1874.] OF THE SENATE. 373

the appointment of Directors of the Maryland Penitentiary,
and to re-enact the same with amendments."

No good reason is perceived for the change proposed by the
terms of this bill. A similar provision classifying the direc-
tors, as suggested in this bill, was incorporated in the Act of
1837, chapter 320, but after a long and fair trial of it, the
Legislature, in 1860, abandoned it, and substituted the pres-
ent system of appointment. Under its workings, the insti-
tution has been made self-sustaining, and the exhibit of its
affairs for the last two years should certainly commend the
present mode of appointment to favorable consideration.

Gentlemen selected by the Governor at the same time, and
for the same term, whose habits of business and dispositions
fit them for a harmonious administration of the affairs of such
an institution, in my judgment, will be more likely to dis-
charge their duties to the satisfaction of the public.

No demand has been made, of which I am aware, by the
officers of the Penitentiary, or any other persons, for a resto-
ration of the old system, and as there is nothing more detri-
mental to the public interest than frequent changes in the
laws, I trust that the present mode of appointment may re-
main undisturbed. In addition to the general objections to
this bill, the bill itself contains an innovation I cannot sanc-
tion.

The Maryland Penitentiary is a State Institution, and,
therefore, all the citizens of all parts of the State have a
common interest in its management.

The bill provides that all of the directors shall be "resi-
dents of the city of Baltimore."

Heretofore, residents of Baltimore county had been selected
for this position, and, indeed, some of the most efficient di-
rectors of that institution, in the past, have been residents of
that county. I am not disposed to concede that there should
be any limit as to the locality from which directors should be
taken, but leaving the whole State as the field from which
a choice could be made, it is highly probable that the Gov-
ernor would nominate suitable persons from the territory con-
tiguous to Baltimore city, and from that city itself.

There are other objections to the bill itself, which careful
reading will suggest, and especially, I call your attention to
the apparent conflict between the first part of section 1 and
the closing line of the same section, which leaves it doubtful
whether by the use of the word "fill," the Governor is not
invested with power to make appointments hereafter for
terms expiring under this law, without the "advice and con-
sent of the Senate."

WM. PINKNEY WHYTE.

Which was read