Introduction/7
and public articulation, of the most intensive and extensive examination of the Con-
stitution of 1867 that has ever occurred before or since. Every section of the pro-
posed constitution was discussed in detail and compared minutely with the Constitu-
tion of 1867. The Debates therefore represent not only a revealing picture of modern
constitution making, but they provide a remarkably revealing analysis of the con-
stitution that governs Maryland to this day. In 3,452 pages of closely spaced type,
delegates of various political affiliations, representing diverse backgrounds and in-
terests, debated the entire gamut of constitutional issues.
As rich as the Debates are as a source of information on Maryland's constitu-
tion, they are not without limitations. The fact that the delegates were aware, and
frequently reminded, that their words were being recorded and transcribed verbatim
meant that much was left unsaid in the convention. Many of the most sensitive issues
were resolved in conferences off the floor. And, as is the case with the General As-
sembly today, much substantive work was done in committee, with only the consen-
sus view being aired in the public forum. The Debates can, therefore, give an incom-
plete or inaccurate representation of the relative importance of items discussed by
convention members. The oath to be taken by officeholders, for example, specifi-
cally whether the phrase "In the presence of Almighty God" should be relegated to
an optional requirement appearing in parenthesis or eliminated from the constitu-
tion entirely, was discussed on four separate occasions and the delegates' remarks oc-
cupy twenty pages in the Debates. The vital and technical question of how state
funds should be audited, on the other hand, was dispatched quickly on one day in
the convention, with discussion of the issue covering fewer than five pages in the
printed Debates.
And, as is typical of such deliberative proceedings, debate in the Constitutional
Convention of 1967-1968 often concentrated on topics of current interest or propo-
sitions put forward by proponents of special interests rather than on the eternal
verities popularly associated with constitutions. The expressed goal of the Constitu-
tional Convention, as outlined by the Constitutional Convention Commission, was
to draft a short, concise statement of the fundamental principles of government.8
But this object frequently came into conflict with the desire of delegates to enshrine
in the constitution their own favorite proposal for solving specific social and
economic ills or propositions near to the hearts of the voters back home. Heated
debate centered around a proposal to include in the new constitution a provision
that the General Assembly should provide by law "for the conservation, enhance-
ment, improvement, and protection of the natural environment, natural resources,
and natural beauty of the State.'" Correctly noting that "resources in 1867 were in
man's way,"10 proponents of the provision turned aside critics who argued that sub-
jective concepts like "natural beauty" were unfit for constitutional status and suc-
ceeded in having the mandate added to the document. Consumer rights proved even
more devisive, but again those who argued that such concerns were statutory rather
than constitutional failed to convince the majority, who believed that the new con-
8 For the drafting principles followed by the Constitutional Convention Commission, see Report of the
Constitutional Convention Commission, pp. 6-7.
9 Section 9.06, in Constitution of Maryland as Adopted by the Convention (Annapolis: Constitutional
Convention of Maryland, 1968), p. 44.
10 Del. Elroy G. Boyer, Debates, p. 735.
|
