clear space clear space clear space white space
A
 r c h i v e s   o f   M a r y l a n d   O n l i n e

PLEASE NOTE: The searchable text below was computer generated and may contain typographical errors. Numerical typos are particularly troubling. Click “View pdf” to see the original document.

  Maryland State Archives | Index | Help | Search
search for:
clear space
white space
Proceedings and Debates of the 1967 Constitutional Convention
Volume 104, Volume 1, Debates 1116   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space

1116 CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION OF MARYLAND [Nov. 21]

DELEGATE SCHLOEDER: Mr. Chair-
man, it seems again in the last four days
we have heard a lot about insulating the
judiciary. I rise to support this amend-
ment because I believe — we not only — I
would, as a matter of fact, take Delegate
Weidemeyer's reasoning and come up with
a different conclusion: It seems that while
we pretend to protect the judiciary, I think
the special electorate of lawyers, also, is
an electorate, and we ought to take the ju-
diciary from them. It seems also to me that
it is not constitutional to set up a consti-
tutional electorate which is exactly what
we would be doing if we were to pass the
committee recommendation for setting the
attorneys up as a special constitutional
electorate. I would trust to their good judg-
ment that they could do what they had to
do, that they could discharge their responsi-
bility without putting it into the constitu-
tion.

For those reasons, I would support this
amendment.

THE CHAIRMAN: The Chair recognizes
Delegate Schneider to speak in opposition
to the amendment.

DELEGATE SCHNEIDER: Mr. Chair-
man, the reason this section should be left
in the constitution and the reason this
amendment should be defeated is that this
is a fundamental and basic part of the se-
lection and tenure of judges that your Com-
mittee has recommended. This is not some-
thing that can be left to rule. When you
want something and it is important to you,
you make sure it is there. You do not leave
it to chance or leave it to the Rules Com-
mittee to provide for it.

This is a necessity if we are to have a
meaningful non-competitive election. With-
out this the non-competitive election will
find very few voters taking part; they are
just keeping the judge in office and giving
him the benefit of the doubt.

Under the present system we hear from
the bar associations how they feel. If we
did not have this, we would still hear from
them. It is a small part of the lawyers, it
is -a private club within the committees
that decide what the bar association is
going to do. This makes sure that the
people know just how the entire bar and
the county feels, and how they feel about
this judge, and it gives them some guide-
lines.

I do not think it is really going to have
any more effect than it should, and I think
it is a very important provision. I urg^e the
defeat of this amendment.

THE CHAIRMAN: Is there any further
discussion? Would you like to speak in
favor, Delegate Bard?

DELEGATE BARD: I have a question
of Delegate Mudd.

THE CHAIRMAN: Do you yield to a
question, Delegate Mudd?

DELEGATE MUDD: Yes.

DELEGATE BARD: Delegate Mudd,
would there be a notation in regard to ab-
stentions, not only those who vote Aye and
Nay, but those who abstain?

THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Mudd.

DELEGATE MUDD: That was not dis-
cussed in Committee, Delegate Bard, but
the matter was voted on by you.

DELEGATE BARD: Then I would like
to speak in favor of the amendment, if I
may.

THE CHAIRMAN: Proceed.

DELEGATE BARD: It would be per-
fectly possible in a small county such as
Garrett, and we have heard of this on two
or three occasions, that there would be but
six lawyers who were voting; if some of
them were named as judges there would
be two or three lawyers. This would mean
that the whole concept of secret ballot
would certainly disappear. Suppose of those
three or four who vote, there are two ab-
stentions? Of what value would this entire
poll be to the public as a whole?

In other words, it may well be that ab-
stentions could indicate the fact that there
is no strong feeling in terms of the judges.

On the basis of this, should he be re-
turned, and because I have the feeling that
there would be a number of abstentions, I
believe the whole concept has very little
value.

THE CHAIRMAN: Are you ready for
the question?

(Call for the question.)

The question arises on the adoption of
Amendment No. 43 to Committee Recom-
mendation JB-1.

A vote Aye is a vote in favor of Amend-
ment No. 43. A vote No is a vote against.
Cast your votes.

Have all the delegates voted? Does any
delegate desire to change his vote?

(There was no response.)

 

 

clear space
clear space
white space

Please view image to verify text. To report an error, please contact us.
Proceedings and Debates of the 1967 Constitutional Convention
Volume 104, Volume 1, Debates 1116   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>


This web site is presented for reference purposes under the doctrine of fair use. When this material is used, in whole or in part, proper citation and credit must be attributed to the Maryland State Archives. PLEASE NOTE: The site may contain material from other sources which may be under copyright. Rights assessment, and full originating source citation, is the responsibility of the user.


Tell Us What You Think About the Maryland State Archives Website!



An Archives of Maryland electronic publication.
For information contact mdlegal@mdarchives.state.md.us.

©Copyright  October 06, 2023
Maryland State Archives