The canal is worked by the State, merely for
the benefit of those parties who carry freight
over it. The State is aiding Allegany coun-
ty, and the counties bordering upon it, to
send their coal down cheap; and the peo-
ple of the State are being taxed to the amount
of the annual payments made to the Chesa-
peake and Ohio Canal, simply fur the purpose
of enabling this coal to be cheaply carried
down to tide-water. Nobody has any private
interest in it. The expenses exhaust the
earnings. There is no private interest in-
volved, that the canal should be productive,
and the canal is controlled simply for the ben-
efit of the parties along the line of the canal.
There is no reason at all why the State should
continue to take money out of the treasury for
the purpose of supporting this one canal.
Suppose we have an opportunity, when those
immense coal fields are worked, as it is said
by the gentleman from Howard county (Mr.
Sands) that they will be very shortly, to get
three or four millions, or two millions, or
even one million of dollars for this canal.
Is it not better to get that, and extinguish so
much of the public debts, and reduce the tax-
ation of the whole State?
Mr. STIRLING. I rise to a point of order.
Is discussion upon the gentleman's amend-
ment in order ?
Mr. CLARKE. I am debating your prop-
osition. The vote has not yet been taken
upon striking out the clause submitting this
question to the people and inserting that
proposition.
Mr. STIRLING. The convention has deter-
mined that.
Mr. CLARKE. The convention determined
to strike out my amendment and insert that
proposition; but they have not determined to
strikeout the original clause submitting the
question to the people, and insert that prop-
osition, and that is the proposition upon
which I am addressing the convention.
The result will be that you prohibit the
State from reaping this benefit, if there is an
opportunity, if there is no such opportunity,
this section will leave the canal as at present
under the control of the State.
With reference to the Tide Water Canal,
what is the case in that regard? The bonds
of the Tide Water Canal became due January
1st, 1864. That canal now owes a million of
dollars to the State, except a small amount,
I believe, extinguished in the sinking fund.
In order to secure this, the State took the
bonds due January 1st, 1864, and issued
bonds payable to the same parlies, which will
become due January 1st, 1865. The canal
failed to meet its bonds, and the State has
got to pay them. The State is secured by
mortgage, Tbe result will be that it will
cost something like three million dollars to
pay that one million. She has got a mort-
gage on the canal, and the proposition is that
she shall not sell it. It amounts to this; that |
although the State, to secure herself, has taken
this mortgage upon the canal, yon come for-
ward and say that she shall take no action
at all, that she shall not protect herself; and
you entirely exempt this canal from any lia-
bility of being proceeded against upon this
mortgage. In other words, you jeopardize
to the extent of three millions of dollars, the
property of the State) by prohibiting her
from taking any steps under the mortgage,
which she has a right to proceed against
and must proceed against in order to secure
her.
With reference to the other canal, it
amounts to very little. I believe the State
only has an interest of $50,000 in the other
canal.
This, therefore, so far as it goes, covers the
case of each of these canals.
A word or two now upon the question of
the sale of the public works. I do not in
this proposition advocate its being done now,
or say when it shall take place. I only throw
safeguards around it, and require that the
proceeds shall be applied to the extinguish-
ment of the public debt. The funded debt
of the State amounts to something like eight
millions of dollars, and in the sinking fund
we have a million dollars. The productive
stocks of the State, it appears from the state-
ment of the comptroller, page 13, after de-
ducting some few items of collectors, sheriffs
and others, amount to something like eight
millions of dollars. To be within bounds,
suppose we put down the public works at seven
millions for the productive stocks which can
be sold. Then if that stock is sold, and ap-
plied together with the sinking fund to the
payment of the debt, it extinguishes the
entire public debt of the State.
This proposition therefore is to secure the
application of the proceeds from the sale of
these works to the extinguishment of that
debt, to relieve the people of the State en-
tirely from all their debt. We are burdened
with taxation. We are taxed annually to
pay the interest upon the public debt. I put
this proposition to the convention. If you
can by converting the public stocks lo the
extinguishment of the public debt, and relieve
the people from taxation, and relieve the
people of the State also from any danger that
hereafter the legislature may divert these
public works to objects not intended; if you
can secure the entire extinguishment of the
public debt, and relieve taxation to that ex-
tent; is not that a measure which we should
take pride and pleasure in inaugurating and in
engrafting upon the organic law? Why
should we go on, when we have the means
of extinguishing the public debt, paying
taxes upon it as we have been for years?
Why should we go on ten, twenty, or thirty
years longer taxing ourselves, when we can
sell our stocks and relieve ourselves from tax-
ation ? |
