604 THE CHANCELLOR'S CASE.—1 BLAND.

* we wish you to return us the bills, that we may determine
644 on them."

To this message from the Senate, the Delegates on the 23d of
the same month made the following reply: "May it please your hon-
ours—This house have considered your message of the 19th in-
stant, by James Lloyd, Esquire. We are very desirous of mak-
ing a liberal provision for the Governor, the Chancellor, and the
Judges; and wish the circumstances of our people would justify
this House in acceding to the salaries proposed by the Senate. If
time will permit, we shall attempt to provide particular funds, to
secure the payment of the salaries established by our bill. It will
always be in the power, as it will certainly be in the inclination of
the Legislature, to make such alterations in the present salaries, as
the ability of government will permit.

"As the Chancellor must necessarily have great trouble, from
the number of disputes relative to the grants of lands, we are will-
ing to make him compensation; and to add a clause to the bill tor
the civil list, allowing him the sum of———for the next year.

"This House will consent to limit the number of Judges in the
Court of Appeals; and that when any vacancy may happen, the
number shall not exceed three, until the abilities of the State will
justify an increase of the establishment."

Soon after the sending of the last of these messages, on the 7th
of February, 1786, the Act of 1785, ch. 27, received the assent of
both Houses, and became a law. This is the first legislative act
which secured to the Chancellor and Judges their salaries during
the continuance of their commissions.

This review, which we have taken of the first nine years of the
Republic, shows, that during the whole of that time, that provision
of the thirtieth Article of the Declaration of Eights, which re-
quires the Legislature to secure to the Chancellor and Judges their
salaries during the continuance of their commissions, was waived.
But the reason why it was so left dormant and inoperative, is most
satisfactorily shown. The causes were imperative and uncontroll-
able; they amounted almost to a physical impossibility to give
effect to that provision of the Declaration of Rights. Such causes
have, at various times, been held to be an allowable excuse, for
the widest departures from some of the most important provisions
of the Constitution. Thus, in the year 1780, when this State was
imminently threatened with being made the immediate seat of
war, the Governor was invested with the dangerous power of
seizing any * persons he suspected of treachery to the country,
645 and of having them tried and executed according to mar-
tial law. Nothing could justify, but the times seemed to excuse
the measure, (q)

(q) June, 1781, ch. 12, and November, 1781, ch. 5, notes Hanson's Laws of
Maryland. It seems that Maryland was not singular in thus leaving her