be submitted to the people. As I do not be-
lieve in this policy of the legislature refusing
to perform its proper functions, and to dis-
charge its own duties, and submitting every-
thing to the consent of the people, I cannot
vote for it in any form like this. There may
be a particular part of a county which it may
be desirable to set off to another county for
public reasons. There is no reason in that
case for asking them whether they are willing
to go or not. I see no reason for asking the
consent of the counties. The legislature is
to judge cot' the matter. If the legislature
choose to divide a county, who has aright to
complain ?
The only reason why these questions should
be submitted to the people, about setting them
off from one county to another, is that the
legislature do not desire to exercise their
power of transferring the people unwillingly
to a jurisdiction where they don't want to
go; for if they are unwilling to go, nobody is
going to make them go. The mere question
with the people of the county generally, is
the question whether they shall be shorn of
their territory, which only concerns them in-
directly rind not directly. If they lose that
amount of county tax, they avoid that amount
of county expense.
According to the proposition of the gentleman from
Allegany (Mr. Hebb,) the legisla-
ture cannot change a county line two feet
without submitting the question to a vote of
the people. They cannot run a new bounda-
ry line without submilting the question to a
vote of the people. I do not think he intended
this; but tint is the result of his amendment.
It has been the practice always this State
where a county has been set off, to have. the
question submitted to the counties affected by
the change. That has been the uniform prac-
tice heretofore.
The change of county lines is merely a ques-
tion of legislation. The counties possess no
Sovereignty. There is no right in tire people
of a county to say that they shall have a cer-
tain county line. That is a matter within the
discretion of the whole people; and the only
reason wily the question is submitted to the
people of the county at all, is that it is not
good policy to take people away from one
county and put them into another, unless they
want to go. If they want to go, and if the
legislature thinks they ought to go, I do not
see why the rest of the county should say that
they shall not go.
Mr. SANDS. Howard county is a new county,
and is a precedent. In that case the question
wag submitted wholly and solely to the peo-
ple within the prescribed limits set off to form
the new county. That is a rule which will
always? be acted upon. The reason why I op-
pose this amendment is that it violates all rule's
and all precedents, and takes the question from
the people really interested in the settlement
of the matter. I think the report of the com- |
mittee, as it stands here in this section, just
leaves the matter on this ground.
A part of one county is erectly inconveni-
enced by the existing division of county lines,
and that portion come up to the legislature
and petitions the legislature for the privilege
of detaching itself from the county to which
they have belonged, and of attaching itself to
some county which would give it greater fa-
cilities. The whole question of the rights and
interests of the people of these two counties
comes here before the legislature to be settled.
The legislature, under this section, sits in
judgment upon the matter, and considers the
grievance. If the grievance is such as is set
forth in the petition, it grants the request of
the petitioners, withdrawing them from the
county to which they belung, and putting
them into that into which they desire to go ;
and the vote is taken merely of the people
desiring to be transferred.
Look at the case of Howard county. A
narrow stream not only divides two commu-
nities but the same town, Ellicott's Mills,—
We have been struggling for an act of incor-
poration for a long time; but we cannot get
it as the matter stands. Just see how it oper-
ates. A gentleman who lives across the stream
comes over to a storekeeper within a stone's
throw of his house and deals with him, and
contracts a bill. The storekeeper must follow
that man to Towsontown to collect that bill,
although he can almost step from his own store
into the court-house of his own county. But
tire debtor lives on the Baltimore county side
of. the river, and he must undergo the incon-
venience, expense, trouble, and loss of time,
to <"go over to Towsontown to collect his bill.
1 want to have this corrected, if the major-
ity of the voters of those three contiguous dis-
tricts desire still to remain attached to Balti-
more county, with all its inconveniences, let
them do so; but if they will come as one man
and say they are laboring under these difficul-
ties and annoyances, and that they desire to
be annexed to our county by the consent of the
legislature, what shall hinder the legislature
from doing it? Why should we depart to-day
from the precedent? Why depart from the
principle that the people halve the right to come
to the legislature with their grievance, and
that the legislature has the power to act upon
it? I hope the convention will adhere to the
section, which leaves the matter entirely to the
people interested and the legislature of Mary-
land.
Mr. KING. I hope the convention will not
adopt the principle that one part of a county
may go off and get rid of their share of the
debt of the county, whenever they choose to
do so, without the remainder of the county
being consulted.
Mr. SANDS. I will suggest to the gentleman
from Baltimore county, that they will get into
a big a debt as they get rid of if they come
to our county. |
