systems. I think the vice of the systems is
entirely in the tenure. Certainly, in courts
having criminal jurisdiction, the resalt is that
preceding an election the functions of the
office bear directly upon a large class of per-
sons who are interested in the re-election or
the defeat of the judge. And there is a
bonus offered to every judge to corrupt his
moral integrity by administering the law to
suit the people who he knows will have in
their hands his nomination or election.
There are a large class of persons, not crimi-
nals in the ordinary acceptation of the term,
but who come under those provisions of law
which are penal in their character, who wield
a vast political influence. And it is a con-
stant temptation to a judge to exercise the
functions of his office just before an election
so as to suit the views of those persons over
whom he administers justice, it is true there
may bejust and pure men under such a sys-
tem. But the system continually holds out
temptations to corrupt their integrity, in
other States that same thing has happened ;
and judges have studied the cases upon their
dockets and allowed some of them to stand
unprosecuted because they were seeking for
votes at the approaching election. Now, if
the people elect their own judges, there is no
reason why the term of office should not be
as provided in this report, so that the judge
should be independent of any motive to ex-
ercise his functions without any reference to
the views of the people.
I hardly suppose my view is going to pre-
vail. But I wish to record my opinion upon
this subject, and I shall vote in accordance
with it.
Mr. CHAMBERS. I am most happy to see
some evidence of what. I consider just sense
upon the subject of judicial tenure, I shall
consider it very much the happiest day that
I have passed in this house, since the 27th of
April, if the majority of this body could be
brought to accord in the opinion, that the
independent tenure of a judge, whether by
appointment or election, during good beha-
vior was the proper theory upon which to
establish our judicial system. I do hope
that reflection has brought to the minds of
some gentlemen, a change of opinion upon
this subject. With a view to ascertain that
fact I propose to amend the proposition of
the gentleman from Allegany (Mr. Hebb)
now before the house, by striking out the
tenure there contained, and inserting the
words "during good behavior or until be
shall attain the age of sixty-five years."
The PRESIDENT. That amendment is not
now in order; there is already an amend-
ment to an amendment pending.
Mr. BERRY, of Prince George's. I propose
to withdraw my amendment, so that the
gentleman from Kent (Mr. Chambers) can
submit the one he has indicated. I much
prefer the life tenure, and will vote for it if I |
see the convention are in favor of it. But 1
am opposed to the judges being elected by
the general ticket of the State. If that
proposition is reconsidered, and the conven-
tion will allow each district of the State to
elect its own judge by the vote of the dis-
trict, I will go for the life tenure. I will
withdraw my amendment for the present, so
that the vote can be taken upon the amend-
ment of the gentleman from Kent,
The amendment of Mr. BERRY, of Prince
George's, was accordingly withdrawn.
Mr. CHAMBERS. I now submit the follow-
ing amendment to the amendment of the
gentleman from Allegany (Mr. Hebb:)
Strike out the words " for the term of ten
years, from the time of his election, or until
he shall have attained the age of seventy
years, whichever shall first happen," and in-
sert the words "during good behavior, or
until he shall attain the age of sixty-five
years.' '
Mr. HEBB. I desire to state why I offer
the amendment which I have submitted. 1
have always been and am now in favor of an
appointed judiciary system for the State.
But the convention having determined in
favor of the elective system, I thought it best
that the judges of the court of appeals should
be elected by general State ticket, one of the
judges to come from each of the judicial dis-
tricts, I offer this amendment because if
the judges are to be elected by the people, 1
am opposed to their holding office for more
than ten years; otherwise, if you happen to
elect a bad judge you cannot get rid of him.
The question was upon the amendment of
Mr. CHAMBERS to the amendment of Mr. HEBB.
Mr. THOMAS, In relation to the limitation
of age, if this amendment should pass, I know
at least one judge, one of the best judges tip-
on the bench, who in the course of four or five
years would beexcluded from the bench. 1
do not consider that a man in growing old
loses his mind, and becomes incapable of be-
ing a good judge. I think we have as many
men of venerable age, who are good judges,
as those who are young men. If it is the
sense of the convention, I would vote to have
no limitation in regard to age at all. If yon
elect your judges tor ten years, if any one up-
on reaching the age of sixty or seventy years
is not capable of fulfilling the duties of the of-
fice, the people need not re-elect him. I shall
therefore support the proposition of the gen-
tleman from Allegany (Mr. Hebb.) I think
this matter of limiting the tenure of a judge
because of age is wrong, not only in principle
and theory, but in practice and experience.
I have a letter in my possession now from a
gentleman informing me that if this provis-
ion in relation to sixty or sixty-five years be
adopted, one of the best judges we have in the
State would thereby become incapacitated
from serving on the bench,
Mr. CHAMBERS. I ask the gentleman from |
