ແ

Assuredly this turns out but a crazy plank, and a Civil Officer of Maryland" would make the governor, by resting upon it, pay but a poor compliment to the opini ons of republicans, particularly when it is considered, that it was moved in the senate by Mr. Johnson, formerly a member of the council for several years, and well acquainted with the uniform and established practice in such cases in the council; was concurred in by the senate; and out of twenty-nine republicans assented to by twenty-three, and rejected by every federal member, in the house of delegates, as appears by a reference to the yeas and nays taken on the question. Besides, it was sent back to the senate with a message, expressly stating, that it was non-concurred in by the house, upon the principle, that legislative opinion upon the propriety of any mode practised in the exercise of executive duties was deemed an unnecessary interference. Assuredly then the governor could not have founded upon this dissent of the delegates made under these circumstances, his continuance in the government, and although this may be the opinion of a Civil Officer of Maryland," we must entertain a different opinion, and believe that this could not be the real reason.

But this difference in opinion on this constitutional point between the governor and council is not novel in Maryland, notwithstanding the federal prints endeavour to press the contrary upon the public mind, for federal purposes. Governors Smallwood and Paca, each contended with the then council for the same construction of the constitution, which governor Mercer contends for with the present council, but usage which had been established by preceding executives, was considered paramount to all nice distinctions, and fine spun arguments, it therefore prevailed. And although those cannot control the express words of the constitution, yet in all instances where the construction of the constitution is doubtful, and the instance, in which the governor and council have differed must be one, usage must unquestionably be very imperious as to the establishing what really is the true and sound construction, perhaps it should be conclusive.

I will here postpone the farther investigation of this subject for another paper.

Eastern Shore, February, 1803.

A SPECTATOR.

FROM THE AMERICAN

A FRIEND TO CANDOUR—No. I,

A COMMUNICATION signed “A Civil

Officer of Maryland," which appeared originally in the Anti-Democrat, and has since been reprinted in different Federal news-papers, must no doubt have attracted the public attention. It purports to be a direct disclosure of the substance of the governor's verbal address to the general assembly, in consequence of a difference of opinion between him and the council; and it may also be considered as a summary of facts, that constituted, (in the governor's opinion,) the disrespectful conduct of the council, noticed in his letter to the legislature on the subject of that difference. Had the "Civil Officer" given a full and correct statement of all the circumstances attendant upon this transaction, the council, it is believed, would have stood acquitted, in public opinion, of the slightest personal disrespect towards his excellency; and the public reason would then have been unbiassed in the investigation of a constitutional question, which has given rise to an unfortunate, but honest diversity of sentiment, among constituent members of the same department. The writer of this will not assert that the "Civil Officer" has been intentionally incorrect, because he entertains too favourable an opinion of the supposed author of that performance to intimate that he is capable of wilful misrepresentation. But that his statement is materially variant from that of every member of the council, is a fact of which the public ought to be apprised, in forming its opinion on this interesting question. With this view, he ventures to submit a narration of facts, which, he believes, he is warranted in asserting to be substantially correct, from different conversations which he has had on this subject with every member of the executive

Council. This may serve to remove improper impressisions, and be a necessary preliminary to the further discussion of the constitutional point, to which the attention of the state has been lately drawn.

It is true, that the governor's opinion, of his having the exclusive right of nomination in all appointments, was known to the council early in the last year; and he was as early apprised of their opinion, of its being a concurrent right, to be exercised by the governor and every member of the board. This led to no serious inconvenience. In one instance, however, it being believed that the board were not united in opinion as to the proper character to fill some appointment then under consideration, one of the council requested that a ballot might take place, as he had understood that mode had been adopted by former executives-it was objected to by the governor, as an infringement of the constitution, and an interference with his right of nomination. The effect was nothing more than a momentary irritation, and a postponement of the appointment until the next daywhen again taken up, the governor consented to the ballot, but observed, that it must not be considered as a constructive waver of his right of nomination. Balloting was, in all subsequent appointments, resorted to, when required—And a right of nomination to office by the governor, or any member of the council, was exercised, when the character first proposed by either did not receive the approbation of all the attending members of the board. The governor, in no instance, even when apPointments were made by the council in his absence, refused a commission: Of course this conflict of opinion was never brought to an issue during the last year.

But to proceed to the facts more immediately connected with the appointment of certain commissioners on the part of this state, which produced the governor's letter to the assembly, charging the council with a flagrant violation of the resolution under which the appointment was made, and with disrespectful conduct towards himself. On the morning of Saturday the 8th of January, the resolution was taken into consideration by the board, the go

vernor and all the council attending-in the course of conversation, different gentlemen were named by the governor and members of the council, as proper characters to discharge the duty of commissioners. The impropriety of appointing two members of the legislature, it is true, was brought into view, and the council were not united in opinion as to its expediency. But it was soon discoverable that a majority of the board were in favour of the gentlemen ultimately appointed. To take the sense of the board, one member of the council requested, that the question might be tried on a gentleman he had named; another remarked, that perhaps it would be more regular to put it on the first nomination-The governor then, to the astonishment of the council, with warmth observed, "that he would put the question on no person not nominated by himself, and that from that day forward he would sign no commission where the character therein named did not meet his entire approbation." A suspension of the business took place, upon its being observed, that other appointments, upon which there might not probably be such a difference of opinion, had better be taken up. After a lapse of an hour or two, the subject was resumed, by one of the council remarking to the governor, that although he, (the member of the council,) did not agree entirely with the majority of the board in their selection of commissioners, yet if that majority were determined to appoint three particular gentlemen, the act he thought would be binding; and he hoped, for the sake of harmony, the governor would consent to go into the appointment. The governor replied, that he entertai? › ed a different opinion. A general conversation then took place on the subject, which was closed by an agreement to meet at five o'clock, P. M. for the purpose of making the appointment. The governor remarked, that he would, in the mean-time, see the two gentlemen in the legislature, who had been nominated as commissioners; and he thought he could convince them, that under all the circumstances of the case, they ought not to act in that capacity.

It is readily admitted, that before the adjournment. took place it was understood by the board, that one of

the members of the council expected to leave the city of Annapolis the day following, which was one reason of the agreement to meet in the afternoon-It is equally certain, that the adjournment was agreed to unanimously, the governor and all the council consenting to it. Indeed, some of the council are positive that the governor himself proposed the adjournment.

The council attended punctually in the afternoon, and having waited at least an hour, proceeded to the appointment. They directed their clerk immediately to notify the commissioners of their appointment, as two of them were members of the assembly, and it was supposed that body would terminate its session during the evening.

Under this statement it may surely be asked, where were the circumstances of personal disrespect towards the governor? Or, where the evidence to establish the fact, that the appointment was made without his knowledge? True it is, that it took place when the governor was absent from the council chamber; but that was certainly a voluntary absence, arising from a disinclination to attend, as the adjournment for the special purpose of making the appointment was agreed to by him, if it was not the result of his own proposition. But it is said by some, that it would have been respectful to have informed the governor, through the messenger, that the council were attending! With a knowledge of the meeting, it was a duty no less incumbent on the governor, than every other member of the board, to have been present at the time. Independent of this consideration, it was believed, that it might lead to still further irritation than what had been produced by the interchange of sen timent in the morning.

When the governor met the council on the Monday following, after observing that he had understood they had appointed, commissioners on Saturday evening, he began the letter which he afterwards forwarded to the assembly. Before its completion, he named three gentlemen, who he said he thought ought to be appointed, and asked if the council would act on that nomination?