must express his amazement at his argument.
The gentleman had borne testimony to the learn-
ing and intelligence of the people of the Eastern
Shore and those of Western Maryland. If a
President of the United States was to be elected,
in the opinion of the gentleman the people were
capable of making a selection, even if he came
from California. They could be trusted with the
election of a Governor coming from any part of
the State—coming from the mountains or the
valleys—and with the election of judges, but yet
the people of Western Maryland could not be en-
trusted with the discrimination and selection of a
judge beyond their own BORDER=0s. Will he limit
the intelligence of the people to a single district?
He (Mr. S.) knew of no such doctrine. He held
that the people of Western Maryland would in-
quire into the character of their candidate, and
they would soon ascertain his virtues and his infirmities
wherever he might reside, just as well
as if he came out of their own district. It was
for this reason he (Mr. S.) advocated the system
of election by general ticket.
One of his friends said he had advocated the
district system for the election of the State's
agents in the public works The cases were very
different. The judges had to decide questions
of law, questions in which there was no local
interest, and which were uniform. But in refer-
ence to the public works, there was a different
and entirely distinct interest—each portion of the
State had in them a separate and distinct interest.
It was because of this sectional interest, of this
divided feeling, he voted to secure the people of
the State in their different interests—that the
Potomac interest—that the commercial interest of
the people of Baltimore—the financial interest of
the Eastern Shore, and the agricultural interests
of Western Maryland, might all be represented.
Mr. W. C. JOHNSON would make one or two
words in reply. He had before spoken of his
love for the people; bat in saying so, he did not
mean to be understood as one who gathered his
sentiments entirely from the tone and character
of the people. If he happened to differ from
the people, he pursued his own course always:
and when he went for popular measures, he was
not going as the people did frequently, upon the
principle of ubiquity, and say that the people of
Maryland could know a man upon the principle
of clairvoyance, and know if a man from the
Eastern Shore could read and write. He,
therefore, did not go for the superhuman tricks
of the people. They were mere masses of hu-
manity. Their intentions were good. Give
them the materials before them, and they would
act well. According to the plan proposed, they
would have to take things second-handed, and
they would have to take a certificate of credit
which a caucus would issue, to know whether
a man was qualified for a judge or not. He
could, he knew, almost disqualify himself to
judge well, according to the general ticket sys-
tem, whom he would vote for as judge. He
would have to rely upon the knowledge of oth-
ers. That being the case, he could not believe
that the people, by some intuition, had a know-
ledge of every man before them. But in the |
districts, there was no man who practiced in his
county, and presented himself as a candidate for
the Supreme Bench, but would be known, from
the fact of his having delivered arguments in
the county courts. That was the reason he
(Mr. J.) went for this plan. He would say one
word more: He was not here at the time the
question of the Board of Public Works was
under discussion, or he would have opposed the
appointment of an additional number of officers;
for, if there was any one thing more than another
improper to have been done by this Convention,
it was this. He would take occasion, if the bill
should come up again, to offer an amendment,
allowing those four officers a per diem instead, of
salaries—which, he thought, would not amount
to more than $100 a year. He had only to say,
in conclusion, that he would vote against every
amendment pending.
Mr. BRENT, of Baltimore city, remarked that
it was enough to know that a proposition offered
here came. from Baltimore, to seal its fate. He
would vote for the election of the Judges of the
Court of Appeals by general ticket, and he
would not do it on party considerations, but be-
cause of the intrinsic justice which recom-
mends the thing to us. And, he would not say
any thing upon the argument of the gentleman
from Frederick county, (Mr. Johnson,) who had
spoken of the controlling influence of Balti-
more. Now, would that gentleman tell him
that the citizens of Allegany county were bet-
ter acquainted with the merits of a candidate
coming from Harford or Baltimore county than
the citizens of Worcester would be? And yet,
that gentleman had advocated for the classifica-
tion of the State into four judicial districts, in
which Harford and Baltimore and Allegany-
formed one district, to elect a Judge of the
Court of Appeals. The Convention had voted
for that classification by an overwhelming vote.
Mr. W. C. JOHNSON. 1 voted to reconsider
only,
Mr. BRENT, of Baltimore city. He would
repeat that the Convention voted for it by an
overwhelming vote. Now, he would ask, was
it possible that the citizens of Harford or Bal-
timore county could personally know every man
in their judicial district who might be present-
ed as a candidate? And yet the only argument
used here against electing the Court of Ap-
peals by general ticket, was that the voters
could not know the candidate living in a re-
mote quarter of the State.
Mr. W. C. JOHNSON said that he was willing
to give Baltimore one Judge, but was unwilling
that she should elect Judges for all the rest of
the State.
Mr. BRENT, of Baltimore city, observed that
he had supposed so. He was here for the pur-
pose of showing that according to the classifica-
tion already made, they were called upon to
vote for judicial candidates, in large judicial
districts, whom the people could not personally
know, any more than if they were to be elected
by general ticket. Again: Cecil and Worcester
were in the same judicial district, to elect one |