ing these men to the counties from which they came; for, had the counties desired to have them so credited at the time, there was not a particle of impediment in the way of their enlisting them. There was no motion on the part of any one in those counties so to aid the government. On the contrary, the right of the government to take those negroes was in all cases declaimed or inveighed against. The representatives of Maryland, in Congress, denied the right of the government to take them. Those counties, so far as I know, have never admitted the right of the government to take those negroes. And if they are to be credited to the State, I think they should be creditied to the general quota of the State. But I think the practical question for us to consider, is that before the 5th of September, it would be impossible for the government to do anything in this matter. There is but about two weeks now to the time fixed for the draft. And if it should be decided that we are not to furnish the number we have been called upon to furnish, then the quotas of a I the States of the Union must be revised to make up the number for which Maryland would be deficient. Mr. JONES, of Somerset. The gentleman from Baltimore (Mr. Cushing) has most extraordinary ideas of logic and of justice. Because the people in the counties do not admit the right of the government to take their slaves and put them in the army, when they are so taken and put in the army, the counties are not entitled to any credit for them. Why, sir, every man who is drafted goes unwillingly, and the same objection might there arise. He does not go willingly, does not admit the justice of being taken froin home and put in the army; therefore, the county from which he is taken should receive no credit for him. 1 I think it seems to be generally conceded that there has been great injustice done many portions of the State, in not giving the proper credit for persons who have been taken and put into the army of the United States. I saw in the newspapers some time ago, the statement that representations had been made by the governor, authorities, and some of the leading men of Kentucky, to the administration at Washington, that a very large portion of their population had actually left the State, and gone into the service of the Confederates, and therefore a draft upon the residue, based upon the entire population as if these men were still there, would be most unjust to those remaining. For those men who had left the State and had gone into the Confederate service had expatriated themselves, and were no longer to be considered a part of the population of Kentucky, supporting the government of the United States, and from which a draft should be made. And the authorities at Washington, upon these repre sentations, allowed a credit of twenty-five thousand to Kentucky upon the draft. It has been stated that a great many have left this State and gone away. Who is responsible for that? They have taken their lives in their hands; they have left the State; they are no longer citizens of this State. We admit the right of expatriation; we admit that a man may leave the State and go elsewhere, to Great Britain, to France, to any European country, and if their laws allow, he may become a citizen of those countries. If they are gone, is it proper and just that they should be considered as still here and liable to the draft, and their absence made up by the heavier draft upon those who remain. And besides, the gentleman from Frederick Mr. Schley) states that he has been informed that a lumping credit of eight thousand men has been made upon the deficiency of Maryland, by the authorities at Washington. Now, if that credit is on the score of the slaves that have been taken away from the several counties, then I submit most respectfully that such a credit operates most unjustly to the counties that have furnished these eight thousand men. The people of Frederick, and Washington, and Allegany, and Baltimore city, and all those populous portions of the State that have furnished very few colored recruits to the army of the United States, would get the benefit of this credit, in precisely the same manner and in a greater ratio than the counties that have furnished them. Mr. SCHLEY. We have furnished white men. Mr. JONES, of Somerset. I apprehend that all the counties have made efforts to raise their men. And I know that more than a thousand negroes have been taken from Somerset county, and very few have been credited to that county. My friend from Dorchester informs me that of two regiments enlisted in the city of Baltimore there were a great many men from his county, and from my county, who had gone to the city of Baltimore and enlisted there, and that city has the credit for them. Now that is not just. There ought to be an inquiry into this atter. We have suffered injustice enough already, in a variety of ways. I have no doubt that the governor and the adjutant general have been doing and will do all they can to put this matter