popular branches, and the reasons for them.
Suppose the people of Maryland are over-
whelmingly in favor of a certain reform; say,
99-100ths of them in any one year. In comes
this conservative, aristocratic branch, and
says, "No, you don't; we clog the wheels;
we Stand in the way; we say that though
public sentiment has utterly revolutionized,
yen elected us for six years, and we will keep
back the wheels of progress for six years at
least." It is not good thus to inaugurate
hostility at once between the two branches
of the Legislature. However overwhelming
the people may be in favor of a certain measure,
however large the majority for it in the pop-
ular branch, the aristocratic branch say they
shall not have it. I am not in favor of aris-
tocratic privileges anywhere, nor an aristo-
cratic government. I am in favor of a purely
representative government The only reason
why I oppose annual elections is because I
know the evil effects of elections, held accord-
ing to our present constitutional theory,
"free and frequent." You have seen the
deeds around the poll, and you ought to know
whether it is demoralizing, disorganizing or
not. I think two years quite often enough
for the election of representatives of the peo-
ple. And if I had the ordering of matters,
not only the popular branch but the conser-
vative aristocratic branch should be subject
to the same popular will. My friend says:
suppose a man comes here this year and does
a thing which his constituency repudiates;
now long has he a right to do this? I say,
suppose a gentleman in the aristocratic
branch does this same thing, as they have
done. I know counties of this State in which
if the people had a chance at their present
senators to-morrow, they could not get a
corporal's guard to vote for them. Does not
the principle apply there? It is said to be a
very bad rule that will not work two ways ;
but this is so very bad that it will not work
in the same direction even, about too differ-
ent things.
Individually this is a matter of no moment
to me. But I think we ought to have annual
sessions of the legislature, and I do not think
there is any necessity far annual elections.
As the idea has been brought before this body
that Maryland has an aristocratic branch of
the Legislature, I take occasion to express my
opinion, that if she has, I for one am anxious
to get rid of it. I for one will hold the sen
ator of the State of Maryland to equal respon-
sibility with members of the House of Dele-
pates. I shall vote for. annual sessions of the
Legislature, because I think seriously that
the interests of the people of the State demand
an annual meeting of the Legislature. I
I shall vote against annual elections, because
1 believe under the circumstances under
which elections are now and have been
held with the drunkenness, rioting and
scenes of violence, which characterize our |
popular elections, their influence is bad. I
believe they are demoralizing, disintegrating,
destructive.
Mr. STIRLING. As a matter of principle, I
have no very great objection to annual elec-
tions or annual sessions, I rather think that
as a matter of principle, annual elections have
the advantage; although that is a mere ques-
tion of time. I hold that elections should be
frequent. When we Come to the question
how frequent, there is a difference of opinion,
And permit me to say that the distinction
between one year and two years is not very
great. What has induced me to oppose this
change is the belief that the people of this
State are in favor of biennial sessions, and
biennial elections. There is one fact about
this matter which is very instructive; and
that is that this particular provision existed in
the old Constitution, and was submitted to
the people of this State at the ballot box sep-
arately; and it was carried by a large major-
ity, I think from this fact, and from the
experience that I have had, that the great
mass of the people of the State are in favor of
biennial sessions, I do not think there is any
doubt about it; for they voted for it at the
ballot box when they had nothing to look at
but that distinct proposition. We have lived
under it for fifteen years, and it has given
satisfaction, and has worked better than the
old system.
Mr. CLARKE. I voted to reconsider the
second section of this report; but upon .re-
flection I agree with the remarks or the gen-
tleman from Baltimore city (Mr. Stirling.)
My first impression was that the people de-
mand annual sessions and annual elections.
But the great danger and the great evil is
over legislation, over taxation, over accumu-
lation of indebtedness, Which always results
from every session of the Legislature, and
much of this will be saved by biennial ses-
sions. A large amount of taxation will be
saved, which I think it is very important at
this time that the people .should be relieved
from.
In reference to my friend from Howard (Mr.
Sands,) who I think is to a great extent a
democrat, I think be would better be classed
with the radical democracy I believe he is
disposed to advocate democratic doctrines,
and to return to his first love, the democracy.
Mr. SANDS. I was a great admirer of Fre-
mont, when he crossed the plains and the Rocky
mountains, and when I read his book. Fre-
mont was a man of genius, as I thought;
but he got into such bad company that I had
to quit him.
Mr. CLARKE. I understand that the gen-
tleman is now returning to his first love. I
understand that he commenced his career as a
democrat before know-nothingism grew up.
Mr. SANDS (in his seat.) May the Lord
forgive me !
Mr. CLARKE continued; I think he is very |
