was quadruple, should not prevent the passage of
the amendment. The gentleman from Queen
Anne's, had said that if would create a great crib
for the printers. He, (Mr.S.,) knew not why there
ought not to be a crib for printers, as well as one
for lawyers, for surely the present mode of legis-
lation is one of the latter kind. But in framing
a Constitution for a great and growing State, we
should not look to any one class of the commu-
nity alone, but endeavor to secure the greatest
good to the greatest number.
Mr. HARBINE expressed himself entirely favor-
able to the object of the amendment, but he could
not see how the difficulty against which it was di-
rected. could be overcome. One-half the mem-
bers of the Legislature, would not know where to
find these laws. If we are to provide for the
codification of our system, then indeed this pro-
per reform might be carried into effect. Without
such codification, the gentleman from Caroline,
could not get at the object of his amendment.
Mr. BROWN said the difficulty with him was
this. if the Legislature put all the laws relating
to a subject, winch have not been repealed, into
one, it would amount to a codification, and it
would take a long lime, perhaps twelve months,
[Mr. Schley, in his seat, "twelve years."] to ac-
complish it.
Mr. SPENCER. thought the subject was sur-
rounded with difficulties. If every time we find
a defect in a law, the Legislature is to re-enact
it, there will be no end of legislation. Almost
every law will have to be re-enacted, and the
sessions must become interminable. He refered
to the insolvent laws, and the attachment system,
which would, in such cases, lead to long discus-
sions, so as to protract the sittings of the Legis-
lature.
Mr. STEWART, of Caroline, said that he felt a
deep interest in the amendment that he had of-
fered, because he thought it would remedy many
of the evils that exist under the prevent mode of
legislation, and work great good to the people of
the State.
The gentleman from Queen Anne's, (Mr.
Spencer,) has said that the adoption of the
amendment, would lead to interminable sessions
of the Legislature. He (Mr. S.) did not think
so. If the plan he had proposed, had been adopt-
ed at the commencement of our State Govern-
ment, the whole volume of laws, instead of swell-
ing out to its present bulk and requiring a life-
time of study to know them. would not now ex-
ceed, three or four hundred pages, and would be
understood by the most of the people. The ex-
isting evil calls for a remedy, and how else can
it be applied except by a provision in the Consti-
tution, and what better time can there be, to com-
mence a new system of legislation than when the
new Constitution has been adopted? It has re-
peatedly been urged, against the amendment,
that members of the Legislature could not know
what the laws were, and the gentleman from Anne
Arundel, (Mr. Dorsey,) has said that they would
have to go to a lawyer to get a simple amend-
ment to a law drawn. There could not be no
stronger argument in favor of the amendment
than this. It is an acknowledgment that incom-

petent men, under the present system, may draft
laws and get them passed in an imperfect form.
How, he would ask, could the Legislature pass
wise and judicious amendments to laws, when
they knew not what the laws were. As well
might you expect a man, who knew nothing of
mechanics to repair an engine properly, as that
the Legislature should amend a law wisely, when
they knew nothing of the law that they were
amending. Many amendatory supplements, now,
require explanatory acts, and thus supplement is
added to law, and law to supplement, until it re-
quires judges, lawyers, and jurymen, to find out
what the law is. There are many penal stat-
utes that is of vital importance, that they should
be understood and yet in many cases, they were
so covered up amid supplements and amendments,
that it is often difficult to find the true law. If
a farmer or mechanic should desire to prove an
account to be sent out of the State, or one against
a deceased person, he doubted whether they
could find the law. The laws are now so volu-
minous, that but few will incur the expense of
their purchase.
The latter part of the amendment has met with
the strongest opposition. Is it because it is some-
thing new? He was aware that there were many-
persons averse to change—that prefer old things
and customs to new. This is an age of progress
and improvement. We cannot look around any-
where in this great and flourishing Union, but
what we see improvement and progress. There
is no nobility in old usages and customs. Every
thing is appreciated for its intrinsic worth.
What, he would ask, does the latter part of the
amendment propose ? "No law shall be revived
or amended by reference to its title only." Is
not that right and reasonable ? Does not every
one know that laws are often amended or revived
by reference to their title only ? This, then, is
to prevent such mode of reviving and amending
laws. Then again, "but in such case, all such
parts of the act to be revived or amended, that
are embraced in the object of the bill, shall be
re-enacted and published at length. If this be
adopted, the Legislature, before they can revive
or amend a law, must have it before them. They
must then know what it is they are to revive or
amend. It is also proposed to have the laws
codified. He was heartily in favor of it, and
when they were codified, the amendment he had
offered would keep them so. Without it, they
would require codifying every ten years.
Mr. SPRIGG moved to amend the amendment
of Mr. STEWART, of Caroline, by adding the following.

"And no law enacted by the Legislature, shall
embrace more than one object, and that shall be
described in its title, and no law shall be revised
or amended by reference to its title only."
Mr. DORSEY said he thought it very impor-
tant the qualifications of the persons employed
in this work, should be well ascertained. No
man should be permitted to discharge the duty
who is not a sound and experienced lawyer. The
codification of our system of laws would require
great skill and care. The members of the Gen-