right. I trust they will push this investigation, which more properly belongs to them, and endeavor to ascertain how many have been taken from the several counties, in order that the proper credit may be given to those counties which have furnished the troops. I trust that the difficulty which has existed with Col. Bowman will be disposed of in some way, and that the government will see the justice of having the authorities of the State furnished with correct lists of those who have been mustered in the service of the Uni therefore, furnished enough able-bodied negro men to fill the quota for our entire congressional district. The question was then taken upon postponing informally the preamble and resolution submitted by Mr. MARBURY, and it was agreed to. ted States, who have been in the recent bat- Mr. ABBOTT. Has the county of Somerset offered any bounty for troops? Mr. JONES, of Somerset. No, sir; the county has offered no bounty, but she has filled her quota, either in person or by substitute. Mr. BERRY, of Prince George's. I will give one reason why I think it would be wise to postpone the further consideration of this subject. It is admitted on all sides that great injustice has been done to the State of Maryland. But we want the data before we come to a just conclusion. The object of postpon ing is to have that data before us. I propose to follow up the postponement. with the motion that a committee of three or five be appointed to make the necessary inquiry in order to obtain from the proper authority the requisite information. The gentleman from Baltimore city proposes to hurry this thing through without that information. Mr. CUSHING. I propose to vote it down in this convention. Mr. BERRY, of Prince George's, then sub Ordered, That a committee of three be appointed by the president to correspond with the proper authorities, and furnish this convention with the number of recruits, both white and black, which have been received into the service of the United States, from the several counties of the State, and the city of Baltimore, and also the number credited to the said counties and city respectively." Mr. CHAMBERS. I would suggest to my friend to have one committee man from each congressional district. Mr. STIRLING. I am opposed to sending a commit ee to Washington. It is the governor's business to look after this matter. I do not understand that he has made any publication of wrong having been done. I offer the following amendment: strike out all after the word "ordered," and insert 'That the governor is hereby requested to furnish this convention with any information he may have as to the quota of the State, and the credits that have been given for inhabitants of the State, white or black, who have been enlisted in the service of the United States.' from the provost marshals and the authorities at Washington. My order does not contemplate the sending a committee to Washington; only to correspond with the proper authorities. Mr. BERRY, of Prince George's. He proposes to vote it down. He says it is all just and proper that whatever number Prince Mr. BERRY, of Prince George's. The George's county has furnished should be cred-governor could not possibly give us in'orited to the whole State. Now is that proper?mation of the number received into the service Does he forget that the quota of every county of the United States. That we can only get and district in the State is fixed by the provost marshal? Does he forget that each county and each district in each county has to furnish the number allotted to it? I should say there was not the slightest justice in crediting the number to the whole State; that it was contrary to the spirit of the law. The law enacts that each county should be credited with whatever recruits it may furnish to the army. I say it would be not only unjust, but contrary to the law. Before I conclude I propose for a moment to refer to the negro population of our county. Mr. STIRLING. What is the use of postponing this subject, if we are going to take up all the morning in discussing it? Mr. BERRY, of Prince George's. I do.not propose to discuss it all the morning. Mr. ABBOTT called for the previous question. The call was sustained, and the main question was ordered. The question was upon the substitute submitted by Mr. STIRLING. The question being taken, upon a division -ayes 34, noes 27-the substitute was adopted. The question then recurred upon the order of Mr. BERRY, of Prince George's as amended. Upon this question Mr. GALE called for the yeas and nays, and they were ordered. Mr. STIRLING. I do not refer to the gentle- The question being then taken by yeas and man from Prince George's (Mr. Berry) in par-nays, it resulted-yeas 38, nays 33-as folticular. 