it is an office that we should take far from the
people; it is an office which I would place in the
hands of the judiciary. They are responsible
for the prompt administration of its duties, and if
they are neglected, they should have no plea
that the people had thrown upon them a man
who was not competent to the task. The next
thing to a perfect judge is a perfect clerk in your
court. Have we not seen this in our own delibe-
rations? Have you not had your reading clerks
changed ? I say, of all the offices in the world
that I would place with the judiciary, it is that
the judges should appoint their own clerks, be-
cause the public holds the judges responsible, and
therefore it is an officer which the judges themselves
should appoint. If they have the appoint-
ment, they can make no plea of delay, for the
people would tell them, turn your officer out if
he is inefficient. When the people have deter-
mined to hold the judges responsible for the
prompt execution of their duties, and if these
should have just cause to complain of the ineffi-
ciency of the clerk, (and it is now said, by law-
yers, that you have thrown duties upon the judges
which they can never discharge—that your judi-
cial duties are now too onerous,) they cannot
get through with their duties in detail. The
lawyers ill my own region have written to me
thus and so. The people do not wish to elect
this officer. I am for placing this power in
the hands of the judges, and making the clerk
subordinate to the court. If he is not efficient,
let the court put him out, at its will and pleas-
ure. I will tell gentlemen who are in favor of
Judicial reform, that when they thus tie up and
paralyse the judicial system we have voted for,
they will do that which will make it unpopular
and inefficient, and therefore let the judges be an
entirety. Let them be responsible for their own
clerk , let them take the whole responsibility of
executing their own task, and appointing their
own subordinate agents. If they do not appoint
a good one, it is their own fault. I withdraw the
motion to postpone.
The question was then stated to be on agreeing
to the substitute as amended.
Mr. BRENT asked the yeas and nays on the
adoption of the substitute as amended, which
were ordered, and being taken, were as follows:
Affirmative—Messrs. Blakistone, Hopewell,
Howard, Buchannan, Dashiell, Miller, Spencer,
George, Wright, Dirickson, Sappington, Mc-
Henry, Magraw, Thawley, Gwinn, Brent, of
Baltimore city, Sherwood, of Baltimore city,
Ware, Schley, Fiery, Neill, John Newcomer,
Harbine, Michael Newcomer, Brewer, Weber,
Slicer, Fitzpatrick, Smith, Parke, Shower,
Cockey and Brown—33.
Negative—Messrs. Chapman, President, Dent,
Ricaud, Lee, Chambers, of Kent, Mitchell,
Donaldson, Dorsey, Wells, Randall, Sellman,
Brent, of Charles, Lloyd, Dickinson, James U.
Dennis, Crisfield, Williams, Hicks, Hodson,
Goldsborough, Eccleston, Bowie, Tuck, Sprigg,
McCubbin, McMaster, Jacobs, Thomas, John-
son, Gaither, Biser, Annan, Stewart, of Balti-
more city, Davis, Kilgour and Waters—36., |
So the Convention refused to accept the sub-
stitute.
The question then recurred on the adoption
of the fourth section.
Mr. MCMASTER moved to strike out "six" and
insert "five," so that the clerk shall be appoint-
ed for five years. He remarked that the Court
of Appeals is to be elected for ten years, and
he would give them the power to appoint their
clerk for five years.
The amendment was rejected.
The article as amended was then adopted,
and, on motion, the Convention adjourned.
TUESDAY, April 29, 1851.
The Convention met at nine o'clock.
Player was made by the Rev. Mr. Griffith,
The roll of the members was called, and a
quorum was present.
The Secretary proceeded to read the Jour-
nal, and had read it in part, when,
On motion of Mr. NEILL, the further reading
of the Journal was dispensed with.
MOTIONS TO RECONSIDER.
Mr. HOWARD rose, he said, to give notice
that he would to-morrow morning move to re-
peal the order which had heretofore been adopt-
ed on the motion, he believed, of the gentleman
from Frederick, (Mr. Thomas,) which allowed
a motion to re-consider to be made at any time
or by any body. He thought that the repeal of
the rule was necessary and proper, and he
would to-morrow morning, when the motion
should be taken up, state the reasons which had
induced him to make it.
The motion was entered on the Journal.
Mr. WELLS offered the following order:
Ordered, That Benjamin Hopkins be allowed
one dollar and fifty cents per diem, during the
session of the Convention, for his services in
attending to the furnace and making fires.
The order was read and adopted.
AMENDMENT TO THE RULES.
Mr. THAWLEY rose, he said, to offer the fol-
lowing order, which he hoped would be adopted?
Resolved, That no gentleman shall stand over
the Clerk's desk while he is calling the yeas and
nays.
Ordered, also, That no vote to re-consider
shall be reconsidered without receiving at least
as large a vote as passed it.
The order having been read—
Mr, SCHLEY called for a division of the question,
so that the vote should be taken separate-
ly on the proposed amendment of the rule in
regard to motions to re-consider.
Mr. BLAKISTONE suggested that the first branch
of the proposition (that which prohibited mem-
bers from looking over the desk, &c.) had al-
ready been provided for. So far, therefore, as
that branch of the proposition was concerned,
the order was unnecessary.
In relation to the latter branch of the proposi- |
