his colleague, and let the subject be postponed
until the report on the executive department shall
come up. He would withdraw his amendment.
Mr. GRASON cited the amendment as proof
that the Convention had not sufficiently consid-
ered the connection between this subject and the
report on the executive department. The gen-
tleman from Anne Arundel proposes that power
shall be given to the courts to grant a new trial.
Was it not better to remit the case to the Execu-
tive, when it appeared that the conviction had
been given improperly, than to try the man over
again ?
Mr. DORSEY suggested that the gentleman from
Queen Anne, (Mr. SPENCER,) had committed
an error when he stated that the courts now pos-
sessed the power conferred by his amendment.
To obtain a new trial, which can only begranted
before judgment, it is now necessary to make a
motion therefor within some few days after the
verdict, according to the rules of the courts. But
his amendment proposed to override these rules
of court, and to permit the motion to he made
any time; and as well after as before judgment.
It, was alleged by that gentleman that courts were
sometimes influenced by prejudices or partiali-
ties, as well as jurors.
During his observation, when at the bar, and
his experience on the bench, which was not a
very short one, he had never know, had never
heard of any court in this State, which had been
thus influenced. It is well known that the feel-
ings of judges are always in favor of the accused
and that in trials by the court to induce a convic-
tion full and satisfactory evidence of guilt is re-
quired. He could speak with the same knowl-
edge of facts in exculpation of juries. He recol-
lected but one case to the contrary, as having
passed under his judicial cognizance. There the
Jury under mistaken influences found a verdict
of guilt), when the court, after a moment's con-
sultation, informed the counsel of the accused, that
if applied for a new trial would be granted. He
did not think that the Governor was so likely to be
free from political influences the courts. He
would further state that he, when acting as a judge,
had made it a rule never to suffer any man to
approach him for an appointment, on the ground
that he was a Whig or a Democrat. He always
replied to such applicants, that he knew no poli-
tics on the bench, and this he believed was the
case of all courts in this State. The Governor
on the contrary is apolitician. The court when
acting has heard both sides; while the Gover-
nor, after listening to the testimony on one side,
only grants or refuses a pardon. It is important
to ajust decision, that if a punishment is to be
remitted, it ought to be after an examination of
the testimony on both sides.
Mr. GRASON considered it improper to com-
mit the pardoning power to the courts, or the
Legislature or the Attorney General; he did not
think that it ought in all cases to be vested in the
Governor. But be did not intend to make any
speech. He was not prepared to go into the
consideration of this subject at present.
Mr. RIDGELY regretted that he could not com-
13 |
ply with the request of the gentleman from
Queen Anne's, that he should withdraw his
amendment. He would be happy to do so, from
courtesy to that gentleman; but he felt himself
compelled from a sense of duty to persist in it
until the question should be taken He did not
think the amendment was out of place.
Mr. CRISFIELD gave notice that at the proper
time he should offer the following amendment:
"Laws shall be made for ascertaining by pro-
per proof, the citizens who shall be entitled to
the right of suffrage hereby established."
On motion of Mr. MCHENRY,
The Committee rose, the President resumed
the Chair, and the chairman reported that said
committee had in obedience to order had said
report again under consideration, and had come
to no conclusion thereon.
The Convention then adjourned until to-mor-
row morning, 11 o'clock,
EXPLANATION.—Mr. SPENCER in reply to the
gentleman from Dorchester, Mr. PHELPS, said,
so far had the law been carried by the judges
of elections, in rejecting legal voters, that he had
known instances, where persons offering to vote,
were rejected on the score of age, who notori-
ously were above the age of twenty-one years.
He could mention many instances of legal voters,
who had been rejected on the score of age. He
could refer to the case of an individual, who was
associated with a newspaper journal in Queen
Annes, who had been so associated in Talbot
county; who bad been a farmer in Talbot county,
and whose birth place was in a distant county.
He offered to vote in Queen Annes and was ob-
jected to, on the score of age, and although he
offered to swear that he had voted at previous
elections for years antecedent, in other counties
in this State, and that he had been conducting
his own business for years and was of age, still
because his parents and the bible in which they
had registered his birth, were not at hand, and
in the nature of things beyond his reach, his
vote was rejected. He could recite other cases
of like abuse in reference to age as well as resi-
dence.
WEDNESDAY, January 22d, 1851.
The Convention met at eleven o'clock.
Prayer was made by the Rev. Mr. GRIFFITH.
The roll was called, and a quorum was present.
The Journal of yesterday was read, and hav-
ing been so amended as to correct an error in the
statement of the amendment of Mr. SPENCER,
was approved.
DEBATE ON THE ELECTIVE FRANCHISE.
Mr. GWINN. I move the adoption of the follow-
ing order:
Ordered, That all debate on the report of the
committee on the Elective Franchise, and on
the pending amendments, shall cease at twelve-
and-a-half o'clock to-day, and that the chairman
of the committee of the whole shall report the |
