WEEMS, as a modification of his own proposi-
tion.
The question then recurred on the amendment
heretofore of Mr. MCHENRY, to strike out the
word 'two-thirds;" and insert in lieu thereof "a
majority."
Mr. CHAMBERS, of Kent, desired to request the
gentleman from Harford, (Mr. McHenry,) to
furnish a reason for the change he proposed. The
objection to a majority was perfectly obvious,
and as he, (Mr. C ,) supposed, was understood by
every body. in a period of political excitement,
a majority, from political considerations it was
supposed, might be induced to effect a change in
the case of an officer whose politics were offen-
sive. This consideration, he believed, had al-
ways induced the necessity of a vote of two-
thirds. The gentleman was aware that, in judicial
proceedings generally, unanimity was re-
quired before a man could be convicted of a crime.
Twelve men must all unite before there could be
a conviction. He had not known an instance in
which less than two-thirds was required to adopt
such a proposition. He would he glad to learn
what reasons the gentleman had to assign for the
alternation he proposed.
Mr. MCHENRY said he would, in two or three
words, repeat what he had said before His im-
pression was, that instead of party feeling ope-
rating as a general rule against incumbents of
office, its tendancies were in their favor. The
sympathies of impartial men were always with
the unfortunate, and an office-holder threatened
with disgrace was so considered. Party feeling
was much more easily enlisted in his behalf in
all legislative bodies than in behalf of the gene-
ral Interests of the community, so far as his limi-
ted observation had extended. The public was
not brought so palpably into view; its exposure
to wrong by the continuance of an inefficient or
faithless officer was not presented so prominently
as to operate on the motives which usually go-
verned men equally with the loss likely to be in-
flicted on an individual, whom all could identify
and most were personally acquainted with. He
would rather that an officer should sutler than the
public. He did not know that if he were to take
half an hour to make his meaning more plain
than it was already, he would have enlightened
the Convention.
Mr. RANDALL said he would call the attention
of gentlemen to one fact, which it seemed to him
ought to have an important bearing upon the ac-
tion of this Convention on this subject—the im-
peachment of the judges. He alluded to the
provision made for the election of judges by the
people as reported from the judiciary committee.
If the judges are to be elected by the people,
then, as in all the States in the Union where they
are so elected, they will be selected as other persons
are, by one or the other of the political par-
ties—they will be nominated, as others were, by
a political party; and elected by a politi-
cal party. They, by this report too, are
to be elected for a term of years, and to be re-
eligible. Thus, they would scarcely have served
out their term and relieved themselves from their |
party prejudices and influences before they will
again be propitiating party with a view to their
re-nomination and re election. Hence, these
judges will always he, or believed by many to be,
improperly operated upon and influenced in the
performance of their judicial duties, and hence,
there would be a foundation, real or imaginary,
constantly laid for impeachments which did not
exist in the present mode of appointment. These
judges thus nominated and supported by a politi-
cal party, would canvass the State with their po-
litical friends and opponents, who were candi-
dates for seats in the Legislature.
Thus parly judges, senators, and delegates
would all be brought into direct collision. Pre-
judices would be engendered and oppositions
formed against these judges, senators, and
delegates in this their first associations. Now,
he would ask, if it was not human nature that
these prejudices and oppositions should continue
and be aggravated by the party conflicts and collisions
which would take place after the election
of judges, senators and delegates of opposite po-
litical parties, in the discharge of their respective
duties.
Is this the time, then, he would ask, when by
a different mode of placing our judges in office,
we are creating bias and prejudice against them
in the minds of those who are to impeach and
try them—is this the time to increase the facili-
ties of their condemnation—to diminish the secu-
rities and protection which the existing and the
old constitutions both throw around them? Must
not this change of reducing the number necessary
to convict from two-thirds to one half of the Le-
gislature, necessarily and essentially impair still
more the independence of the judiciary.
If you elect the judiciary fur a term of years,
you diminish that independence materially If
you allow them to be re-elected you increase their
dependence.
If they are to be impeached, tried and convict-
ed, by a majority of the Legislature who might
be upposed to them in politics, under improper
influences and prejudices, he fell alarmed for the
indepence of the judiciary. He threw out those
sentiments rather as hints for reflection than as
argument. He thought the change of electing
judges if we made it, would be sufficiently radical, and
he would remark to his friend, (Mr. Me
Henry,) if those suggestions were worthy of con-
sideration, there should be a postponement of
this question fur the present at least, until the
Convention decided on the mode of appointing
the judges.
The question then recurred and was taken
upon the amendment offered by Mr. MCHENRY,
also on Journal of February 34th, to strike out
the words "two-thirds," and insert in lieu there-
of "a majority," in the following section [19] of-
fered by Mr. SPRIGS:
"The House of Delegates shall have the sole
power of impeachment in all cases, but a majority
of all the members, must concur in an impeachment;
all impeachment, shall be tried by the Sen-
ate, and when sitting for that purpose, they shall
be on oath oath or affirmation, to do justice ac-
cording to the law and evidence, but no person |
