|
|
|
would not be agreed to by the counties. One of these
judges was as much as Baltimore could ask. Mr. A. then
asked to reply briefly to the argument of the gentleman
from Howard. He said that the labors of the Court of
Appeals had been vastly increased of late years, and would
require the entire attention of the justices for the whole
year, and leave no time to attend to circuit duties. The
appellate judges were now required to give written opin-
ions in all cases, but this was not the case under the old
system, where the judges only gave written opinions when
they deemed it necessary. The statistics of the gentle-
man from Howard, (Mr. Merrick, ) in relation to the Su-
preme Court did not go far enough to enable a proper con-
clusion to be formed as to his argument.
Mr. Barry said there was no point of difference be-
tween the amendment of the gentleman from Harford,
(Mr. Archer, ) and the gentleman from Baltimore, (Mr.
Gill, ) except that the amendment of the latter coupled
with the first seven wards of Baltimore city the counties
of Baltimore, Carroll and Harford. They wanted no such
community of interest. So far as Baltimore county was
concerned, they desired a total segregation of interest
from Baltimore city. The idea of the gentleman from
Baltimore, as stated by the gentleman from Harford, was
to secure another judge of the Appeal Court for Balti-
more city.
Mr. Gill said that might be the effect.
Mr. Barry said he liked the modesty of the proposition.
It probably would be the effect. But they of the county
wanted nothing of it. They knew how the primary elec-
tions were managed in Baltimore, how the ballot-boxes
were stuffed, and had also had a lively experience of col-
onization. They did not want to be brought under the in-
fluence of that class of politicians which infested those
seven lower wards. They wished to be free to select their
own judicial officers without any interference from Balti-
more city, with which they wanted no political associa-
tion. He wished to see the good old days returning, to see
men on the bench, at least in the circuit in which he lived,
who would not be swayed by any partisan considerations,
who would hold the scales of justice with an even hand.
Mr. Garey opposed the amendment. Representatives
352
|
|
|
|
 |
