the last general assembly of Maryland passed
this resolution?
Mr. STOCKBRIDGE. The expense of travel-
ling by railroad has not.
Mr. DELLINGER. What was the price of
gold then, and what is it now ?
Mr. PURNELL. I see it stated in the papers
that the railroad fare from Philadelphia
south has been increased thirty-three per cent.
Mr. DELLINGER. I know very well—at
least I am so informed by members of the
last general assembly—that board in this
city is higher now than it was then. And
certainly all the expenses to which members
of the convention are subjected, have been
greatly increased over those of the members
of the last general assembly. If the commit-
tee on accounts do not chose to allow the one
hundred dollars, let them readjust the mile-
age, and say what the members from Anne
Arundel shall receive, and what the members
from Washington and Allegany, who live
farthest away from the seat of government,
shall receive. Let us have it fair and equita-
ble. I think I am entitled to something
more than I am getting, and therefore I must
insist upon this order,
Mr. MILLER. Without slating whether I
am or not in favor of this proposition as it
has been advanced, I merely rise now for the
purpose of replying to a remark made by the
gentleman from Baltimore city (Mr. Stock-
bridge) in reference to members of the last
general assembly, whose homes were within
a stone's throw of the State house, on receiv-
ing one hundred dollars for their mileage.
Mr. STOCKBRIDGE. I made no such state-
ment. I said that there were members sit-
ting in this hall now, whose homes might be
reached by a stone thrown from the steps of
this State house.
Mr. MILLER. It may be applied to mem-
bers of the last general assembly.
Mr. STOCKBRIDGE. The gentleman may
apply it to any one he pleases.
Mr. MILLER. The only gentleman of the
last legislature who refused to take the
money, but returned the hundred dollars to
the treasury, was a senator from Anne Arun-
del, who lives some twelve or fourteen miles
from Annapolis. I am informed, without
knowing the fact, that the gentleman from
Baltimore city (Mr. Stockbridge) received
his hundred dollars extra, although it cost
him but a dollar to go from Annapolis to
Baltimore.
Mr. STOCKBRIDGE. I propose to reply to
this argumentum ad hominem. It is known to
everybody here, that the moment that in-
'famous proposition was presented in this hall
last winter I arose and denounced it. I did
my utmost to prevent its passage, uniformly,
persistently. The president of this conven-
tion knows that I called his attention to it,
when it was originally but a mere order, as
being without any authority of law that |
would justify him, as the comptroller of the
State, in paying it. And that gave rise to
the joint resolution which was subsequently
introduced and put through here.
As to any compensation which I received
then, I received not one cent until after the
general assembly had adjourned, when a cer-
tain amount of money was brought and
placed in my hand. Whether it included the
hundred dollars or not, I did not know then,
and do not now, but presume it did. At that
time I was in somewhat of a bad humor.
The house of delegates bad passed an appro-
priation for the care of our sick and wounded
soldiers. That went to the senate, and the
senate cut it down to one-sixth of what we
had voted. They sent it back here, and the
house refused to accede to their amendment,
but returned it to the senate, and asked them
to recede. We said that it was due to the
soldiers that they should receive from the
Static that amount of money. We did our
utmost to get it through; but we failed, and
were obliged at the last moment, late in the
session, to accept what we could get—one-
sixth of what we had passed. In no very
amiable mood when I received the money,
presuming that it contained the hundred dol-
lars, I said, " This hundred dollars belongs
to the State; I will pass it over to the State
where it should be put " And I passed it
over to the benefit of the sick and wounded
soldiers. That is the bistory of that hun-
dred dollars. If that is wrong, let it be so.
Mr. ECKER. As I am somewhat interested
in this matter myself, I rise to corroborate
what has been said by the gentleman from
Baltimore city. When that proposition was
introduced last winter, that gentleman
arose with some show of indignation, as he
frequently does, and made a very excellent
speech on the subject. The proposition came
up before the house of delegates, and was
voted down—I think the vote stood 40 to 22.
We supposed that that matter was at an end,
and turned our attention to other matters,
But a very particular friend from Harford
county, watched his opportunity, counted
noses, and when he found my worthy friend
(Mr. Stockbridge,) and those who voted the
other way, out of the house, he slipped around
to another member from a neighboring coun-
ty, whose name I will not mention —
Mr. CHAMBERS. Give the name.
Mr. ECKER. No, it is too near home. He
slipped around to him and said, " Let us re-
consider this matter." And it was reconsid-
ered and carried. When I called for my
money, I counted it over, but made no calcu-
lation at all, and put it into my pocket. 1
had a neighbor from Frederick county who
sat near me. He took his money and put it
into his pocket, intending to keep it, not sup-
posing that Frederick county would notice
it. But when he got home he found his
neighbors and friends down on him like a |
