them to indorse, they can obtain money
through the agency of a friend at the bank of
which they are officers, just as well as if the
constitution gave them the power to borrow
it for themselves.
It is not fair to infer from the fact that no
case has been brought to our knowledge, that
there has been no infraction of this law, since
the adoption of it in the constitution. The
very fact that they may indirectly accomplish
the same purpose satisfactorily accounts for
it. I do not believe that the assertion could
be made truthfully, if the indirect accom-
plishment of the same purpose could be ascer-
tained. Why do we hear nothing since 1850
of the violation of this law? Because the
proceeding by the use of the same of a, friend,
with the indorsement of a director, accom-
plishes all the purpose that is desired, and
therefore he need not violate the law; in
other words, because the law is inoperative.
I wish to suggest one idea that I have not
heard suggested. It is that there are several
counties in which there is but a single bank
ineach. In these banks the officers are se-
lected, as they are everywhere I admit, from
the large stockholders, men of property,
men of character and reputation as business
men and men of integrity. Now, this class of
persons being in the direction of the bank,
they cannot, as suggested by the gentleman
from Washington county (Mr. Negley,) go
to a neighboring bank to get money, because
there is no neighboring bank to go to. You
deny to them, therefore, the privilege which
other citizens residing in the vicinity of the
several banks can enjoy, under this prohibi-
tion. In Baltimore that may be no objection ;
hut it is so in Kent county. There you would
exclude some of the very best men in the
county from participating in the advantages
of the bank, the common advantages enjoyed
by every other citizen.
With regard to the penalty, I agree with
the gentleman from Anne Arundel (Mr. Mil-
ler) in his view of the law. I do not think it
is necessary here to reaffirm a principle of com-
mon law. A statute or a constitutional pro-
vision, may be legally enforced, although it
is not accompanied by a penalty. The vio-
lation of it is a misdemeanor to be punished
by fine or imprisonment at the discretion of
the court precisely as provided here
Therefore I say, without any banking ex-
perience, because I never had but one note in
bank that I recollect, and that wan a great
many years ago, I can well believe that injury
may be accomplished by this, to honest men ;
and those directors who are not honest can
always get the assistance of another party
and reciprocate by indulgence in return. I
think that in the case of honest directors,
they may borrow from a bank, without injur-
ing the bank itself or the community. I
shall vote against the amendment for these
reasons. |
The question being taken, the result was—
yeas 37, nays 19—as follows :
Yeas— Messrs. Goldsborough, President;
Abbott, Annan, Barron, Belt, Carter, Cun-
ningham, Davis, of Charles. Earle, Ecker,
Galloway, Harwood, Henkle. Hoffman, Holly-
day, Hopkins, Hopper, King, Lee, Mace, Mar-
key, McComas, Mitchell, Miller, Morgan, Mul-
likin, Murray, Negley, Parker, Russell, Sands,
Smith, of Carroll, Smith, of Dorchester,
Swope, Sykes, Wickard, Wooden—37.
Nays—Messrs. Brooks, Chambers, Craw-
ford, Cushing, Daniel, Davis, of Washing-
ton, Dent, Greene, Hatch, Jones, of Somer-
set, Keefer, Kennard, Larsh, Nyman, Pugh,
Schley, Sneary, Stirling, Stockbridge—19.
When his name was called,
Mr. ABBOTT said: I am in favor of a na-
tional currency. Believing that every incor-
poration by a State of banks of issue to be
unconstitutional, I voted against giving the
legislature power to charterer recharter any
more of these institutions. Believing that
this amendment is going to encumber it, and.
make it less desirable, I shall vote for it. I
vote "aye."
So the amendment was adopted.
The consideration of the 44th section was
resumed, and it was read 'as follows:
"Sec. 44 Corporations, other than for
municipal purposes, may be formed and crea-
ted under general provisions and regulations,
to be prescribed by the general assembly, and
shall not be created by special act, except so
far as special acts may be necessary to author-
ize any person or persons to exercise and en-
joy such corporate rights, franchises and pri-
vileges. All laws and special acts pursuant
to this section, may be altered from time to
lime, or repealed; provided, nothing herein
contained shall be construed to alter, change
or amend, in any manner, the article in rela-
tion to banks.
Mr. STIRLING submitted the following amend-
ment:
Sec. 44. Strike out down to the word
"all," in line seven, and insert, "corpora-
tions may be formed under general laws, but
shall not be created by special act, except for
municipal purposes, and in cases where, in
the judgment of the general assembly, the
object of the corporation cannot be attained.
under general laws."
Mr. STIRLING said: The present constitu-
tion prohibits the legislature from creating
coporations by special act, except where in
their judgment it cannot be done under gene-
ral laws. The section as reported prohibits
them absolutely, and forces them to make all
corporations by general laws. That I am op-
posed to. I think it is too strong a prohibition
upon legislative action. It is an absolute pro-
hibition. No special powers can be given to
any corporation, and of course every corpora-
tion will have the same powers. I think that |
