With the view of giving him time to prepare
an amendment to meet the views he had present-
ed, he would move that the first section be infor-
mally passed over. The other sections were dis-
connected from it, and could be perfected, with-
out reference to this first section.
Mr, SHRIVER was desirous of having the sense
of the Convention on this subject, as it would
decide whether a majority were in favor of the
creation of the office of Attorney General, or
whether they were opposed to it. To his mind,
it was very clear that the office was entirely use-
less and unnecessary.
Mr. CRISFIELD said that he desired that the
Attorney General should be an officer who should
receive asalary. If the Legislature should think,
upon the performance of any unusual service,
that he should receive additional compensation,
they could give it to him.
He would not allow the Governor to employ
as many counsel as he might think fit, nor would
he allow him to give them such compensation as
he might deem proper.
With a view to move such an amendment, and
to allow him time to prepare it, he had submit-
ted his motion to pass over this section informal-
ly. If the Convention was opposed to having
such an officer, and opposed to the views he had
expressed, it could signify its opinion by refusing
to agree to his motion.
Mr. MCLANE suggested to Mr. CRISFIELD that
he could move his amendment when the second
section should come up for consideration, and
stated that he should vote against continuing the
office of Attorney General.
Mr. SHRIVER thought that the office, if created,
should be provided for in the first section, and
its duties defined and salary fixed. The ques-
tion of the creation of the office would arise, and
he wished to have it disposed of, as a test ques-
tion, on the first section.
Mr. BOWIE concurred with the gentleman
from Somerset that there should be such an of-
ficer as Attorney General, and thought that the
Convention ought to provide for the appointment
of such an officer. The idea of giving to the
Governor the right to employ as many counsel
as he pleased, to prosecute in the courts in and
out of the State, in any cause in which the State
was concerned, was conferring on him too much
power.
There should be but one officer, and although
he was opposed to having an officer for life
or during good behaviour, he did not see the
least inconvenience or impropriety in allowing
every Governor to appoint his own Attorney
General. This would create rotation in office,
which seemed to suit the people and the republi-
can notions of the present age.
He was opposed to permitting the Attorney
General to appoint deputies in the different coun-
ties, which he thought might be done by the tax
and levy courts. He thought this would produce
a wholesome result, although he had no objec-
tion to electing the deputies by the people.
He did not regard the situation of Prosecuting |
Attorney as an office, but looked upon the per-
son holding it, as a professional gentleman, prac-
ticing his profession for the State, and would
give him no more fees than now allowed by
law, As to electing these officers by the people,
he saw no necessity for so doing; though be had
no insuperable objection to such a course, as he
went very generally for electing all officers by
the people.
If he thought, however, that these were really
offices which the people desired to fill, he would
be in favor of electing by the people.
He was of the opinion that the Governor had
better appoint the Attorney General, and that
it would be proper for each county to take care
of its own officers, by appointing competent per.
sons who could attend to the interests of the
State.
Mr. DIRICKSON said that he was willing to
vote for the motion to pass this section over in-
formally as a matter of courtesy to the gentle-
man who made the motion; but if it was meant
as a test question as to whether there should be
an Attorney General or not, lie would vote
against it.
Mr. CRISFIELD said that be would not consider
it unkind if the gentleman should vote against
his motion. He certainly desired that an amend-
ment such as he had indicated, should be brought
before the Convention, but he had not the time
to prepare it now. He preferred it to the one
indicated in the bill. He could see no evil in
passing over the section informally, unless
the majority had determined to adopt the partic-
ular scheme contained in it, in which event they
could just as well vote upon it now as at any
other time.
The question was then taken on the motion of
Mr. CRISFIELD, to pass over the first section in-
formally, when on adivision of the Convention no
quorum voted.
Mr. GWINN asked the yeas and nays,
Which were ordered,
And being taken were as follows:
affirmative—Messrs. Morgan, Lee, Chambers
of Kent, Donaldson, Wells, Weems, Brent of
Charles, Jenifer, Crisfield, Dashiell, Hicks, Hod-
son, Eccleston, Phelps, Bowie, McMaster, Fooks,
Sherwood of Baltimore city, Presstman, Weber,
Hollyday, Slicer and Smith—24.
Negative— Messrs. Buchanan, President, pro
tem., Dorsey, Welch, Dickinson, Sherwood of
Talbot, Miller, McLane, George, Wright, Di-
rickson, Shriver, McHenry, Magraw, Nelson,
Carter, Hardcastle, Gwinn, Brent of Baltimore
city, Ware, Schley, Fiery, Neill. John New-
coiner, Harbine, Brewer, Fitzpatrick, Parke,
Shower and Cockey—29.
So the motion was not agreed to.
The question now being on agreeing to the first
section,
Mr. McHENRY moved to amend said section,
by inserting after the word "State," the words
"at such rates of compensation as the General
Assembly may prescribe," and by striking out the
words "and make suitable compensation from the
contingent fund placed at his disposal." |
