The Cecil Whig. [volume] (Elkton, Md.) 1841-current, 1841-09-25

aud only three Parran, Shower, and
Berrehl against it. The bill was then
carried by the following vote:
Aeirmative-Messrs. Tuck, (speaker.)
Mcdaniel, Usilton, Welch, Gale Brown.
Iglehart, Higgins, Simmons, Orrick. Ris,
teau, Ely, Turner, Balt.co. Kerr, Jones.
Carroll, Frazier, Ecleston, Goldsborough,
Tall, Parker, Gheseln, Swan, Alexander,
yua"ls6y, Giles, Hillen, gallagher, Nc
KnneH, Mann, Beam, Dawson, Weir
Blocher, H"ddleson, Spligg-36. :"
Negativc-Messrs. Crane. Sellers
Paren, Duke, Kent, Beall, Hughes. Car
penter Matthews, Denny, Bowie, (ofTaI>
Jump, (of Tal) Lennon, Comegus,
Eca's, Grason, Harrison, Ulz@er.
townsend, ilearn, Powell Biscr, Gcyer.
W'll'ams, Nelson. Boon, Jump; (of Car.
Rentch, Wilmer, Griffith, White, .Soper.
Berrett-36.
Fourteen Van Buren, me nbers voted in
the affirmative, and thirteen in the mega
tive.
We all remember the history of the sale
OF the States Bonds by her Commission
ers under the Eight Million Act of 1S35
CHI. 395, to the amount of six millions If
dollars, one half thereof to the Baltimore
and Ohio Railroad Company, and the 9TH
er half to the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal
Company.
mat act PROVIDED that the Bonds should
be sold in Europe or in this Country for
Slao nett for every $500 par value, and
that the excess of the par value, or the 20
per cent, should be paid into the Urea SUI
~ TO cons tltute sinking fund, SC. The
commissioners, failing to make sale in
Europe, on or about the 24th of Dec.
1887, consummated contracts with the
Baltimore and Ohio, Railroad COMPANY.
and the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal Com
pany, whereby they placed at the disposal
OF those Companies, Bonds of the
State, to the amount of six millions of
dollars.
The opinion prevailed extensively that
the contracts thus consummated were in
violation of the provisions of the Act of
1880, and consequently that the State was
discharged from her liabilities under that
act; and further, that, by reason, of the
necessltous condition of the COMPANY.
great sacrifices, would, in all probability.
be incurred in the ultimate disposition Of
the bonds, On the meeting of tn e Gene
raj Assembly at Dec. session, 1897. an ar
dent controversy arose in relation to the
whole subject. Mr., Thomas A. Alexan-
der Wing member, submitted report
from the majority of the Committee of
Ways and Means, which concluded with
resolutions declaring the aforesaid con-
tracts to have been made agains, the
form and lntcnt'' Of the Act of 1885, and
the commissioners ought not to make
''any contracts which would not assure
sales to the amount of the price prescrib-
ed, without any direct or Indirect sacr-
iceon the part Of the companies.'
A counter report was made by Messrs.
Solomon Hillcn jr. John Mcdaniel, snd
James Turner, the minority of the Com
mlttec of Ways and Means, justifying the
sale Of the States bonds, and concluding
with resolutions declaring that the IL e.
gislature had no power to rescind or an
nul the contracts" made by the commits
sloners with the companies, aforesaid, and
that it would be inerpediem to institute
proceedings, sc. sc. (Vol. Pub. Doc.
1897, State Library After long
and animated debate in Committee
OF the Whole, and after various PROPOSE
tons had been submitted and were pend
ing, Mr. William Grason, now the Co
vernon of the State, and then a Van Bu-
rem delegate from Queen Ame's county,
came to the RESCUE, and submitted Sc
rics Of resolutions No. 26 of 1897 mod
flying essentially the terms prescribed by
the Act of 1895, CHI. 395, and declaring
SHAT The contracts made By lie said com,
miSSioncrs arith The said companies ShaLl
be considered, and Mey are herc6y declar-
cd 10 be, binding upon the State. (H. J.
1897, p. 329.) Mr.. Grason's resolutions
were accepted by the Committee of the
Whole, andreported to the House. Whilst
they were pending in the House, Mr..
James W. Williams, a Van Buren, dele
gate from Hartford county, moved to a.
mend them by adding "that for the pur-
pose Of discharging the debt and
interest of the debt contracted,
or TO be contracted, in virtue of
the Act of 1885, of 1876, such parts of the
States as are TO derive the most advantage
from said improvements, shall be charged
with The heaviest portion of said debt and
interest, and shall be assessed therefor &C
cordingly, and the Legislature shall here
after determine whether any county, re-
mote from works of internal Improvement
as not to derive decided benefit there
from, shall be charged with any portion
principal or interest Of said debt" The
question was put on Mr. Will;ams's a.
mcndmcnts and determined in the mega