1 refer to all. Mr. BERRY, of Prince George's. I do not mean to discuss the question now. I only desire to say that the negro population of our county was 12,479; and I am satisfied that of that number 5,000 able-bodied negro men have been taken for the army. We have, lows: Yeas-Messrs. Goldsborough, President; Berry, of Prince George's, Billingsley, Blackiston, Brown, Chambers, Clarke, Crawford, Davis, of Charles, Dennis, Dent, Duvall, Edelen, Gale, Hodson, Horsey, Jones, of Cecil, Jones, of Somerset, Lansdale, Lee, Mace, Marbury, Mayhugh, Mitchell, Miller, Morgan, ernor, I shall vote for the order very cheerfully. But if it is with the President or with any federal authority, then I shall vote "no." If the gentleman who offered the order will assure me that the committee is to correspond with the governor, my vote shall remain as it is. Nays Messrs. Abbott, Annan, Audoun, The order as amended was accordingly adopted. Pending the call of the yeas and nays, the following explanations were made by members as their names were called: Mr. ABBOTT. Believing this to be a matter with which this convention has nothing in the world to do, I vote "no." Mr. BERRY, of Prince George's. Believing this to be in keeping with precedents established by this convention, I vote “aye." Mr. KENNARD. Believing that the information desired can be had, and ought to be had, without recourse to the means proposed, I vote "no." Mr. NEGLEY. Believing it is the duty of each c tizen of the State to see that justice is done to every citizen of the State; believing that it is right that this information should be had, and that Marylanders should look after Maryland interests, I vote “aye.” Mr. STIRLING. I am perfectly willing to make proper inquiry of the government in regard to this matter. But as I conceive it is an utter usurpation of power on the part of this convention to undertake, over the heads of State authorities, to correspond with the authorities at Washington in regard to this matter; and as I think the gentlemen interested in this proposition refused a fair compromise, I take great pleasure in voting "no." "to Mr. BERRY, of Prince George's. It says correspond with the proper authorities." The PRESIDENT announced the vote to be, Mr. STIRLING. Has the vote been read over by the secretary? The PRESIDENT. The assistant secretary informs me that the roll has been read over by him. Mr. STIRLING. I think the secretary is mistaken. I do not think the roll has been read over since the vote was taken. The PRESIDENT. The chair will direct the roll to be read over again. Mr. CHAMBERS. By what authority is that order made? The PRESIDENT. There seems to be some misunderstanding as to whether the roll has been called off properly. And the chair has directed the secretary Mr. CHAMBERS. I ask under what rule that is done? The PRESIDENT. The gentleman from Kent (Mr. Chambers) is out of order. Mr. CHAMBERS. I say the chair is out of order. The PRESIDENT. The chair was announcing what had been done, and b fore he had concluded, the gentleman from Kent interposed, in which he was out of order. Mr. CHAMBERS. The president has authority, I know, but it is authority to enforce the rules. Mr. SANDS. I should like to understand from the gentleman (Mr. Berry, of Prince George's,) who offered the order, whether this committee is to correspond with the gov-been read. ernor of Maryland or with the President of the United States? I have voted "aye," because my impression was that the committee was to correspond with the governor. If that is so, then my vote shall remain as it is. If it is to correspond with the President, then I shall change my vote, as I believe the matter to be peculiarly appropriate to the governor of the State. Mr. BERRY, of Prince George's. My object was to ascertain the proper authorities, and then correspond with those in authority. Mr. STIRling. It says "authorities in Washington." Mr. BERRY, of Prince George's. No, sir; it says "proper authorities." Mr. SANDS. I merely wish to say that if the committee is to correspond with the gov The PRESIDENT. And the president will see that the rules are enforced; he will compel the enforcement of them, if he has any power in this body. The president called upon the clerk for the purpose of ascertaining whether the roll had been read over, being under the impression that the roll had not been read. The clerk informed the president that it had been read over, and thereupon the president announced the vote. There seems, however, to be some misunderstanding on the part of several members of the convention in regard to the subject, and the president will therefore direct the roll to be read over again. There can be no harm done. The trouble has occurred only from the interposition of the gentleman from Howard (Mr. Sands,) who asked several questions of the gentleman from Prince George's (Mr. Berry,) after the vote had been taken but before it had been announced. If gentlemen will just be quiet, and interpose at the proper time, there will be no difficulty about the matter. The president will take care hereafter that the rules are strictly enforced. While gentlemen are walking all about the hall, and indulging in conversation, it is utterly impossible to keep the convention in proper order. Hereafter, should this