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 1141   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space

[Nov. 21] DEBATES I141

DELEGATE JAMES: A point of in-
quiry. What happens if they do not submit
the lists? Would Delegate Henderson an-
swer that question? Would it mean you
have to get a judicial interpretation to the
effect that the governor can appoint when
a list is not made in a timely manner? I
would like to have that question answered.

THE CHAIRMAN: The Chair would
like to address an inquiry to Delegate
Clark. I doubt that the Committee of the
Whole has the power to cause the amend-
ment to be laid over. Certainly, the Chair
has no such power. Would you be willing to
withdraw the amendment from considera-
tion at this time, with the assurance from
the Chair that you would be able to offer
it tomorrow morning?

DELEGATE J. CLARK: Yes, sir. That
would be satisfactory to me.

I just think that this is an area that
should be covered, and that is the only
reason I offered the amendment. I think if
we do not cover it, we will regret it.

THE CHAIRMAN: The amendment is
withdrawn on the assurance of the Chair
that Delegate Clark will have the oppor-
tunity to submit the amendment to the
Committee of the Whole tomorrow morning.

I think we are now ready — for what
purpose does Delegate Bamberger rise?

DELEGATE BAMBERGER: Mr. Chair-
man, I rise to move that this house recon-
sider its vote on Amendment No. 43.

THE CHAIRMAN: Amendment No. 43,
a motion to reconsider by Delegate Bam-
berger. Is the motion seconded?

(Whereupon, the motion was duly sec-
onded.)

The motion being seconded, the Chair
recognizes Delegate Bamberger to discuss
the motion to reconsider the vote by which
Amendment No. 43 was rejected. Amend-
ment No. 43 pertains to section 5.21. Does
every delegate have it?

(There was no response.)

So that you may know the amendment,
in case you don't have it available, it
would strike out the sentence in lines 43
through 50, which is the sentence that "the
Court of Appeals shall prescribe by rule
for the taking of a poll by secret ballot of
the lawyers of the area in which the judge
is required to stand for election as to
whether he should be continued in office
for a full or additional term and for pub-
lication of the results thereof".

The Chair recognizes Delegate Bam-
berger to speak to his motion to reconsider
a vote by which that amendment was re-
jected. Delegate Bamberger.

DELEGATE BAMBERGER: This
amendment was offered at the beginning of
this afternoon's session by Delegate Ben-
nett. The purpose of it is very simple, as
stated by the Chair.

The Committee's proposal mandates that
there shall be an election of constitutional
dignity by the lawyers to pass upon, or at
the very least to advise the electorate about
the qualifications of the judges.

THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Bamberger,
pardon the interruption of the Chair. Will
the Clerk please ring the quorum bell?

Delegate Bamberger, you may proceed.

DELEGATE BAMBERGER: I think we
all have shared some concern about the
detail in this particular article. I do think
some of that detail is necessary. I think
when we are considering a plan for the se-
lection of judges, that we must give it some
period of reasonable time in which to oper-
ate, to know whether it does, in fact, im-
prove the quality of justice in this State.

But I think we have gone much too far
when we mandate in the constitution that
lawyers have some special prerogative to
advise the electorate, and what I think con-
cerns me more, some special prerogative to
place what must inevitably be some blem-
ish upon the character of a judge.

Let me state the two things which con-
cern me most. First, for those who in this
room are not lawyers, to not entertain the
presumption that every lawyer knows the
judges. I would venture to say that in the
large metropolitan counties in the State, a
minority of the lawyers in the City prac-
tice before the City courts with enough reg-
ularity to say that they really know the
judges there.

I would even be willing to wager that a
majority of the lawyers in Baltimore City
cannot name for you all of the members of
the supreme bench of Baltimore City.

I am absolutely certain in Baltimore
City, because that is the jurisdiction in
which I live and practice, that a majority
of the lawyers have not been inside the
Baltimore City court house for years.

I am also concerned with what I am told
is an inevitable fact, that in any election
there are a fixed percentage or a guaran-
teed percentage of no votes.

 

 

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 1141   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