The question was then taken upon the
amendment to the amendment, and it was re-
jected.
The question recurred upon the amendment
of Mr. HEBB.
Mr. THOMAS moved to amend the amend-
ment by adding thereto the following :
" Provided, the judges of the orphans court
of Baltimore city shall receive an annual salary
of fifteen hundred dollars to be paid by
the mayor and city council of Baltimore, as
city officers are paid."
Mr. NEGLEY. I cannot understand why the
salaries of the judges of the orphans' court in
the city of Baltimore should be fixed in the
constitution, and the salaries of the judges of
the orphans' court in the counties be left open
to the legislature. I cannot see why the leg-
islature is not as competent to fix the salaries
of the judges of the orphans' court in the city
of Baltimore, as it is to fix them in the coun-
ties. If you fix in the constitution the sala-
ries of the judges of the orphans' court in the
city of Baltimore, I do not see why you should
not go to work and fix the salaries or per
diem of the judges in the counties, is the
gentleman afraid that the legislature will not
give them as much as this convention is dis-
posed to give? Or is be afraid to trust the
legislature hereafter on that subject? I do
not see why this distinction should be made
at all. I shall vote against the amendment.
I am for uniform legislation.
Mr. DANIEL. I am rather opposed to the
amendment in its present form. The legisla-
ture has heretofore regulated this matter. It
increased the salaries of the judges last win-
ter, and it will increase them again, I suppose,
if necessary. I think it is rather bad policy
to fix a certain salary in the constitution. I
should rather see it remain as it now is, to be
altered by the legislature as they may think
proper.
Mr. THOMAS. If the counties desire to have
the constitution fix the per diem of the judges
of the orphans' court, I am perfectly willing
to vote for any proposition they may offer to
that effect. But the desire upon the part of
county members appears to be that the coun-
ty commissioners shall have control over that
subject. But we prefer that the salaries of
the judges of the orphans' court for Baltimore
city shall be fixed. Last winter the salaries
of those judges were raised to twelve hundred
dollars a year. There was a general disposition
on the part of the members of the legis-
lature to fix it at fifteen hundred dollars a
year; but on account of one gentleman op-
posing it, that proposition was defeated. We
bad great difficulty in getting it, for the sim-
ple reason that there was a clause in the con-
stitution which said that the salary of no offi-
cer should be increased or diminished while
he was in office. But after a long and full
argument they overcame their constitutional
scruples, and agreed to give the judges of the |
orphans' court what they considered a better
salary than they had been getting before.—
The duties of the judges of our orphans'
court are as onerous as the duties of some of
the judges of the circuit court. They are in
session every day; they have to hear very
frequently long litigated cases on the probate
of wills. They can transact no other busi-
ness. And it appears to me that while yon
give the judges of your small circuits twenty
five hundred dollars a year, a salary of fif-
teen hundred dollars a year is little enough
for the judges of the orphans' court for Bal-
timore city, whose duties require them to be
in session every day in the week except Sun-
days.
Mr. STIRLING. In addition to what my col-
league (Mr. Thomas) has said, I will state
that it is impossible to fix in the constitution
the compensation of the judges of the or-
phans' court in the counties, because there
are no two counties in which the same ser-
vices are rendered: their compensation must
be a per diem. But the orphans' court in the
city of Baltimore is organized upon a differ-
ent principle. The judge there attends every
day, and there is a reason why the per diem
should be abolished and a proper fixed com-
pensation given. I have not consulted all
the delegates, but so far as the most of us are
concerned, we think that a salary of fifteen
hundred dollars is not too much, and as it
comes out of the city treasury I do not sup-
pose the county members are very much in-
terested in the subject.
Mr. DANIEL. I feel great delicacy in again
opposing this matter. But really it seems to
me that I cannot see any reason for a different.
rule being established in the city from the
one in the country. I believe that the prac-
tice in the city is to sit pretty much every
day, but to meet at eleven o'clock and adjourn
at one. And the judges can have time to at-
tend to their other business either before or
after those hours. And the legislature hav-
ing, in view of the high prices and every-
thing, fixed the salary at twelve hundred dol-
lars, I really am opposed to fifteen hundred
dollars at this time.
Mr. MILLER. I cannot see why a day's
work in the orphans' court in the county is
not worth just as much as in the city of Bal-
timore. We have just as good judges in our
orphans' court, and they are worth just as
much. And if you leave it to the legislature
to fix their compensation they will fix it fairly
and uniformly.
The question was then taken upon the
amendment of Mr. THOMAS, and it was re-
jected.
The question again recurred upon the
amendment of Mr. Hebb.
Mr. STIRLING. I move to amend the amend-
ment as follows: Strike out the words " shall
be paid at a per diem rate for the time they
are in session, to be fixed by the general as |
