county, or that they shall be elected in every
county; but the legislature would not give
discretion to the county commissioners to say
whether they shall be appointed, or shall be
elected by the people.
Mr SANDS. Suppose the legislature should
pass a law that each county should provide
its own internal police arrangements. Would
not that be a general law, leaving the coun-
ties to do what they please, according to the
circumstances ?
Mr. DANIEL. If the amendment was that
they should pass a general law that the county
commissioners should regulate their own in-
ternal arrangements, I can conceive that would
be consistent with the provision already adopt-
ed; but it does not say so. It says they shall
provide for the appointment or election of road
supervisors, and not that they shall regulate
their internal affairs to provide either for elec-
tion or appointment.
Mr. CHAMBERS. Can we delegate to the conn-
ties the power of legislating?
Mr. DANIEL. I think we cannot. That is a
point I intended to make, that we cannot del-
egate it to the county commissioners. I do
not see how we can get at it without interfer-
ing directly with the provision we have already
enacted, which says that the general assembly
shall pass no special law relating to roads. I
think therefore it is better lo retain the sec-
tion, To the. proposition of the gentleman
from Washington (Mr. Davis,) I have no ob-
jection. If he chooses to put constables in
another place, let it be so. I think it is better
to let the section alone.
The amendment offered by Mr. DAVIS, of
Washington, was rejected.
Mr. STIRLING, I hope we shall have some
constables in Baltimore city. We do not ex-
pect to get very good ones, but we should like
to have some.
Mr, SCHLEY. Baltimore city will be provi-
ded for under the judiciary department.
Mr, STIRLING. Why not put them all
there?
Mr. SCHLEY. For the reason assigned some
time ago, that in this section we are defining
the powers of the county commissioners.
Mr. STIRLING. You .do not leave it to the
county commissioners now.
Mr. DANIEL. The counties embrace the
city.
The PRESIDENT. I think not.
Mr. STIRLING. They cannot. There are no
county commissioners there to appoint.
Mr BELT. It the gentlemen from Baltimore
city desire any provision inserted here for the
City, we have no objection. All we want is
to secure to ourselves in the country the sys-
tem we want.
Mr. MILLER demanded the yeas and nays
upon the amendment submitted by Mr. BELT,
and they were ordered.
The question being taken the result was—
yeas 21, nays 33—as follows : |
Teas—Messrs. Abbott, Annan, Audoun,
Belt, Brooks, Cunningham, Ecker; Hatch,
Henkle, King, Lansdale, Markey Mayhugh,
Pugh, Ridgely,' Sands, Scott, Sneary, Stirling,
Stockbridge, Wickard—21.
Nays—Messrs. Goldsborough, President;
Baker, Brown, Chambers, Daniel, Davis, of
Washington, Dellinger, Duvall, Earle, Edelen,
Farrow, Galloway, Greene, Hebb, Hodson,
Hollyday, Hopkins, Hopper, Lee, Miller, Mur-
ray, Nyman, Parker, Parran, Purnell, Robi-
nette, Russell, Schley, Smith, of Carroll,
Smith, of Worcester, Todd, Valliant, Wil-
mer—33.
As their names were called,
Mr. GALLOWAY said: I do not wish to trust
a matter of legislation to the road supervi-
sors. I am satisfied that the citizens of Hartford
county are opposed to the election of
road supervisors as they Have been provided
for by the old constitution. I hope this con-
vention will not adopt any article making
these officers elective in the counties. What
is the system as at present carried out? The
people in each election district elect a road
supervisor. In compliance with the duties of
his office, he appoints road supervisors for all
the roads in the counties. These sub-super-
visors go on and regulate the roads. They
have nothing to do but to ride about over the
roads and look at them; and in a county
where they extend eight hundred or a thou-
sand miles, there is not a particle of benefit to
be derived from it. The people are sick and
tired of this mode of electing supervisors. If
it is intrusted to the legislature, I am afraid
the legislature will adopt the same system ;
and I therefore vote "no."
Mr. HOLLYDAY said: We have tried this
system a long time, and we have found in
Kent county, as my colleague has stated,
that it does not answer the purpose at all.—
Our people are very much opposed to the
system as it now is. Under the old system,
which had existed a very long time, the roads
were taken care of by persons living upon
them, and we generally had them in repair ;
but since we have had supervisors elected un-
der the present constitution, we have had su-
pervisors who have received the compensation
without rendering any service whatever. 1
therefore vote "no."
Mr. VALLIANT. I think the county commis-
sioners should determine, and not the legisla-
ture as to the number of road supervisors the
county may require. Under the old system,
an election district now having but one su-
pervisor of the road, had some four or five.
I think the cause of the unhappy condition of
the roads at this time, is the fact that we have
a general provision for one man, and that one
man has the whole responsibility; whereas,
under the old system, we have four or five,
and each supervisor has some eight or ten
miles to take care of, and he performs his
duty well and faithfully. Under the present |
