the sum or value of five hundred dollars, he or
they shall be allowed or adjudged to pay his or
their costs, at the discretion of the court. And
the said judges shall each receive a salary of
twenty-five hundred dollars per year, which shall
not be increased or diminished during their con-
tinuance of office. And the said court shall also
have jurisdiction in all cases arising in equity
in the said city."
Mr. CRISFIELD made some remarks, which
will be published hereafter.
On the question being propounded.
Will the Convention reconsider their vote?
Mr. GWINN demanded the yeas and nays,
which were ordered,
And being taken, resulted as follows:
Affirmative-Messrs. Lee, Donaldson, Howard,
Bell, Welch, Ridgely, Lloyd, Dickinson, Colston,
James U. Dennis, Crisfield, Williams, Golds-
borough, Chambers, of Cecil, McCullough, Mil-
ler, McLane, Spencer, Grason, George, Wright,
Annan, Stephenson, McHenry, Thawley, Stewart,
of Caroline, Gwinn, Stewart, of Baltimore city,
Brent, of Baltimore city, Sherwood, of Baltimore
city, Ware, Neill, Michael Newcomer, Hollyday,
Parke, Shower, Cockey and Brown-38.
Negative-Messrs. Chapman, Pres't, Morgan,
Blakistone, Dent, Hopewell, Ricaud, Chambers,
of Kent, Mitchell, Dorsey, Wells, Randall, Kent,
Sellman, Weems Bond, Brent, of Charles, Jeni-
fer, Buchanan, John Dennis, Dashiell, Hicks,
Hodson, Eccleston, Phelps, McCubbin, Bowling,
Dirickson, McMaster, Hearn, Fooks, Jacobs,
Thomas, Shriver, Biser, Sappington, Nelson,
Fiery, John Newcomer, Harbine, Davis, Brewer,
Waters, Weber, Slicer, Fitzpatrick and Smith
-46.
So the Convention refused to reconsider their
vote on the 12th section.
The 16th section was then read;
Mr. BUCHANAN moved as a substitute for the
16th and 17th sections, the following:
"There shall also be a criminal court for the
city of Baltimore to be styled The Criminal
Court of Baltimore, which shall consist of one
Judge, and shall have and exercise all the juris-
diction now exercised by Baltimore city court,
and the said judge shall receive the salary of
$2,500 per annum, and shall be subject to the
provisions of this Constitution with regard to the
election and qualification of judges, and their re-
moval from office. And it shall be the duty of
the Legislature at its next meeting, to provide
for the sessions of said court, to be held at not
greater intervals than quarterly, for the purpose
of trying cases in which trial byjury may be de-
termined by the accused; and also to provide that
said court shall hold frequent sessions for the
trials of cases subject to its jurisdiction in which
the accused may not demand ajury trial,"
Which was read.
Mr. BUCHANAN remarked, that the object of his
substitute was to get rid of the Pol ice Court
which he considered unnecessary. It seemed to
him that one criminal judge was abundantly able
to do all the business, and that there was no occasion
for a Police Court. Now, what were the |
facts? There had been a criminal court ever
since 1816 in the city of Baltimore. The Court,
as it existed at present, was established under
the act of 1816. It consisted of three judges,
and there had been great clamor in relation to
it, we all knew. The objection had been, that
the court was too expensive; and there was a
disposition manifested to get rid of two of the
judges, leaving the Chief Justice to attend to all
the business of the Court, believing that he was
fully competent and able to dispose of it himself,
as he certainly was—a more competent judge
could not have been found than Judge Brice.
Now, what (he asked) were the further facts?
Why, that one judge had done all the business,
for some lime past. Judge Brice, a most faith-
ful and upright judge, had not been for some time
on the bench, on account of declining health,
being now almost at the point of death, and
Judge Worthington had resigned two or three
years ago. There was then left but Judge Nis-
bett now on the bench, who by the by, was a very
good man in his way, and he had gone on and con-
ducted the business of that court by himself for
the last year. He (Mr. B.) would say to the
Convention, put on the bench one efficient and
energetic man, and pay him well, and he will do
all the business. There is no need of a Police
Court, and the expense would be considerable.
Mr. SPENCER moved for a division of the ques-
tion upon each branch of said amendment.
Mr. THOMAS moved for a division of the ques-
tion first on striking out, and
The question recurring on striking out,
Mr. GWINN demanded the yeas and nays,
Which being ordered and taken,
Resulted as follows:
Affirmative—Messrs Chapman, President, Blak-
istone, Dent, Hopewell, Ricaud, Chambers of
Kent, Donaldson, Wells, Randall, Weems, Bond,
Brent of Charles, Buchanan, Bell, Welch, Chan-
dler, Ridgely, Lloyd, Dickinson, Colston, John
Dennis, James U. Dennis, Crisfield, Dashiell,
Williams, Goldsborough, Eccleston, Phelps,
Chambers of Cecil, McCullough, McCubbin,
Bowling, Spencer, Dirickson, McMaster, Hearn,
Fooks, Jacobs, Shriver. Biser, Annan, Sapping-
ton, Stephenson, McHenry, John Newcomer, Da-
vis, Waters, Weber, Parke, and Cockey—51.
Negative—Messrs. Lee, Dorsey, Kent, Mer-
rick, Howard, Hicks, Hodson, Miller, McLane,
Grason, George, Wright, Thomas, Gaither. Ma-
graw, Carter, Thawley, Stewart of Caroline,
Gwinn, Stewart of Baltimore city. Brent of
Baltimore city, Sherwood of Baltimore city,
Ware, Fiery, Neill, Harbine, Michael Newcom-
er, Kilgour, Brewer, Anderson, Hollyday, Sli-
cer, Fitzpatrick, Shower and Brown—38.
So the Convention agreed to strike out.
The question then recurred on the motion of
Mr. SPENCER, on the first branch of the amend-
ment as offered by Mr. BUCHANAN, down to the
word "office," inclusive in the seventh line.
Mr. GWINN demanded the yeas and nays,
Which being ordered and taken,
Resulted as follows: |
