they will find that it is as follows: Strike
out of the amendment all after the words "pro-
vided further," and insert "that the State's
interest in the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal,
the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal, and the
Susquehanna and Tide Water Canal, shall
be exempt from said sale." The amendment
as proposed by the gentleman from Prince
George's (Mr. Clarke) was as follows: Strike
out the last clause of the proposed section
submitting the question of sale to the people,
and insert in lieu thereof the following:
"Provided further, that no sale or contract
of sale of the State's interest in the Chesa-
peake and Ohio Canal Company shall go
into effect, until the same shall be ratified by
the ensuing general assembly,"
Now, I voted for the first branch of the
amendment to the amendment in relation to
the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal, under the
impression that it embraced precisely what
the amendment of the gentleman from Prince
George's embraced. That is, that it excepted
and was designed to except, from the opera-
tion of this section the validity of the sale of
that canal, until the same should be ratified
by a subsequent legislature.
The section provides in the first place for
the appointment of a board. It then pro-
vides that that board may at once dispose of
the State's interest in the Baltimore and Ohio
Railroad Company, dollar for dollar, for
State bonds, or registered indebtedness. That
is the only exchange which under this sec-
tion this board, can make without legislative
action.
Then, under this section, in regard to the
disposition of the State's interest in all other
works, and in banking institutions, it ia abso-
lutely necessary that there should be legisla-
tive action. It is expressly stated that the
legislature shall provide the ways and means,
indicate the mode and manner of the dispo-
sition of the State's interest in those corpora-
tions, the time, place, and everything else.
So that under the operation of this section as
reported, no sale could take place in the State
of Maryland without the previous action of
the legislature of Maryland.
The gentleman from Frederick (Mr.
Schley) was anxious to call the attention of
the legislature particularly to this work of
the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal. He then
suggested, and the gentlemen from Prince
George's (Mr. Clarke) accepted the sugges-
tion, to insert that the sale of that canal, even
under the previous action of the legislature,
should not be binding and valid until ratified
by a subsequent legislature. And I voted for
the first branch of the amendment of the gen-
tleman from Baltimore city (Mr. Stirling) to
the amendment of the gentleman from Prince
Georges (Mr. Clarke,) under the impression
that it meant merely that the sale of the
Chesapeake and Ohio Canal should not be
binding unless ratified by a subsequent legis- |
lature. And I supposed that the remainder of
the amendment to the amendment was in-
tended merely to include in the same category
the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal, and the
Susquehanna and Tide Water Canal. 1 did
not see the necessity of any subsequent legis-
lative action in reference to the sale of these
two canals, and therefore I voted against that
part of the amendment to the amendment.
But to my surprise, and 1 apprehend to the
surprise of all the members of this conven-
tion, an examination of the journal this
morning shows that the amendment of the
gentleman from Baltimore city (Mr. Stirling)
does not leave this question open to the legis-
lature, but is a positive inhibition on the leg-
islature for all time to come, from ever con-
senting to or ratifying the sale of either the
Chesapeake and Ohio Canal, the Chesapeake
and Delaware Canal, or the Susquehanna and
Tide Water Canal. It prohibits the legisla-
ture forever from ever taking any action for
the sale of those works. That 1 apprehend is
going far beyond what this convention
intended.
The convention started out with the propo-
sition of the gentleman 'from Baltimore county
(Mr. Ridgely,) by which a board was created,
and under which they made provision for the
sale without any legislative action. Then
subsequently they adopted the amendment of
the gentleman from Montgomery (Mr. Duvall, )
saying that the sale under the proposition of
the gentleman from Baltimore county should
not take effect unless ratified by the legisla-
ture. But this amendment of the gentleman
from Baltimore city (Mr. Stirling) goes far
beyond that, and even beyond what the ma-
jority of the committee on the legislative
department reported in the thirty-ninth sec-
tion, which makes it mandatory upon the
legislature to pass laws for the sale of the
State's interest in these public works.
This proposition reported by the majority
of the select committee does not make it
mandatory upon the legislature) but leaves it
optional with them, except in the solitary
case of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad, to
make provision for the sale or not. This
amendment, however, goes away beyond that,
and absolutely precludes the legislature for-
ever, or while this constitution, if it be
adopted, shall last, from making provision for
the sale of those canals. Here are three steps
of retrogression. First, we started out with
a proposition directing the legislature to pass
laws providing for the sale. Then the select
committee comes forward with a proposition
creating, as 1 conceive, a proper board to
make the sale, but leaving it optional with
the legislature to make provision fur the sale
or not. Then this amendment oversteps in
the other direction, and goes far beyond it, and
absolutely prohibits the legislature from
making any provision for the sale of the
State's interest in the Chesapeake and Ohio |
