|
prescribes the method authorized for the
election of judges, and does not authorize
the solicitation of objections to the elec-
tion of judges."
Further, I would like to say that Judge
Prendergast appeared before the Commit-
tee on the Judicial Branch and presented
the consensus of judges of the supreme
bench in Baltimore City, and in dealing
with that section, this is the consensus of
the judges of the supreme bench, he said,
"There is another provision in section
5.21 which we believe to be objection-
able"—
THE CHAIRMAN: You have one-half
minute, Delegate Harkness.
DELEGATE HARKNESS:
"It provides that provision shall be
made for a poll on the lawyers in the
area where a judge is required to stand
for election. As to whether he should be
retained in office and for publication of
the results, not infrequently a very capa-
ble judge is not popular with the bar. No
less a person than the great Chief Justice
Marshall was a highly controversial fig-
ure and would have suffered if subjected
to a popularity poll such as recom-
mended."
I suggest that this poll would be nothing
but a popularity contest, and do nothing to
promote official administration of justice
in this State.
THE CHAIRMAN: The Chair recognizes
Delegate Darby.
DELEGATE DARBY: Would you yield
to a question, Delegate Mudd?
THE CHAIRMAN: Do you yield to a
question, Delegate Mudd?
DELEGATE MUDD: Yes.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Darby.
DELEGATE DARBY: Did you consider
what would be able to be proven by secret
ballot? Would just members of the bar as-
sociation be able to vote?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Mudd.
DELEGATE MUDD: I think it is to be
carried out and implemented by rules, and
the attorneys qualified would be determined
by rule.
One suggestion that was made by our
Committee was that all attorneys who
would contribute to the client security
fund would be one method to determine
|
the lawyers qualified to vote. Of course,
that would be prior to the State having a
unified bar, which we do not have.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Darby.
DELEGATE DARBY: But it is actually
possible if just members of the bar as-
sociation are included it could exclude a
number of attorneys who might be prac-
ticing in Baltimore City and residing in
Baltimore County?
THE CHAIRMAN: Would you restate
your question?
DELEGATE DARBY: If the rule was
by members of the bar association, that the
ballot would be only by members of the bar
association, if the Supreme Court should
require that, it is possible to exclude an
attorney who practices in Baltimore City
and resides in Baltimore County?
THE CHAIRMAN: Do you understand
the question?
DELEGATE MUDD: I think so.
THE CHAIRMAN: The question is if
the Court of Appeals should proscribe by
rule that only members of the bar associa-
tion could vote, would this perhaps disen-
franchise members of the bar residing in
one county and practicing in another?
Is that your question?
DELEGATE DARBY: That is correct.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Mudd?
DELEGATE MUDD: I assume it is pos-
sible, but highly improbable. I think there
is a possibility that the lawyers living in
Baltimore County would have a right to
vote with respect to vacancies in Baltimore
County when, in fact, their practice was
almost exclusively Baltimore City. I think
that is a more realistic possibility.
DELEGATE DARBY: It is possible, of
course, that they would have the right to
vote in either place?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegats Mudd.
DELEGATE MUDD: I cannot imagine
under what rule that would develop.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Darby.
DELEGATE DARBY: I will take your
word for it.
THE CHAIRMAN: The Chair suggests
the lawyers disenfranchised could claim
they were denied equal rights.
The Chair recognizes Delegate Schloeder
to speak in favor of the amendment.
|
