to an end. I therefore am opposed to that
amendment.
Mr. MILLER. I do not think my friend
from Baltimore city (Mr. Stockbridge) has
answered the objections of the gentleman
from Cecil (Mr. Pugh.) Let me illustrate
Here is a bank of issue in Baltimore city,
having a capital of $1,000,000; there is
another bank there with the game amount of
capital. They are both banks of issue. The
capital stock of those banks is owned by
widows, orphans, married women, executors,
administrators and business men, who have
placed their capital there. That is their pro-
perty; the dividends upon that stock is their
income, and the value of it when it is sold
constitutes their property. The charter of
one of those banks expires next year; the
charter of the other bank does not expire for
twenty years. Now, the bank whose charter
expires next year, must wind up its affairs at
that time, unless it chooses to come in under
the national banking system. That is a
matter of choice; they may not think that as
profitable a way of carrying on the banking
system as the old system. Their affairs are
wound up, and their property is sold; and
the stockholders receive their pay in what?
Why, in that money which is legal tender
this year or next year.
What, therefore, is the effect of this provi-
sion upon the stock of these two banks?
The stock of the bunk whose charter is to ex-
pire next year is depreciated just to the extent
at which the paper money of the country
happens to be depreciated at that time;
whereas, the man who has his capital in-
vested in the stock of the bank whose charter
does not expire until twenty years from now,
baa a permanent investment of his capital for
that time, and at the expiration of the twenty
years it is more than probable that we shall
have got back to a specie basis; and the
capitalist who holds the stock of that bank
will then receive the full value of his capital.
That is the practical operation of the provision
which has been put in this section, and un-
less we wish to make this discrimination,
this distinction between the value of the stock
of the different banks, I think we should
adopt the amendment of the gentleman from
Baltimore county (Mr. Ridgely.)
Mr. SANDS. I think the difficulty may be
obviated in this way. Amend the section so
as to prohibit the granting of any new char-
ters, or the renewing of any of the existing
bank charters to extend beyond a certain
date We can find out which bank charter
in this State has the longest time to run, and
we can provide that the charters of banks now
in existence, or new charters, may be ex-
tended up to that time. That will do away
with all this talk about injustice and discrim-
ination in regard to banks; or even if we
prohibit the issuing of new charters, we may |
allow the renewal of all existing charters up
to a given time.
Mr. BARRON. Are there not some charters
in this State which are perpetual ?
Mr. SANDS. I think not,
Mr. PUGH. If it can be done, I would ask
that this section be passed over informally for
the present. I do not wish to place myself
in the position of doing anything here, with-
out mature deliberation, in a matter about
which the people are so sensitive as they are
about the financial affairs of this State. If
the gentleman from Baltimore city (Mr. Stock-
bridge, ) or any other member can convince
me that I am wrong and that he is right,
then I will support this provision. But I
know that there is nothing that the people
are so sensitive about as anything that af-
fects the financial interests of the country, as
it will accomplish the same object as an in-
formal postponement. I move the Conven-
tion do now adjourn.
Mr. STIRLING. I want a session this even-
ing at eight o'clock. I therefore ask for the
yeas and nays on the motion to adjourns
The yeas and nays were ordered accord-
ingly.
The question being then taken by yeas and
nays, it resulted—yeas 37, nays 16—as fal-
lows :
Yeas—Messrs. Goldsborough, President;
Audoun, Barron, Belt, Brooks, Carter, Cham-
bers, Crawford, Cunningham, Dail, Daniel,
Davis, of Charles, Davis, of Washington,
Dent, Earle, Harwood, Hatch, Henkle, Holly-
day, Johnson, Jones, of Somerset, King,
Larsh, Lee, Markey, Mitchell, Miller, Morgan,
Murray, Pugh, Ridgely, Russell, Sands,
Smith, of Dorchester, Sneary, Stockbridge,
Thomas—37.
Nays—Messrs. Abbott, Annan, Cushing,
Ecker, Galloway, Hopkins, Hopper, Keefer,
McComas, Mullikin, Nyman, Parker, Schley,
Stirling, Swope; Wooden—16.
The Convention accordingly adjourned.
FIFTY-FOURTH DAY.
THURSDAY, July 21,1864.
The Convention met at 10 o' clock, A. M.
Prayer by the Rev. Mr. McNemar.
The roll was called, and the following mem-
bers answered to their names:
Messrs. Goldsborough, President; Abbott,
Annan, Barron, Belt, Brooks, Carter, Cham-
bers, Crawford, Cunningham, Cushing;, Dail,
Daniel, Davis, of Charles, Davis, of Washing-
ton, Dent, Earle, Ecker, Galloway, Greene,
Harwood, Hatch, Hollyday, Hopkins, Hop-
per, Johnson, Jones, of Somerset, Keefer,
Kennard. King, Larsh, Lee, Mace, Markey,
McComas, Miller, Mitchell, Morgan, Mullikin,
Murray, Negley, Nyman, Parker, Pugh, Rus-
sell, Sands, Schley, Smith, of Carroll, Smith, |