again occur, the president will suspend all business until order is restored. Mr. CHAMBERS. I had understood from the use of the term "calling the roll" that the idea was to take the vote over again, and to that I had a positive objection. I have not the least objection to the vote being read over again. I misunderstood the announcement, and supposed the president had assumed the power to have the vote retaken. The names of those in the affirmative and in the negative were again read over. Mr. TODD. Would it be in order to change my vote now? The PRESIDENT. No sir; the vote has been announced. The president has permitted the vote to be again read over, for the purpose merely of correcting an erroneous impression. Mr. TODD. Then I move to reconsider the vote just taken. The motion to reconsider was seconded by Messrs. NYMAN and SANDS. Mr. JONES, of Somerset, called for the yeas and nays on the motion to reconsider, and they were accordingly ordered. The question being then taken, by yeas and nays, it resulted-yeas 42, nays 30-as follows: Yeas-Messrs. Goldsborough, President; Abbott, Annan, Audoun, Barron, Brooks, Cunningham, Cushing, Daniel, Davis, of Washington, Earle, Ecker, Galloway, Hatch, Hebb, Hopkins, Hopper, Keefer, Kennard, -King, Markey, Mayhugh, McComas, Mullikin, Murray, Negley, Nyman, Pugh, Purnell, Robinette, Russell, Sands, Schley, Schlosser, Smith, of Worcester, Stirling, Stockbridge, Sykes, Thomas, Todd, Wickard, Wooden 42. Nays-Messrs. Berry, of Prince George's, Billingsley, Blackisto, Brown, Chambers, Clarke, Crawford, Davis, of Charles, Dennis, Dent, Duvall, Edelen, Gale, Hodson, Horsey, Jones, of Cecil, Jones, of Somerset, Lansdale, Lee, Mace, Marbury, Mitchell, Miller, Morgan, Parker, Parran, Smith, of Carroll, Smith, of Dorchester, Swope, Turner-30. The motion to reconsider was 'accordingly agreed to. The question recurred upon the adoption of the order. as amended. Upon this question Mr. JONES, of Somerset, called for the yeas and nays, and they were ordered. until to-morrow morning, upon a divisionayes 44, noes not counted-it was agreed to. JUDICIARY DEPARTMENT. The convention then resumed the consideration of the report of the committee on the judiciary department, which was on its second reading. Mr. KING gave notice that at the proper time he would submit the following amendment: : "That the judicial districts in the several counties of the State be as reported by the judiciary committee, except Frederick and Baltimore counties, each to be separate judicial districts. PERSONS ADMITTED TO PRACTICE LAW. Mr. MULLIKIN moved to reconsider the vote by which section eleven of the report of the committee on the judiciary department had been stricken out. The section as reported by the committee was as follows: "Section 11. Every person of good moral character, being a voter, shall be admitted to practice law in all the courts of this State, in his own case. Previous to its being stricken out, it had been amended, on motion of Mr. STIRLING, by striking out the words "of good moral character, being a voter." The question was upon the motion to reconsider, and being taken, viva voce, before the result was announced Mr. ABBOTT called for the yeas and nays, which were ordered. Mr. NEGLEY. I hope the convention will reconsider the vote by which this section was stricken out. It is the provision in the last constitution by which every man is allowed to go into court and appear in his own case, and thereby save to himself an appearance fee at least. It was adopted by the last convention, and is a concession, not to the bar, I know, but to the people generally, and Í should like to see it retained. The PRESIDENT. Is it not a common-law right? Mr. NEGLEY. Then why was it put in the constitution at all? The practice in all the courts, previous to the adoption of the present constitution, was that no man could appear except by attorney. The PRESIDent. I venture to say that before the adoption of the present constitution there were more of such appearances than now. Mr. BERRY, of Prince George's. Before Mr. JONES, of Somerset. The party need the vote is taken, I propose now to make the not appear in his own case now. But this motion to postpone this subject until to-mor-gives him the right to appear in person and row morning. In the meantime I will ascer- confess the judgment, as has been done from tain who are the proper authorities from time immemorial; or he may try his own whom this information can be obtained. case. He has a common-law right to do so. A lawyer is but the agent of the party. The party may appear in person and try his own The question being then taken upon postponing the further consideration of the order case, if he chooses, notwithstanding the old adage that "the lawyer who tries his own case has a fool for a client " The PRESIDENT. There is no use in putting this in here; you cannot deprive a man of that right, for he has it at common law. The question was upon the motion of Mr. MULLIKIN to reconsider the vote by which the