such a provision as that in the constitution.
There is no question that this convention
has the right, if it pleases, to make the
respective counties and the city of Baltimore
pay the salaries of their judges, and of all
their officers. This convention does provide
that the State's attorneys should be paid, as
far as possible, by the counties out of the
fees. I do not think the question of the
power of the convention to act on this
amendment need cause any gentleman to
hesitate. Nor do I see why any gentleman
of the counties can hesitate to let the city of
Baltimore pay this sum to her judges.
Mr, SANDS. I for one will not vote to
place the county I represent in this position,
It would be saying that while providing for
the general administration of justice, she was
not with other counties willing to make pro-
vision out of the general fund of the State, but
required Baltimore city, through her munici-
pal government to provide for justice within
her own BORDER=0s. I cannot vote to place the
constituency I represent in this convention in
any such attitude. Nor do I see how any
other county member can vote for it. It
would appear upon the record that in setting
up the judiciary of the State, we were con-
vinced that Baltimore ought to have certain
mailers, but we would not pay for them out
of the public treasury.
Mr. STIRLING. It will represent the fact
that the convention does not think this
ought to be paid, but the city of Baltimore
does.
Mr. ABBOTT. The city of Baltimore don't
think any such thing.
Mr. SANDS. Then we are to be put into the
position of giving way in the convention to
a portion of the members. What does the
action of the convention signify in striking
out $3,600 and putting in $3,000? Does it
signify that the convention is unwilling to
allow a fair salary for these judges? If it
does, then I am ashamed of it. I as one of
the members of the counties am ashamed
of the fact that we voted upon the ground
simply of $500 additional out of the treasury
of the State to fix the salary of the judges of
Baltimore city. I did not vote upon any
such ground. .But I say the fair interpretation
lion of any vote now by this body in favor
of the proposition of the gentleman from Bal-
timore city (Mr. Cushing) will not only be
to that effect, but that is the inevitable con
clusion. We would not vote to pay the Bal
timore city judges $3,500 when it was pro
posed for the State to pay it, but we were
perfectly willing to vote that the Baltimore
city judges should be paid $4,000 when the
city of Baltimore is to pay it. The members
of the counties, I think, have too clear an ap
preciation of the honor of their constituen-
cies to consent to be put in any such false
position as that.
If I thought the judges of the city of Balti- |
more should be paid $3,000 by the State and
$1,000 by the people of Baltimore, I never
would have voted to strike out the $3,500
reported by the committee and put in $3,000.
1 voted to strike it out simply because it was
an anomaly, something which I suppose does
not appear in any constitution in the Union,
that the judges of an inferior court should
receive a larger salary than the judges of a
superior court. I voted for it that the people
of the State and the people of the city of Bal-
timore should have no unfair or undue dis-
crimination in favor of certain localities. 1
do not see how any county member upon
this floor can vote to place his constituents
in the attitude of saying they were not will-
ing that the Baltimore city judges should be
paid $3,500 out of the treasury of the State,
hut they are willing they should be paid
$4,000, if $1,000 of that amount came out of
the city of Baltimore. I earnestly trust this
amendment will not prevail,
Mr. NEGLEY. I would like to know what
right a delegate from Washington county,
has to vote money out of the treasury of the
city of Baltimore. It would be indecent
and improper. We voted to fix the salaries
of the judges all over the State. We voted
to give Baltimore city judges five hun-
dred dollars more than we give the county
judges. But it was in the exercise of a gene-
ral principle, and to take the amount to be
paid out of the common treasury of the State.
And it was because this three thousand five
hundred dollars or three thousand dollars
was to be paid out of the common treasury of
the State that we had any right as the rep-
resentatives of the common State to vote
upon the subject at all. And when we did
fix the salary at three thousand dollars, we
exhausted all the right we had.
Now I am opposed to this special act, to
putting this special provision in here, to de-
termine this question of voting money out of
the treasury of the city of Baltimore to pay
these judges. How do we know that the city
wants it? They are divided among them-
selves, One party says they do want it, the
other party says they do not. They are abso-
lutely afraid to trust their own representa-
tives with this question,
Mr. STIRLING. Not a bit. We voted it
down, so far as our vote was concerned.
Mr. NEGLEY. We do not ask the city of
Baltimore to authorize us to give the judges
- of Washington county an additional sum;
- we will settle that ourselves. If we think his
e salary is insufficient, and we choose to give
e him more, that is a matter for us; we do not
e want anybody else to vote away our money
s for us. Let the city council itself, if it thinks
- proper, apply to the legislature for power to
- do this, if they do not have it now, I cannot
e vote for this proposition, because the people
of Baltimore are competent to settle it.
i- Mr. ABBOTT. The people of the city hare |
