interest. I seek to avoid both, I seek to re-
lieve the State from holding on to the Chesa-
peake and Ohio Canal, and I seek to protect
the interest of the people who reside in that
portion of the State by making the terms of
the sale such that they never can damage the
public interests in any way. Hence it is that
I offer this amendment, I take it for granted
that the board to sell will carry out in good
faith this provision, and will enter into bonds
or agreement with the party who buys fully
carrying out this object.
Mr. PUGH. I wish I could convince—
The PRESIDENT. The gentleman has al-
ready spoken twice.
Mr. ABBOTT. I understand that the object
in the sale of these works is to realize the
most money that can be obtained to benefit
the State. It appears to me that it is ridicu-
lous for us now to attempt to decide who
shall or who shall not buy it. I hope that
the amendment offered by the gentleman will
not prevail. If the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Baltimore county (Mr.
Ridgely,) is to obtain as much as it is possi-
ble to get for the stocks, for the interest of the
whole State, it is not our place, having this
property to sell, to say that certain persons
shall not buy it. I do not see bow the inte-
rests of the State can be subserved by any such
obligation. It says not only that such per-
sons shall not buy it, but that whoever does
buy it shall not sell for all time to come to
such persons. It looks to me like a provision
which will prevent the work from being
bought by any one. I hope the amendment
of the gentleman from Baltimore county
(Mr. Ridgely) will prevail.
Mr. SCHLEY. The object of the committee
in making their report of section thirty-nine,
was to lay down a line of general policy for
the State to pursue. The committee had no
thought of passing an act of assembly for the
sale of any particular public work or of the
whole of them. My objection to the amend-
ment of the gentleman from Baltimore coun-
ty consists considerably of that fact, that it is
in the nature of an act of assembly providing
for the agency, sale, and appropriation of the
proceeds arising from such sale or sales, with
all the specialities that an act of assembly
would provide. It says at what rate it shall
be sold, how it shall be sold, &c.
I voted for the amendment of the gentle-
man from Kent (Mr. Chambers,) because it
was assimilated to the idea that the commit-
tee had in view, to lay down a general line
of public policy. It only went beyond that,
in one or two important particulars I admit,
but only beyond it in order to limit the pow-
er that the general assembly might by pos-
sibility use unwisely, or, as gentlemen have
unfortunately suggested here, corruptly, in a
sale for less than its convertible par into State
stocks. I have no such apprehension that
the general assembly of Maryland will be cor- |
rupted. I am sure that one benefit of the
discussion b. this convention to-day will be
to attract public attention so conspicuously
to the action of the next general assembly
that the most effectual conceivable guaranty
will be given thereby to the public, that
whatever law may be passed in that direction
will not be contaminated by lobby corruption.
With this view, I infinitely prefer the re-
port of the committee, which lays down this
general line of policy. It does not elate spe-
cifically what shall be sold, that this stock
shall be sold and the other reserved; but it
leaves that to the wise discretion of the gene-
ral assembly representing the people of the
State, and coming immediately from them,
fresh, to regulate according to the time and
the circumstances.
All the propositions contained in these sev-
eral amendments were more or less discussed
by the committee. I believe it was generally
agreed by the committee that it was better to
lay down a naked line of policy than to at-
tempt to encumber the constitution with the
provisions, regulations, and restrictions
which these amendments contain. I am con-
fident, from the opinions manifested and the
opinions expressed here to-day, that there is
no probability of a general concurrence in the
provisions of any such proposed sale, nor in the
objects of the sale; and that it will be impos-
sible to obtain here, in the time that we pro-
pose to allot to the consideration of this sub-
ject, anything like unanimity or wise action
in that direction,
I merely rise to express briefly this view as
a reason why I shall oppose the pending pro-
position, and recur to, and prefer, the one
reported by the committee.
Mr. STOCKBRIDGE. There is one point upon
which, before voting upon these questions, I
desire to be informed. If I understand aright,
there is a considerable proportion of the
stocks in the public works, and more partic-
ularly in the hanks, held by the State to the
credit of the school fund, or to the credit of
certain other particular funds; so that al-
though the State in form is the owner of this
stock, yet it is in fact but a trustee holding
these stocks for the benefit of the school fund
and certain other institutions. Now, I want
to understand whether, if we adopt this
amendment, these stocks so held to the credit
of certain funds, are to be sold and the pro-
ceeds invested in the extinguishment of the
State debt? If so, what becomes of the cestui
que trust, the real party interested? I should
like to understand how this will operate;
whether we shall get into difficulty in that
matter.
Mr. MILLER. The gentleman will perceive
from the comptroller's report that the school
fund consists entirely of bank stocks.
Mr. STOCKBRIDGE. There is a list of stocks
here held for the use of the school fund; a
formidable list amounting to— |