eleventh section was stricken out. Mr. ABBOTT called for the yeas and nays upon this question, and they were ordered. The question was then taken, by yeas and nays, and resulted-yeas 44, nays 26-as follows: Yeas-Messrs. Abbott, Annan, Billingsley, Blackiston, Brown, Cunningham, Cushing, Davis, of Charles, Davis, of Washington, Dennis, Dent, Ecker, Hebb, Hodson, Hopkins, Horsey, Jones, of Cecil, Keefer, Kennard, King, Lansdale, Mace, Marbury, Markey, Mayhugh, McComas, Morgan, Mullikin, Negley, Nyman, Parran, Robinette, Russell, Sands, Schlosser, Smith of Carroll, Smith, of Dorchester, Swope, Sykes, Thomas, Todd, Turner, Wickard, Wooden-44. Nays-Messrs. Goldsborough, President; Audoun, Barron, Brooks, Carter, Chambers, Clarke, Crawford, Daniel, Earle, Edelen, Galloway, Hatch, Hopper, Jones, of Somerset, Lee, Mitchell, Murray, Parker, Peter, Pugh, Purnell, Schley, Smith, of Worcester, Stir ling, Stockbridge-26. The motion to reconsider was accordingly agreed to. The question was stated to be upon agreeing to the section, as amended, which was read as follows: "Every person shall be permitted to practice law in all the courts of this State, in his own case." Mr. MULLIKIN moved the following as a substitute for the section: Every person, being a voter, shall be admitted to practice law in all the courts of this State, in his own case. norant of every form connected with his case. He filed a plea covering from ten to twenty pages, and going into everything except the real merits of the case. There was a demurrer to that, and he filed another plea; to that there was a demurrer, to which he again filed a plea. And finally he had to get a lawyer to take part in the case, while it was belore the court. Of course the lawyer who came into the case then, had no knowledge of it. The result of that case was that costs accumulated to such an extent that the party was really damnified. The case went up to the court of appeals, and we agreed to leave out a great many issues, it was so complicated and involved. If this provision had never been in the constitution, I think a great deal now on the records of the courts would never have got there. Mr. MULLIKIN. I only want that in a plain case, involving a hundred dollars for instance, a man shall not be compelled to employ a lawyer, but shall be allowed to try his own. case. Mr. PARRAN. I move to insert the words "in this State," after the words "being a voter. Mr. JONES, of Somerset. I move to strike out the words "being a voter, so as to leave the matter where the common law leaves it. For fear that legal gentlemen here might be under the implication of striking out what may be considered by some, who do not know what the common law is, their constitutional right, it would be as well to incorporate the broad provisions of the common law. It can do no harm; it is but an affirmance of the common law; and having been put in the present constitution, if it is stricken out of this the ignorant might suppose the lawyers struck it out for their own benefit. It takes very little experience to convince a man to the contrary. A man never tries that thing but once. He may go up and confess judgment, that is done every day. But as to a man's trying his own case, I never knew an instance of a man doing that the second time. I knew Mr. CLARKE. It might be considered that, being an attorney, the vote in favor of striking out this section was one in which I was in-a case once of a shrewd man, who tried his terested, as being one who, to a certain extent, probably might be benefited thereby, by the exclusion of parties from acting in their own cases. But a very limited experience on this subject has convinced me that not only is the profession not interested in having this left out, but I think the public would be benefited, individually, by not having this right extended to them. I understand that at common law any party who is sued in court has the right to come in and have his personal appearance entered. I once brought suit against a person, and he undertook to conduct his own case. We had a rich scene there, I can assure gentlemen, such as I never saw before. During the pendency of the trial almost a fight took place in the courthouse. The party seemed to be entirely ig own case, examined his own witnesses, etc. His case was just as plain a case as possible, and if he had employed some one who understood the matter to ask the proper questions he would have been cleared. There happened to be two cases against him. In the first one which he undertook to manage himself, he failed to make out his case, and the judge decided against him. He then asked me how it was he had lost that case, and I told him. He then asked me if I could get the case opened again, I told him it was doubtful. He told me he would give me ten dollars if I would try. I went to see the judge, who said the case was closed. Then said the man to me-"I will get you to try the next case any way. Now if a man trusts himself to draw up a declaration on a note for one hundred |