scarcely gets familiar with the duties of his
office, betore his term expires. I cannot see
how this is to prevent the settling up of the
sheriff's accounts. I am satisfied that if you
were to abbreviate his term still more, and
instead of putting in the sheriff for two years
were to. put him in for six months, so that in-
stead of having one sheriff appointed for two
years you would have four sheriffs appointee
in the same length of time, it would not fa-
cilitate the settlement of the accounts. I
you make it four years, instead of having
two sheriff's appointed in four years, you will
have only one.
As to the clause to prevent re-election, I
think it is hardly necessary to put it there,
for this reason. I have scarcely ever known
any disposition in our county to re-elect a
sheriff, and I have never known a sheriff to
be re-elected or re-appointed. I do think that
is not much of an evil, if it is an evil.
I do not think any bad result will follow
from extending his office for four years. We
have lengthened the term of a good many
other officers, and I do not fee why we should
not this. As to the terrible, tremendous,
overwhelming, and irresistible influence of
the sheriff, of the exercise of which the gen-
tleman from Howard speaks, I cannot con-
ceive of it, it exists more in the fertile im-
agination of the gentleman than in the actual
fact. I cannot conceive what terrible, crush-
ing influence he can exercise as an executive
officer in any case. I do not want to revo-
lutionize society, or overturn its foundations,
or endanger public justice. Not at all. Yet
the gentleman speaks as though it were some-
thing terrible to lengthen his term of office.
I do not so think.
Mr. STIRLING. I shall certainly vote against
this amendment. I certainly think this is bad
enough as it is, and I shall not vote to make
it worse. It strikes me that the provision in
the constitution, which has been there for so
long a period of time, must have been put there
for some reason. Sheriffs have been elected
before any other subordinate officer, way
back for it period of thirty or forty years least;
elected by the people. Yet in every consti-
tution this same provision has been retained of
election for two years, and forbidding re-elec-
tion. That alone carries with it the convic-
tion that there must have been some reason
for it. The position taken by the gentleman
from Howard (Mr. Sands,) it seems to me, is
not entitled to be treated as a matter of im-
agination at all. A sheriff has power distinct
from everybody else. He may have writs of:
execution, on the person or property of three
or four hundred citizens of the county.—
What tort of a man is that to go before the
people for re-election, with a large part of
the voters of the county subject to his control,
when he can put them in jail or sell their
property at auction? It strikes me that that
provision was put into the constitution be- |
cause it was thought it was not fair to give
a man that power, allowing him to put him-
self up as acandidate for office; it was because
of the temptation to the sheriff constantly to
exercise his office for his own immediate
emolument. The powers and influences of
the other officers are indirect powers to a very
great extent; but this is an absolute, fixed,
definite, personal control over A, B and C.
It is of no use to say that the sheriff is
bound to make a return in a certain number
of days. It is a fact that he does not make it
in a certain number of days. They are often
allowed to grant time, and are often instructed
by the perrons who have the judgments to
obtain money by compromise. Nobody com-
plained of the constitution as it stood. It
was a part of the constitution of 1836, and of
the constitution of 1850, and I beard no com-
plaint about it. I certainly see no reason
why we should extend the term beyond two
years, it will not be a popular provision.—
Certainly when the sheriff has been in two
years making money, there are plenty of peo-
ple who want him to give way to somebody
else. Certainly some sheriffs make an inde-
pendent fortune out of the office; and there is
no reason for continuing them in it.
Mr. SCHLEY. Before the convention votes
on this amendment I should like to call their
attention to what hag been the practice in
this State. Not dreaming that such a thing
would be proposed here, I am not prepared to
give all the reasons for the law as it now
stands. I find, on referring to the constitu-
tion of 1? 76, that the sheriff was elected every
third year in this State. So that we had a
term of three years, which, when we came to
reform the constitution in 1850, was deemed
to be too long a period, in both constitu-
tions the disqualification for the succeeding
term was incorporated in the organic law.—
1 am sure the convention must admit the va-
lidity of the reasons adduced by the gentle-
men from Howard (Mr. Sands) and Baltimore
city (Mr. Stirling) in behalf of retaining this
qualification. I hope some gentleman who
voted in the affirmative upon that proposition
will move its reconsideration presently.
From three years the term was reduced to
two. I have never heard any one complain
that that term was too brief. In my own ex-
perience, in my own county, I find that every
incumbent of that office bars made a fortune
for himself in two years. I say a " fortune,"
which is a comparative term. I have never
known a man within my recollection, to re-
tire from the office of sheriff, in Frederick
county, alter serving in it for two years, with
less than seven thousand dollars clear earn-
ings; and I have beard that it has ranged up
as high as twenty thousand. I regard either
of these sums as a fortune. I have not heard
any reason why the term should be prolonged
to four years; but I can very well conceive
reasons why it should be limited to two. If |
