Mr. BOWIE said that if it did not include the
right to alter or change the tolls, then it meant
nothing, and be presumed the mover intended
that the power to act upon the tolls should be
given; for that gentleman, he supposed, would
introduce no amendment without a practical
end.
Mr. HOWARD said that he had not intended to
interfere with the charters at all. The charters
prescribed the maximum rates.
Mr. BOWIE was sure he could not have meant
that, for as a constitutional lawyer he would
have seen that this Convention could exercise
no such power. But he, [Mr. B,] was about to
show that it would necessarily lead to the same
result, and if so, it would be improper to insert
the amendment into the Constitution. He could
not support it, because the right to review the
tolls with a view to make them uniform, implied
the power to change and alter them, it either
amounted to that or nothing. If it amounted
to that, the Convention had no power to modify
or infringe the charters of these institutions.—
There was a maximum and a minimum in some
of the charters, and in others the rates were spe-
cifically named. No board of commissioners,
whether elected by the Legislature or by the
people, could review those rates, or could use
any influence to produce a uniform rate of charge.
And if they had the power, it would be unwise
to pass any such amendment.
With reference to the Chesapeake and Ohio
Canal, the State had the controlling power, by
means of her stock Although Alexandria,
Georgetown and Washington city, the State of
Virginia, and even the General Government, by
virtue of its assumption of the debt of those
cities, as well as by virtue of its being an original
stockholder and subscriber, were interested in
the work; yet Maryland had the control over the
election of President and Directors of that Canal.
But with reference to the Baltimore and Ohio
Railroad, this was not the case. The State had
no control over them. Would it be wise, then,
to direct that the tolls upon the Canal should be
lowered or increased, when there was no power
to regulate the tolls of the Railroad, and when
the latter would be left entirely to the vote of
the directors of that work? He could not, there-
fore. vote for the proposition, if the power ex-
isted, and still less believing it to be an inter-
ference with the chartered rights of the compa-
nies.
As to other questions connected with this
matter, he was indifferent about them. As the
board of public works was created by law, and
an office not known to the Constitution, he was
perfectly willing to leave it to the Legislature
hereafter to mould it as they might think proper.
The time had passed by when appoint-
ments of this government would be delegated
by the sovereign people to any special agents.
They understood better than they once did, their
lights and their duties; and if the whole question
could now be submitted to the Legislature, he
could not doubt for a moment that those State's |
agents would hereafter be appointed by the peo-
ple. He saw no necessity for engrafting any
such office upon the Constitution. It was acrea-
ture of law, brought into being by the mere ex-
igencies of the times, and when the times chang-
ed, it might be expedient to dissolve the connec-
tion which had bound together the State of Ma-
ryland and these corporations. Why then make
the office paramount. He could therefore vote
against the whole proposition. But he would
say that if he conceived there was any necessity
for incorporating such an office as this upon the
Constitution, he should not hesitate for a mo-
ment to vote, as proposed by the gentleman
from Frederick, that they should be appointed
by the people. He would have them appointed
in districts, and if it could be done would have
them appointed from sections of the State as re-
mote as possible, not from Allegany county, but
from those who were the owners of the coal
works or coal mines in Allegany. He agreed
with the gentleman from Anne Arundel that
there was a direct and necessary conflict be-
tween the interests of the State and the interests
of the owners of coal mines in Allegany. While
the owners of the coal mines were interested in
having the rates of toll as low as possible, it
was the interest of the State to have them so
regulated as to bring the greatest amount of
money into the treasury. The true ground was
to bring them to the very highest point that the
consumers would bear. The rates of toll had
been reduced from one dollar to 54 cents. The
object and design had been, no doubt, to open
the way for a greater trade, and thus to obtain
a higher income of revenue. About that policy
gentlemen might differ. It was a mere experi-
ment. They had tried 54 cents; and if that
would not do they could bring 60 cents, or a
dollar, or any other rate within the chartered
limits. His own notions of policy would not
have induced him to reduce the tolls, for he be-
lieved consumers to be very patient, and liberal,
and generous. The price to the consumer em-
braced all the costs necessary to bring the raw
material into the manufactured state; and when
an article was wanted it would be purchased,
whatever the price might be. if he did not want
it he would not buy it; and if it was not in de-
mand, it would not sell, His own policy then
would be to put up the foils as high as consump-
tion would bear, and if the Allegany coal was
what we have always been told it was, for pur-
poses of generating steam, he had no doubt it
would bear a very high late of toll. But these
were questions which he did not think it necessary
to discuss now.
He was willing to confide the question to the
people. He did not wish the Constitution to be
marred by such questions, and he should there-
fore vote against the whole proposition. These
offices could be moulded and controlled by law,
and it was the duty of the Convention to put into
the Constitution nothing more nor less than was
absolutely necessary to control the Legislature
and the other departments of the Government. |
