cities and counties have a reversionary inter-
est in it; and as soon as the debt is paid they
become the distributers of its revenue. And
who shall have the benefit of that increase?
The State of Maryland and its people who
have borne heavy taxation for twenty or
thirty years, or some private stockjobbing
corporation, that has never paid one cent of
the taxes, but which sees an opportunity for
a great investment, a magnificent speculation
at the cost of the people of Maryland, and
who are now anxious to get it into their
hands? If it is going to increase, let the peo-
ple of Maryland who have paid for it, and
who have borne heavy taxation for thirty
years, have the benefit of that increase.
There is no reason why we should take
hurried action in this matter. I see clearly
that we are going to array against us thou-
sands of men, whose convictions I have very
faintly attempted to utter, and whose inter-
eats are all embarked in this matter. I should
prefer greatly to see this whole section as it
stands here stricken out, and the old one con-
tinued, continuing the State's interest, and
giving to the counties and cities their rever-
sionary interest. If there is nothing to be
made you may be sure that private stock-
jobbers are not going to buy. They have
counted the cost; they know all about it.
If they have made up their minds that this
property is not going to be enhanced in
value, they will not become the purchasers
of it, and if it is going to enhance in value,
then let the people have the benefit of that
increased value. I say, therefore, in view of
all these considerations, I shall vote very
heartily against the sale of the State's inter-
est in these public works.
Mr. RIDGELY. I have but a word or two
to say, and shall only propose to answer one
single view which has been taken by the
gentleman from Howard (Mr. Sands.) I
take it for granted that his objection to this
proposition confines itself exclusively to that
part which refers to the sale of the Chesa-
peake and Ohio Canal, with other works
comprehended within what might be termed
the second branch of the proposition reported
by the select committee. The first branch is
not obnoxious to his criticism, for the reason
that it does not propose to sell any interest
whatever, but merely to exchange the State's
interest in the Baltimore and Ohio railroad
company, for an equal amount of the bonds
or registered debt now owing by the State.
Mr. SANDS. Will the gentleman allow me
to ask him one question? What is the dif-
ference between stock-jobbers, who want this
interest, going into the market and buying a
certain amount of the State debt and paying
that over to the State, and paying so much
in money to the State?
Mr. RIDGELY, There is no difference, be-
cause neither of those aspects of the case is
contemplated. The proposition is to barter |
or exchange the State's .interest in that work
for an equal amount of the St.ite debt.
There is no proposition to sell; simply a prop-
osition to exchange the, one tor the other. So
that his criticism does not affect the first
branch of the proposition, hut confines itself
entirely to the second branch of the proposi-
tion.
But one argument which he used here to-
day, with all respect to him, struck me as
requiring any response. Most of the other
arguments presented are speculative, and de-
pend entirely upon a condition of things
in the remote future wbii'h mny or may not
exist; when the stupendous increase in the
value of theChesapeake and Ohio canal shall
become so great thut it will be impossible to
calculate it.
But I address myself to the argument em-
ployed by the gentlemen which has reference
to circumstances.is they are now. The argu-
ment isthat if the State should part with its in-
terest in theChesapeake and Ohio canal com-
pany, it would involve the private interests of
creditors to the extent of at least $2,250,000;
that the effect of that transfer would be to
paralyze the interests of those creditors, de-
stroy their claims, and virtually put an
end to the vitality of all such claims. Now,
I wouldaskthe gentleman this question: if
he were a stockholder in the Chesapeake
bank of Baltimore, and were to sell his in-
terest in that corporation, would that sale
affect the interests of the creditors of that
bank in the slightest degree, in any way or
form whati'ver?
Mr. SANDS. I will answer the gentle-
man by an illustration, A gentleman who ig
now one of the wealthiest men in our county,
told me that some twenty years ago he wag
on the verge of bankruptcy. He owned
$80,000 worth of stucka in some of the Bal-
timore banks. He bad notes due there which
must be met. He went to one of the banks
and said—"you must let me have $40,000.
"But your notes are due here to-day to a
large amount," was the reply. " I know
they are," he said, "andi must have the
money to meet them." He got the money,
and instead of being to-day a broken mer-
chant, be is one of the richest men in Mary-
land. Now if this c.inal is sold to-day,
would not the liens upon the canal absorb
all and more than all of the amount of
the salts, and would these creditors get any-
thing?
Mr. BIDQKLY. How would that change the
aspect of things?
Mr.SANDB. By keeping this work in the
hands of the State fur ten or twenty years, it
may be able to pay not only all the debts
which are liens, but all the others.
Mr. RIDGELY. I hope so. Unfortunately 1
have been a creditor of that canal of twenty
years' standing, and I never expect to get one
dollar. As for the creditors of the canal in |
