this Convention had done nothing, except to
change the mere mode of appointment, and that
was a beautiful system of judicial reform to
send to the people of this State. A mere
change in the mode of appointment! They had
done nothing to facilitate the dispatch of busi-
ness. It would be found that attempts had
been made here to cut down the judicial dis-
tricts, but they had failed.
The two jurisdictions, equity and common
law, must be disconnected, if you place more
than one or two counties, at furthest, in the
same circuit. If that was not done, the system
would be made worse than when this Conven-
tion first met here—for then we had three judg-
es to do the same business which was now to be
done by one only. The expense of the propo-
sed new system was as nothing compared with
the benefits that must result from it to the peo-
ple.
Mr. SPENCER moved the indefinite postpone-
ment of the whole subject.
Mr. PRESIDENT. On that motion the subject
is open to debate ten minutes.
Mr, SPENCER said he had made the motion in
order to save time, and bring the Convention to
a speedy decision on this subject. He was pre-
pared to support the proposition of the gentle-
man from Prince George's, (Mr. Bowie,) or that
of the gentleman from Charles, (Mr. Jenifer.)
If you adopted the plan of the gentleman from
Prince George's, he would be willing to allow
the judges for the counties $1000. The differ-
ence then between the costs of the plans of the
two gentlemen would be $5000 ill favor of that
of the gentleman from Charles, which he (Mr.
S.) preferred,
Mr. Bowie, with the consent of the Conven-
tion, so modified his substitute as to make the
salary of the judge "one thousand dollars," in-
stead of "twelve hundred dollars," as originally
offered.
Mr. SPENCER proceeded. He said he had ad-
vocated and desired to see a system adopted
which would have been better and cheaper, by
which the county court judges would have been
required to perform all the judicial business of
their districts. But the Convention had deter-
mined otherwise. He had now of necessity to
advocate what he considered the next beat.
The existing system costs the people—with the
Orphans' Courts and the judges of Baltimore
county—$71,200 a year, as per estimate of the
committee, while the plan proposed by the gen-
tleman from Prince George's would cost only
$52,500. Thus there would be a saving of $19,-
700 per annum. The plan of the gentleman
from Charles would cost $46,000 per annum,
and would save the sum of $25,200 per annum.
Mr, BUCHANAN. I beg to ask if he takes into
consideration the perquisites?
Mr. SPENCER, Certainly.
Mr. BUCHANAN. Well, they ought to be ex-
cluded.
Mr. SPENCER proceeded. It could not be de-
nied that the perquisites were paid indirectly |
by a tariff of charges. But it was nevertheless
true, though paid indirectly, it came out of the
pockets of the people, and that in the very
worst form. In the early part of the session he
had submitted a proposition that there should
be connected with the chancery and orphans'
court, a chancery sheriff or master in chancery,
and he intended again to submit it to the con-
sideration of the Convention. If you incorpo-
rated the chancery and orphans' courts with
each other, there should be a master in chan-
cery, attached with powers to sell all estates
decreed to be sold on the equity side of the
court; it would cheapen in a great degree the
costs incident to such sale, and not be, as here-
tofore, necessary to appoint special trustees.
He had submitted this proposition so far back
as the 4th of December last, and he then had
the honor to converse with the honorable gen-
tleman from Cecil (Mr. McLane) on the sub-
ject, and it met his entire sanction as being a
sound and just plan.
He would now withdraw his motion.
Mr. THOMAS rose to address the Convention,
but
The PRESIDENT said the motion to postpone
indefinitely was debatable.
Mr. THOMAS then renewed the motion to post-
pone indefinitely. He observed that he did it
with reluctance, as such a mode of proceeding
was a virtual repeal of our standing order. But
as the President thought otherwise, he was not
willing to sit here and hear, day after date, the
debate altogether on one side of the question,
He had entertained the opinion from the
first—without any intention to impugn the mo-
tives of gentlemen—that this projet would have
the effect of creating, very unnecessarily, more
offices than there were at present in Maryland.
And why did he say so? Each gentleman was
supposed to be familiar with his own district,
and knew its wants. He (Mr. T.) could say,
from his own experience, that one judge who
was faithful to his duties, who would attend to
his duties, could transact all the common law
and all the chancery law business before the
three courts of Frederick, Washington and Al-
legany, by working six months out of twelve.
Again: he was opposed to this system on another
ground. It was that there was created an ine-
quality among the counties and the city, in the
proposition to give one judge to each county,
without regard to its population.
Mr. BUCHANAN. Baltimore is not included.
Mr. THOMAS. We had our theories on the
subject, and we entertained them firmly and
decidedly. He maintained that those plans had
the effect he had stated. The smallest counties
in the State could not give employment to one
judge, even if clothed with common law and
chancery powers, and required also to act as an
orphans' court. The old system of the judici-
ary, in his opinion, did not adapt itself to the
peculiar condition of the small as well as the
large counties. He contended that the great
interests of the State would be promoted by an
adherence to the old orphans' court system, and |
