not subserved by it. Nobody's interest is sub-
served by it, but the interest of those who
hold the offices of the company. They do
not pay their debts; they make no provision
for their debts. Nobody knows exactly how
the toils are used. In our county they have
contracted for repairs; men have had faith in
them, and have gone largely into debt upon
the promises of the Chesapeake and Ohio
Canal Company to pay; have built their
dams repaired their canal, but have never
been paid for it. The officers and men who
control it seem to absorb all the money, and
the outside world gets none of it; it is a mis-
erable instrumentality of corruption and
fraud, and the sooner the State gets rid of its
interest in it the better. I think we ought to
sell the State's interest in all these works,
and thereby get rid at one stroke of an im-
mense field of political corruption and fraud.
And now is the best time to do it, and the
governor, comptroller and treasurer of the
State are the proper parties to accomplish
this purpose,
Mr. PUGH. I shall vote against the substi-
tute proposed by the gentleman from Kent
(Mr. Chambers,) because I prefer a large
portion of that offered by the gentleman
from Baltimore county (Mr. Ridgely.) But I
object to the proviso in toto, that all the
State's interest in or claim against the Ches-
apeake and Ohio Canal, the Tide Water Ca-
nal, and the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal
may be scold for the best terms that can be
obtained, and at the proper time I shall offer
an amendment to strike out that portion of
his proposition.
Mr. MILLER. That has already been stricken
out.
Mr. RIDGELY. And another provision in-
serted embracing all works,
Mr. PUGH. What I mean is this: I am
opposed to that portion of the proposition of
the gentleman from Baltimore county, which
provides that the interest of the State in all
works of internal improvement may be sold
upon the best terms that can be obtained by
these three parties, or any two of them. That
is to say, that they may be sold for what
they will probably bring. If they were
thought to be worth no more than the gen
tleman from Washington county (Mr. Negley
suppose them to be worth, they may be sold
for very little.
I am opposed to the substitute of the gen
tleman from Kent, for the reason that I am in
favor of the first part of the proposition of
the gentleman from Baltimore county. But
that proposition is not now before the house
When it docs come before the house I shall
vote for the proposition submitted by the
gentleman from Baltimore county, with the
understanding that I shall oppose all the lat-
ter part of his substitute. And I wish at
this time to explain why I commit myself to
that limited extent in favor of any proposi-
11 |
tion to interfere with the State's interest in
the internal improvements of the State.
Mr. CHAMBERS. If the amendment which
the gentleman from Cecil (Mr. Pugh) says he
will in due time offer to the proposition of
the gentleman from Baltimore county (Mr.
Ridgely) shall prevail, then the point of dif-
fenence between that proposition and the one
I have submitted is this; first, in the one
case, the legislature is to act by appointing
agencies; in the other, the governor, comp-
troller and treasurer are to act. But I re-
gard as much more important the interest
of the State in the banks; that is the most
important interest.
Mr. PUGH. I do not understand that the
agents are directed to sell that interest, only
to have the power to sell.
Mr. CHAMBERS, If you do not intend them
to exercise the power, then it is idea to give
the authority to them.
Mr. RIDGELY. According to circumstances.
Mr. CHAMBERS. The circumstances now
exist.
Mr. RIDGELY. They may change hereafter.
The question recurred upon the substitute
proposed by Mr. CHAMBERS for the proposi-
tion submitted by Mr. RIDGELY.
Upon this question Mr. DENT called for the
yeas and nays, which were ordered.
The question was then taken by yeas and
nays, and resulted—yeas 15, nays 38—as fol-
lows :
Yeas—Messrs. Belt, Chambers, Cushing,
Dent, Duvall, Edelen, Greene, Hollyday, Lee,
Mitchell, Morgan, Parran, Schley, Stirling,
Wilmer—15.
Nays—Messrs. Goldsborough, President ;
Abbolt, Annan, Audoun, Brooks, Carter,
Dail, Daniel, Davis, of Washington, Earle,
Ecker, Farrow, Hebb, Hoffman, Hopkins,
Hopper, King, Markey, McComas, Miller,
Mullikin, Murray, Negley, Nyman, Parker,
Pugh, Ridgely, Russell, Smith, of Carroll,
Smith, of Dorchester, Sneary, Stockbridge,
Swope, Sykes, Todd, Valliant, Wickard,
Wooden- 38.
The substitute was accordingly rejected.
The question recurred upon the proposition
submitted by Mr. RIDGELY.
Mr. CHAMBERS My proposition was re-
jected, perhaps, because being in the nature
of an amendment to an amendment it could
not be amended by changing the agency
from the legislature to that contained in the
proposition of the gentleman from Baltimore
county. Will it be in order for me to sub-
mit substantially the same proposition, with
the exception that the parlies to make the
sale are to be the 'governor, comptroller, and
treasurer, instead of the general assembly ?
The PRESIDENT. That will be in order.
The gentleman will reduce his proposition to
writing.
Mr. CHAMBERS submitted the following
amendment to the amendment: |
