that I was in favor of their re-eligibility. The
Convention has fixed upon ten years as the time
of limitation. The only question then recurs
whether the judges shall be re-eligible at the ex-
piration of ten years from the time of their ap-
pointment. That I had great doubts upon this
subject is moat true. That much has been said
upon both sides to prove that this is a question
upon which rational minds may rationally dif-
fer, is most manifest, I must confess that my
mind has at last come to the conclusion, the
term being fixed at ten years—for I long doubted
whether, if the ten years were fixed, I should go
for the re-eligibility of judges—after hearing
what has been said, I have come to the conclu-
sion to vote to make them re-eligible, the grounds
adverse to the re-eligibility not being to me so
convincing as those in its favor. Many of the
arguments which I have heard seem to superin-
duce the idea that if judges were nominated by
party caucuses, as members of Congress or of
the Legislature are nominated, they would carry
their party biases upon the judicial bench. But
they are elected for a different purpose. A
politician is elected to go to Congress and speak
the sentiments of his party, to advocate their
principles. Can it be presumed that, in the
selection of a judge, by a party caucus if you
please, he is selected to be placed upon the
bench for corrupt purposes, to do things im-
proper and manifestly wrong? That would be
to impugn the purity of the parties of this
country, and to assume that their purpose is an
abuse of power. A judge, I humbly conceive,
although he maybe elected by a party, is elected
for the purpose of faithfully discharging his of-
ficial duties. He has to administer justice and
the law between men of his own party, between
men of the other party, or between men of both
parties. Suppose a case to occur between one
of his party friends and one of his party adver-
saries. Suppose that he is even so far biased
as to give a judgment erroneously in favor of
his party friend. His judgment goes upon the
record, and it may be that a similar case will
afterwards arise between one of his party friends
and one of his party adversaries, in which the
relations of the parties would be reversed. The
judge cannot change that decision. It would be
too offensive, too outrageous to be tolerated in
any community in the State, and thus his party
adversaries would gain an equal advantage in
consequence of the unjust decision.
Another view which has been presented, is that
founded upon motives, and upon the words quoted
by the distinguished gentleman from Baltimore
county, (Mr. Howard ) " Lead us not into temptation."
Is it to be supposed that the human
heart is only tempted by evil, and that our mo-
tives are always wicked? Is that a just method
of analyzing the human heart, or human society?
That men act from motives—act from temptation.
is most true. But what temptation is so high and
so powerful as to be rewarded by the verdict of
an honest community for virtuous and honorable
action; What motive can be so controlling In
the human heart as the consciousness that he has
discharged his duty faithfully. He meets his re- |
ward, and that reward has the sanction, approbation
and countenance of all that is good, virtuous,
honorable and honest in society. This is the
highest temptation that can enter the human
heart, and it is to place before the judges that
temptation to high and virtuous action, and an
elevated sense of honor and propriety, that I am
in favor of re-eligibility. You thus say to the
judge—discharge your duties faithfully, upon
principles of fairness and justice, and your reward
shall be that you will be continued in the office
which you have merited. It is on account of
this temptation to this high sense of honor and
integrity that I am in favor of a limited term of
office. At each recurring ten years, let the peo-
ple have the light to displace that judge who is
unfaithful, and to elevate to the station another
more worthy of the station. These are the ideas
that control my vole upon this question. I do
not believe that every man in society is swerved
and moved by corrupt and base passions. I have
a higher estimate of society in the 19th century
in which we live. When we see society moving
on harmoniously in its sphere, with the rights of
property, person, and religion, all protected; and
when we find one general voice and universal
sentiment giving countenance and encouragement
to the most virtuous and most honorable to pur-
sue their high and elevated career, when it is
plainly and manifestly the will of the people that
the judge who has served them so well for ten
years should be continued upon the bench, I wish
then to have the privilege of re-electing him, and
to hold out a reward, as an inducement to him to
be impartial and just. I would say to such a
judge—You have shown yourself worthy of the
high place in which we placed you. and we will
continue you there, because your services are In-
valuable to society. For these reasons, I shall
record my vote with pleasure for the re-eligibility
of the judges.
Mr. MERRICK. I do not wish to trespass upon
the Convention, but as gentlemen all around me
are giving their opinions and views, perhaps it
becomes me to give the reasons for the vote
which I intend to give. You have already de-
termined that the judiciary shall be elective.
You have determined—and I am glad that it is
go—that their term shall be ten years. That term
is neither too long nor too short; and it is one far
which I should have voted had I been present.
The question is now presented whether or not the
person thus elected for ten years to perform the
high judicial function shall or shall not be re-eli-
gible. Upon that subject opinions have varied.
It is a matter about which we have no past expe-
rience in our State, and upon which we have to
draw our information from reflection and judg-
ment, I have thought some little upon the sub-
ject. and have attended to the arguments I have
heard since I have been in the hall, and I am
sorry to be obliged to dissent from the opinions of
those who deny that the judge ought to be re-
eligible. There is great force in the argument
advanced by the honorable gentleman from Queen
Anne's, (Mr. Grayson,) whose words were brief
and few, but clear and just. Suppose that you
limit the term to ten years. Can you expect the |
