The motion was accordingly rejected,
Mr. CHAMBERS moved to strike out all after
the words "six per cent. per annum, "and
insert the following:
" And no higher rate shall be taken or de-
manded; provided, it shall be lawful for
parties loaning money on bond, mortgage,
judgment or other security, to contract for
the payment of taxes and dues to the United
States, the State or county, and all other
public dues, by the borrower, so as to retain
to the lender the clear amount of the legal
interest,"
Mr. THRUSTON asked for a division of the
question.
Mr. RIDGELY. I hope the house will be
able to reach some conclusion upon this
question. The proposition now before the
house brings us to the privilege of adopting
the constitutional provision as it now exists.
It is perfectly competent, as suggested by the
gentleman from Allegany (Mr. Thruston) for
the house to divide this question, and take a
vote upon so much of the proposition as cor-
responds with the existing provision of the
constitution. In doing so, we shall adopt
what we now understand, because all the de-
cisions and interpretations which have been
made by the courts in relation to the existing
provision of the constitution are perfectly in-
telligible to us, and is known as constitutional
law. I hope therefore that the house will
take the question upon this proposition in
its divided form. I shall vote for the first
part of the proposition which corresponds
with the provision of the existing constitu-
tion; but I cannot vote for the second branch
of it.
The question was stated to be upon adopt-
ing the first branch of the proposition sub-
mitted by Mr. CHAMBERS, being as follows :
Strike out all after the words ' 'six per
cent. per annum" and insert " and no higher
rate of interest shall be taken or de-
manded."
Mr. THOMAS demanded the yeas and nays
upon this question, and they were ordered.
The question was then taken, by yeas and
nays, and resulted—yeas 89, nays 10—as fol-
lows:
Yeas—Messrs. Abbott, Audoun, Berry, of
Prince George's, Blackiston, Bond, Briscoe,
Carter, Chambers, Clarke, Crawford, Cun-
ningham, Dellinger, Dennis, Dent, Duvall,
Baric, Ecker, Edelen, Gale, Galloway, Hebb,
Hollyday, Horsey, Johnson, Jones, of Cecil,
Jones, of Somerset, Keefer, Kennard, King,
Lee, Mayhugh, McComas, Mitchell, Miller,
Morgan, Mullikin, Murray, Nyman, Parran,
Peter, Pugh, Purnell, Ridgely, Robinette,
Russell, Sands, Schley, Schlosser, Smith, of
Carroll, Smith, of Dorchester, Smith, of
Worcester, Stirling, Swope, Sykes, Thomas,
Thruston, Turner, Wickard, Wilmer, Wood-
en—59.
Nays—Messrs. Billingsley, Cushing, Daniel, |
Hatch, Hopper, Larsh, Negley, Parker,
Sneary, Valliant—10.
The first branch of the amendment was ac-
cordingly adopted.
Mr. NEGLEY, when his name was called,
said: I am in favor of fixing the rate of in-
terest at six per cent. in cases where there is
no contract. And I would be glad to vote
for that. But as the question is now pre-
sented, it does not meet my approbation, be-
cause it forbids the making of a private con-
tract. I therefore vote " no."
The question recurred upon the second
branch of the amendment, as follows:
"Provided, it shall be lawful for parties
loaning money on bond, mortgage, judgment
or other security, to contract for the payment
of taxes and dues to the United States, the
State or county, and all other public dues,
by the borrower, so as to retain to the lender
the clear amount of the legal interest."
Upon this question Mr. WICKARD called for
the yeas and nays, and they were ordered.
The question was then taken, by yeas and
nays, and resulted—yeas 27, nays 43, as fol-
lows :
Yeas—Messrs. Berry, of Prince George's,
Billingsley, Blackiston, Bond, Chambers,
Clarke, Duvall, Earle, Edelen, Gale, Gallo-
way, Hebb, Hollyday, Hopper, Jones, of
Cecil, Kennard, King, McComas, Mitchell,
Miller, Peter, Pugh, Sneary, Stirling, Thrus-
ton, Valliant, Wilmer—27.
Nays—Messrs. Abbott, Briscoe, Carter,
Crawford, Cunningham, Cashing, Daniel.
Dellinger, Dennis, Dent, Ecker, Hatch, Hop-
kins, Horsey, Johnson, Jones, of Somerset,
Keefer, Larsh, Lee, Mayhugh, Morgan, Mulli-
kin, Murray, Negley, Nyman, Parker, Parran,
Purnell, Ridgely, Robinette, Russell, Sands,
Schley, Schlosser, Smith, of Carroll, Smith,
of Dorchester, Smith, of Worcester, Swope,
Sykes, Thomas, Turner, Wickard, Wooden
—43.
The second branch of the amendment was
accordingly rejected.
The following explanations were made by
members, as their names were called :
Mr. MILLER. I consider this proposition
as merely allowing what the law of the State
now permits to be done. But the question
has arisen, and there is a doubt in the minds
of some professional gentlemen in the State
whether that provision of the code is consti-
tutional or not. I think that question ought
to be settled, and that the borrower ought to
have the privilege of stipulating in his con-
tract that be will pay the taxes. I vote
" aye."
Mr. MULLIKIN. I wish to say that no sel-
fish motives will control me in my vote upon
this question. I have never been a money
borrower; I do not know that I ever shall
be. I have had the fortune to loan a little
sometimes. And I think the man who has
money to loan is better able to pay the taxes, |
