almost every argument that was made upon
the subject of striking out this provision in
regard to taxing by the poll, that the poll
tax mentioned in the bill of rights, and
comprehended in the denunciation as be-
ing grievous and oppressive, was a tax in
restriction of the right of suffrage. Now,
sir, that is a total misconception of the pur-
pose and object of the Convention of 1776 in
framing this article. It had no reference
whatever to the question of the right of suf-
frage. The members of that Convention of
1776 were among the most rigid in guarding
the right of suffrage, and about as far from
recognizing and adopting the doctrine of
universal suffrage as entertained by us now,
and held and maintained for the last fifty or
sixty years in this State, as it is well possible
to conceive.
The Convention of 1776 adhered literally
to the doctrine upon which they understood
the revolution then pending to be proceeding,
which was that taxation and representation
were inseparable; that he who did not con-
tribute by the payment of taxes to the sup-
port of the government was not entitled to
participate in that government. That was
the view entertained by the Convention of
1776. And in pursuance of the views they
entertained, in the very inception of the
Revolutionary war, at the very first election
regulated by law in this State, they prescribed
a property qualification for all voters. And
perhaps, if gentlemen have not looked at the
provisions adopted and insisted upon by that
Convention, they may be somewhat surprised
to find the views entertained of the right of
suffrage by the great and learned and patri-
otic men who represented the sovereignty of
the State in that Convention. I will read
gome extracts with a view of illustrating the
qualifications of voters prescribed by that
Convention.
In July, 1776, the Convention then in ses-
sion determined that it should be dissolved,
and they resolved " That a new Convention
bo elected for the express purpose of forming
a new government, by the authority of the
people only, and enacting and ordering all
things for the preservation, safety and gene-
ral weal of this colony." I read from the
"Conventions of Maryland, 1774, '75, '76,"
page 184. They proceeded to appoint judges
of election in the several counties, and to
make the apportionment of representatives,
giving two each to the cities of Annapolis
and Baltimore, and four to each of the coun-
ties, except the county of Frederick, which
then comprised what are now Allegany and
Washington counties, and which was then
divided into three districts, to each of which
were apportioned four representatives. Now
who we're to vote at that election? Here are
the qualifications of voters, as prescribed by
that Convention:
"That all freemen above 21 years of age, |
without any restriction as to color,] being
freeholders of not less than fifty acres of land,
or having visible property in this colony to
the value of £40 sterling at the least, and no
others, be admitted to vote for representa-
tives to serve in the said Convention for the
said counties and districts, and the town of
Baltimore aforesaid; and that all freemen
above 21 years of age, owning a whole lot of
land in the said city of Annapolis, or having
a visible estate of £20 sterling at the least,
within this province, or having served five
years to any trade within the said city and
being a housekeeper, and no others, be ad-
mitted to vote for representatives in the said
Convention for the said city, provided such
person shall have resided in the county, dis-
trict, city or town, where he shall offer to
vote, one whole year next preceding the elec-
tion."
Now there was nothing in the restriction
of the bill of rights which had any reference
whatever to these qualifications. And these
very qualifications were carried into the Con-
stitution adopted by the Convention elected
under them, and continued to be the qualifi-
cations of voters in this State down to 1803,
'4 or '5, I think. Under these restrictions,
and that Constitution, free negroes who held
fifty acres of land, or visible property in the
State of the value of £40 sterling, were al-
lowed to vote. But no freeman in the State,
no soldier who had fought in the Revolu-
tionary war was allowed to vote in this State
unless he had this property qualification.
The history of that time shows that it was
the federal party in those days who sustained
the principle that representation and taxation
should go together; and it was the demo-
cratic party of those days that fought that
provision in the Constitution, and finally tri-
umphed in bestowing the right of suffrage
upon every free white male citizen of 21 years
of age who was a resident of the State. 1
have heard an anecdote, which I will relate,
in reference to the political contests in one of
our counties, which was always used by one
of the democratic candidates to the great dis-
comfiture of his opponent as long as this pro-
perty qualification existed, although it was
a strong federal county. The anecdote is,
that there was an old revolutionary soldier,
who had been wounded and had received
honorable scars in the battles of the Revolu-
tion to secure the liberties of his country,
and who had been voting a number of years.
He owned an old mare valued at £30 sterling,
which was the sole property he had, and
which represented his right to vote. It so
happened that at one time on his way to the
place of election unfortunately the old mare
died. When he got to the polls it somehow
got out that his right of voting had departed.
When ho presented himself to vote as be had
been in the habit of doing for years, the
judges of election asked him if he was worth |
