Port Tobacco times, and Charles County advertiser. (Port Tobacco, Md.) 1845-1898, 1858-06-10
AT HOME, May 18th, 1858.
To the Editors Of the Baltimore San:

"a AAo"c, 10y A~"e, Aooo'
To the Editors Of the Baltimore Sun:
GENTLEMEN Not being subscriber, by the
kindness of a friend, your very useful and valu-
able paper Of the 29th of April has been placed
into my hand. l find by perusing its columns
that an allusion is made to a law passed during
the late session of the Legislature-an act "to
provide for the inspection, measuring and weigh
ing of Grain in the city of Baltimore" The
original draft designed to form the 10Th section,
though somewhat blotted and effaced by inter-
lineations, if my memory is right, read in these
words: "Nothing in this act shall be so con-
strued as to take away from any owner or own
ers of grain the right, by written order, to his
agent or consignee, to direct him to sell, with
out inspection, and deliver the same without
complying with the foregoing provisions of this
act" The intent andmeaning of this section
is clear and evident: the owner or owners are
to exercise supervision and control over their
grain if not per Sc, through the instrumentality
of their agent or agents. By aohat means? By
virtue of a written order.
1t may be argued by some and commended for
by others that no grain can be exempted from
inspection, unless by virtue of written order
to an agent in the city of Baltimore. This, too,
would be an absurdity in TERMS for the right to
control must abide with it's possessor before it
can be delegated, and when delegated cannot
create an authority greater than it's author
Thus, the right to control may be exercised per
Sc or per alum. The seeming awkwardness of
the section, as copied into your columns, must
have been occasioned by some clerical error es-
Gaping the vigilance of the Engrossing Commit
tee for | well remember my views on that oc-
casion. held the doctrine then and maintain
it still, that in land Of liberty, in land of
l lox in l,pI Cf hoe
right to control his labor when not required
for public utility or demanded by common dam
ger If this doctrine be sound in principle,
which none will deny, who has a better right to
enjoy it than the agriculturist, who, by his la
Dor, provides for all the rest
Again: The law at best was mere expert
ment. was unwilling to impair the CONNER
cial interest of the great emporium of our State
by encountering the risk of preventing the in
hux of grain into her market. But when the
learned and distinguished Senator of Dorchester
accepted my amendment-to whose kindness
feel grateful leaving to every owner of grain
to annul or re-enact the law, and those free who
choose to accept it, l could no longer withhold
my assent to its general provisions.
And again: That fraud has been committed
; upon that valuable commodity no one will de-
ny. How, and by whom, it is not my province
to determine. 1t is, however, grateful to my
, feelings to acknowledge that the motives which
1or no OTTER purpose than to proven
the future innovations of fraud. Whether i
will prove successful or not time and experienc,
must determine. [ am, however, gratifed t.
learn that several eminent jurists have ex
pressed an opinion, that the intention of tn,
Legislature in passing the bill referred to is suf
6ciently expressed to carry effect, notwithstand
ing the seeming defect of the section alluded to
:, That object being accomplished, I am content
to do my duty is the highest honor covet.
: A SENATOR.