it in the constitution. Under the laws of Ma-
ryland, any man in the State can practice
medicine and charge for it. Bat would any
main not a physician, among those members
of this convention who favor the adoption of
this section, attempt to treat a bad case of
disease, or to give a diagnosis of it? While
I have seen a man try his own cases in the
courts, I have never in my life seen a man,
not a physician, employed by his neighbors
to treat diseases. Now any man in the com-
munity is as capable of forming a diagnosis
of the most obscure case known to medicine,
as he is, uninformed and unpracticed in the
law, to go to your court-house and try a le-
gal case before the court and jury.
I shall vote, therefore, against retaining
this provision in the constitution, because I
think to do so would be doing our citizens
an injustice. Not that I think that keeping
this section out would benefit my profession
at all; for I believe if would be a greater
benefit to the profession to permit every man
to practice.
The question was upon the motion of Mr.
JONES, of Somerset, to strike out the words
''being a voter."
Upon this question, Mr. JONES, of Somerset,
called for the yeas and nays, and they were
ordered.
The question being then taken, by yeas
and nays, it resulted—yeas 14, nays 58—as
follows:
Yeas—Messrs. Chambers, Crawford, Daniel,
Dennis, Edelen, Hatch, Horsey, Jones, of
Somerset, Lansdale, McComas, Mitchell, Mur-
ray, Schley, Stockbridge—14.
Nays—Messrs. Goldsborough, President;
Abbott, Annan, Audoun, Barron, Berry, of
Prince George's, Billingsley, Blackiston,
Brooks, Brown, Carter, Clarke, Cunningham,
Davis, of Charles, Davis, of Washington,
Dent, Duvall, Earle, Ecker, Gale, Galloway,
Hebb, Hodson, Hopkins, Hopper, Jones, of
Cecil, Keefer, Kennard, King, Lee, Mace,
Marbury, Markey, Mayhugh, Morgan, Mulli-
kin, Negley, Nyman, Parker, Parran, Peter,
Pugh, Purnell, Robinette, Russell, Sands,
Schlosser, Smith, of Carroll, Smith, of Dor-
chester, Smith, of Worcester, Stirling, Swope,
Sykes, Thomas, Thruston, Todd, Turner,
Wickard, Wooden—58.
The amendment was accordingly rejected.
Mr, DANIEL, when his name was called,
said: I shall vote for this, for I can gee no
reason why a roan twenty-one years old
should be allowed to defend his own case,
and not a man who is twenty years and
eleven months old.
Mr. THURSTON, when his name was called,
said: Inasmuch as this amendment if adopted
would permit citizens of other States to prac-
tice law in this State in their own cases, I
most vote against it.
Mr. CHAMBERS submitted the following
amendment: |
Strike out the words'" admitted to practice
law," and insert the words "permitted to
appear and try his own case," and strikeout
the words, in the last line, "in his own
case."
Mr. CHAMBERS said: I have made a business
of the practice of the law in my State from
the year 1805 up to the 18th of August,
1864'; and I think it is entitled to some re-
spect at the hands of this convention when 1
say that a man who knows nothing of the
law cannot be admitted to practice it. Yon
may pass an ordinance or a constitutional
provision, but you cannot enable a man who
is fool enough to go into court to try his own
case, not being a lawyer, to practice law. It
would be a libel upon the profession, were we
to assert such a thing.
The amendment was agreed to—ayes 44,
nays 14.
The question was stated upon the motion
to strike out the section.
Mr. CHAMBERS. I rise to excuse myself
from voting to accomplish an object I have
no desire to accomplish. By common law
every man has a right to appear and try his
own case. Gentlemen seem to think that
they are conferring a privilege upon a par-
ticular class of persons. That is altogether a
mistake. This is restricting a right which
they already have. I vote against it because
it restricts the right of the voter coming into
the State, and having all the qualifications
except residence. A man coming here from
Massachusettes, although he may be a lawyer,
cannot be admitted to try his own case un-
less he comes to the bar and qualifies. But
another man alongside of him, with no pre-
tensions of law, because he is a voter can try
his own case. I do not see the necessity of
restricting the privilege. Any man baa a
right lo spend his own time and money fool-
ishly; to employ his time, talents, money,
reputation, as he pleases, provided be does
not injure his neighbor by it. Why then re-
strain him? The inference would be from in-
serting such a clause, that this class of per-
sona is to be prohibited. I do not want them
prohibited. I think it is an invidious dis-
tinction between persons who stand in this
respect in the same category. When a man
has just come into the State, or into the county,
1 do not see why he should not be as much
as any other man in the State, permitted to
try his own case, I shall vote against the
insertion of such a clause.
Mr. NEGLEY. What will bo the effect of
striking out the entire section?
The PRESIDENT. The gentleman from
Talbot moved to reconsider the vote by which
this section was stricken out. After that vote
had been reconsidered, the gentleman from
Talbot moved a proposition which the house
has been perfecting. After they have per-
fected it the convention must go back to the
motion to strike out. |
