.................... 3 4 19,904
Dorchester............. 3 2 11,654
Frederick.............. 6 6 38,391
Harford................ 3 4 17,971
Howard................ 2 2 9,081
Kent.................... 2 1 7,347
Montgomery.......... 2 2 11,349
Prince George's..... 3 2 9,650
Queen Anne's........ 2 2 8,415
Somerset............... 4 3 15,332
St. Mary's............. 2 1 6,798
Talbot.................. 2 2 8,106
Washington,,........ 5 5 28,305
Worcester............. 3 3 13,442
That statement shows conclusively to my
mind that the proposition of the gentleman
from Prince George's (Mr. Clarke) was the
better one if it could be adopted, and one
which I frankly confess I would vote for if
there was any prospect of its adoption.
If gentlemen will look back lo the history
of Maryland, they will find out that this
basis of representation, which has been the
basis for years and years past, is a mere dis-
tinction without any principle at all. By re-
ference to volume one of McMahon's Mary-
land, they will find the reasons which first
induced the men of provincial Maryland, be-
fore Maryland was erected into a State, to
adopt this principle. On page 449 will be
found the following:
"From the colonization until 1650, the
right of representation had no regular char-
acter. Sometimes the assemblies bad the na-
ture of the "Ecclesia" of the Athenians.
They were assemblies of the freemen gener-
ally, rather than of representatives. Every
freeman had a right to be personally present ;
and this right being a personal privilege, like
that of a member of the English House of
Peers, be might appear in person or by proxy,
or join in the election of delegates, at his op-
tion, When the assemblies were so consti-
tuted, the government was a pure democ-
racy—being administered by the people in
person. At other times, the freemen were
permitted to appear only by delegates or de-
puties, elected in the manner prescribed by
the warrants of election. The three sessions
of 1640, and those of July, 1641 and 1642,
were of the latter character; the other ses-
sions were of the former, which was the pre-
vailing character. After the commotions of
the civil war bad ceased, and the govern-
ment was restored to the proprietary by
Cromwell's commissioners, viz: from 1659,
the assembly consisted only of delegates; and
from that period the right of making proxies
or appearing personally, wholly ceased.
Yet it was not until 1681, that any restric-
tions appear to have been imposed upon the
people in the choice of delegates. By the
proprietary's ordinance of 6th September, |
