Montgomery County sentinel. [volume] (Rockville, Md.) 1855-1974, 1858-03-12
Eastern Shore improvements Minor
ity ReDOrt

VIM DhoohE, iroil tne minority OF tne
Committee on Judicial Proceedings of
the Senate, submitted the following re-
port:
The undersigned, respectfully asks the
privilege in the form of minority re-
port, to explain the grounds on which
he dissents from the conclusion arrived
at by the majority of the committee on
Judicial Proceedings, to which was re-
ferrcd the bill entitled, An Act apply
ing to works of Internal Improvement
on the Eastern Shore, certain portions of
the unexpended balance Of the million
dollars" which by the act of eighteen
hundred and thirty-6ve, chap. 1916, en-
titled, &c.
Recognizing in the broadcast sense, the
obligation resting on the State faithfully
to fulfil all its contracts, and also, an
equality of rights among the citizens of
every portion of its territory, it would be
idle to attempt to add force to this I'M
qualified recognition by the mere accu-
mutation of words.
1t is sufficient to say, (what is honest
and constitmioaal,) is that which can
never fail to address itself with impress
sive, if not controlling influence, to the
judgments of the representatives of the
people of Maryland, (who, true to the
instincts and principles of their constitu-
encies,) have never been sluggish in the
fulilment of every engagement. This
is the just pride and warranted boast of
every Marylander. 1t is his birth-right
and, as an accompaniment to it, it
may be added, with the true Marylander,
there is nothing known of the distinction
of ",ShoreS," save what each man feels
as dwelling by his own hearth-stone, or
by the magnificent Bay, which, by the
finger of the Almighty, was directed to
rest as perfect type of the goodwill
and love which should eriSt between all
those, whether from The Eastern or West
crn Shore, who are permitted to look
upon it. II is q partition withom a d.
Uisi0n.
Without circumlocution, the bill rec
commended by the majority of the COM
mittee, may be defined to be one designed
to take from The Treasury of the State,
(and of course from the people, the
large sum of eight hundred and forty
seven thousand two hundred and thirty
five dollars and eighty cents. l will not
stop to fatigue the Senate with a speci-
fication of the details by which this re-
suit is proposed to be accomplished -
Whether it is proposed to be done by the
endorsation Of bonds by the State, the
issue directly by it of bonds. or, the pay
ment of money to be acquired by taxa
ton or loan, is wholly immaterial to the
inquiry. The substance of the recon-
mendation of the committee, is to appro-
PIRATE of the means of the people of
Maryland, SO much of their money
This, so far as / know, and believe, is
the avowed, as it is the purpose of the
bill. The question then arises, whether
the Legislature of Maryland has the
power to do it? 1t is question which
can only be answered by the constitution
and laws, to whose supreme control we
are subjugated, whilst acting in our legis-
lative capacity. The majority of the
committee entertain the opinion it can
be done in conformity to both, nay more,
they hold it to be the incumbent duty of
the State to redeem a plighted faith,
which, as they substantially allegc has
to this time been disregarded. So far as
I have heard, the belief of the majority
is derived entirely from their interpreta-
ton of the act of 1885, chap. 1896, gen
orally known as the Eight Million
Bill" They believe Gas am bound to
suppose that that act gave by way of
grant unconditionolly one million of dol
lars to the " Eastern Shore"
The 9Th section Of that act expressly
provides, by way of proviso, chat no
instalment sAM be paid by him (the
Treasurer) until after an eqtai proper
Gonal Payment shall hare been actualiy
made BY the other stochhoicfers"
The right Interpretation Of this Ian
guage depends wholly on the ascertain
ment of fuct, which is--was thore an
equal proportional payment by the stock
holders, other than the State? If there
was such payment on the part of the
other stockholders, the Governor and
Treasurer of the State can certify the
fact. They are both required to do so
by the act Of 1885. They have not done
SO, and it is not pretended that any such
payment was ever "AcTUALLY made"
1t must he observed that, according
to the words have quoted, the obliga-
ton of the State does not arise until
"atter the other stockholders shall have
made" proportional payments. 1t does
not rest on a concurrence of action, nor
on anything done by the State Jefore the
right to the other parties accrued. 1t is
what the law knows as condition pre-
cedent That | am warranted in saying
SO, will invoke the aid of some Of the
masters Of the law.
In Bacon's Arrangement, (Bouvier's
edition, second volume, title condition,
letter I, it is said:
Conditions precedent are such as
naua be performed before The estate can
rest" but on condition subsequent, the
estate is Immediately executed, yet the
continuance Of such estate dependcth on
the breach or performance Of the condi-
ton" Chancellor Kent, in the fourth
volume Of his commentaries, page 1919,
uses this language:
:" A precedent condition is one which
must take place before the estate can vest
or be enlarged as il lease to b for a
year, 10 commence from the first day Of