declaration that by the constitution " the per
diem of members as fixed and unchangeable.' '
It was doubtless their purpose ' 'to equalize
the compensation of members with that of
previous legislatures," and having; the con-
stitutional right to increase their mileage,
they did so—very inequitably and unfairly,
I admit, as to the distant members from Alle-
gany, Worcester and Somerset; but I have
got to learn that the unfair or even iniquitous
effect and operation of a law, in particular
instances, can control a judge in pronouncing
upon the true legal construction of a statute.
The only remaining question is, did the
resolution apply to members of that general
assembly only, or does it fix the mileage
" allowed by law," for future general assem-
blies until changed bylaw? I see nothing
in the case, which limits the allowance to mem-
bers of that particular general assembly. If
such were their purpose, the language should
have been "the senators and delegates of this
general assembly." In the absence of any such
restrictive words, whatever may possibly or
even probably have been the selfish motives of
those who voted for the resolution, as charged
here, and under all the circumstances, in
terms harsh and perhaps unjust, I am of
opinion that the resolution is equivalent to a
public general law, fixing the mileage until
duly changed. The delegates to this conven-
tion being entitled under the law of their cre-
ation, to " the mileage allowed to members
of the general assembly of this State," I am
clearly of the opinion that they are entitled
to the mileage fixed by the resolution afore-
said. I admit that it operates most unfairly
to the distant members, but that we cannot
now help or avoid. A future legislature will
doubtless correct this inequality. As to the
indelicacy of deciding the question in our
own favor, we cannot avoid a decision, as
there is no other tribunal to decide. Gentle
men who doubt, or differ from us in our con
struction, ought to vote against the amend
ment. If our construction of the law is cor
rect, there is no altered ' 'condition of the
currency or the cost of travel and living,''
except fur the worse, which ought to be con
sidered as rendering it improper for the del
egates to accept the mileage allowed by the
law.
Mr. DELLINGER moved the previous ques-
tion, which was seconded, and the main ques-
tion ordered.
The question was upon the amendment of
Mr. LEE, to add to the order offered by Mr
RIDGELY the following;
"And that the committee on accounts be
hereby instructed to audit the mileage ac-
count of each member of this convention ac-
cording to the joint resolution of the general
assembly of this State at its last session, ad-
justing the mileage of the members of that
body." |
Upon the question Mr. DANIEL called for
the yeas and nays, and they were ordered.
Mr. STOCKBRIDGE moved a call of the house,
which was ordered.
Pending the call of the roll—
On motion of Mr. NEGLEY,
Further proceedings under the call were
dispensed with.
Mr. SCOTT moved to adjourn.
The CHAIRMAN. That motion is not now
in order. The rule requires the vote to be
taken, after the yeas and nays have been or-
dered, before any adjournment can take place.
The question was then taken upon the
amendment by yeas and nays,
After the call of the roll bad been com-
menced,
Mr. DANIEL said: I want to ask a ques-
tion for information,
Cries of "Order," " Order," from various
parts of the house.
Mr. DANIEL. I want to ask—
Mr. JONES, of Somerset. I call the gentle-
man to order. The secretary having com-
menced to call the roll, it is not in order for
the gentleman to say anything until his name
is called.
The CHAIRMAN, (Mr. Purnell.) The point
of order is well taken. The gentleman from
Baltimore city (Mr. Daniel) must take his
seat.
Pending the calling of the yeas and nays,
the following explanations were made by
members, as their names were called :
Mr. CUSHING. I have not the slightest
doubt as to the legality of paying this hun-
dred dollars to every member; that does not
trouble me the slightest, I think it was
the duty of the committee on accounts,
if they had any doubt as to the law,
to have sought advice and decided the matter
for themselves. In a ease affecting myself, 1
prefer to be on the safe side, and to vote
against taking this money, rather than as-
. sume a duty which I think the committee
. on accounts ought to have taken upon them-
g selves. I therefore vote "no."
'Mr. DANIEL. I shall vote "no" on this
. proposition, because I am opposed to the
. amendment, and shall be opposed to the orig-
g inal proposition as amended, if this be adopt-
ed. The question I want to ask is, whether,
if this order is amended, it can be divided.
1 could vote for the first part of it, but I must
vote against the whole if this is put in, and
it cannot be divided.
f Mr. DENT. I rise merely to say that I have
no difficulty, cither in law or in morals, in
voting for ibis proposition; none whatever.
e I vote "aye."
Mr. ECKER. I do not rise to make any ex-
- planation. But I want the clerk and the re-
1 porter to put down to my name "NO" in
- the largest kind of capitals they can use.
t Mr. GALLOWAY. Being the chairman of tile
committee on accounts, to which this ques- |
