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 1353   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space

[Nov. 29] DEBATES 1353

were political incompetents in the judiciary,
and that there was time for cleaning up
the sorry mess. I submit to you that the
same argument now applies to allow the
governor to appoint the attorney general
and all of his assistants, and putting poli-
ticians in the legal department of the State,
where it has no place. And we are con-
tinually creating the same horrible mess
that was referred to by Judge Henderson
and which he was disposed to clean up.

I submit to you that the only way to
have an impartial, independent office in the
attorney general is to have it an elected
one.

THE CHAIRMAN: Does any other dele-
gate desire to speak in opposition?

Delegate Willoner.

DELEGATE WILLONER: After the
last I must get up and say something. Any-
body who thinks there isn't politics in the
attorney general's office does not know what
the facts are. Not only is there politics, but
the assistant attorneys general are active
politicians, working for the attorney gen-
eral for governor. Whether it makes any
difference to this debate or not, it just is
not true that the attorney general is not
involved in politics, because he certainly is.

I might mention a couple of other things.
We have had so much talk about the people
here. The people could care less about the
attorney general. If the attorney general is
a good lawyer and makes good decisions
based on the law, that is it. He has to in-
terpret what the law is. The legislatures
decide what the law is.

It seems to me that what you are voting
for when you vote for an attorney general
is an individual.

We have had some very nice individuals,
and if you look at the history, as it has
been pointed out today, these individuals
are working on the first step to becoming
governor. It might be interesting to see
what is going to happen in the future
where we have a judicial selection proce-
dure. If we will not be able to elevate our
attorney general to gubernatorial offices,
we will shift them off to the courts.

Politics is a major part of the attorney
general's life, and I think probably it
should be.

THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Pullen.

DELEGATE PULLEN: Mr. Chairman,
I rise to speak in favor of the amendment.
I speak not as a lawyer, but as one who

has probably taken more advice from the
attorney general's office than any individual
in this room, and I consider it to be the
finest advice in that the attorney general's
office represents the best in the tradition
of state government.

I grew up in the state where the at-
torney general was called the common-
wealth attorney. Here he is called the
state's attorney. He is the attorney who
represents the people, not any one indi-
vidual.

I read a statement yesterday to the ef-
fect that the attorney general and the
comptroller should be the governor's men.
The attorney general must represent all of
us. He must represent the department even
at times involving conflict with the gov-
ernment.

I have received opinions which were not
the ones that I wanted, but I respected
them. I believe we must have an inde-
pendent individual in that office.

One final opinion: Anyone who is ap-
pointed by another must, of necessity give
allegiance to that person. He must so long
as he stays with him reflect that opinion.
Anyone in an office created for the purpose
of protecting all of the people cannot be
subservient to any one individual.

THE CHAIRMAN: Does any other dele-
gate desire to speak in opposition to the
amendment?

Delegate Marion.

DELEGATE MARION: Mr. Chairman
and fellow delegates: This morning a letter
was delivered to the Convention. It was
addressed to any old legislator, and one
of the members of the Convention staff de-
livered it to my colleague to my right, Dele-
gate Malkus. Delegate Malkus opened the
letter. It was from a young lady in Alex-
andria, Virginia, and when he read, "I am
especially interested in finding out what
the purpose was in rewriting Maryland's
Constitution," he handed the letter to me
and he said, "You take care of it."

(Laughter.)

I suggest one of the purposes we are re-
writing Maryland's State Constitution is
to put the State of Maryland back on the
track as a strong governmental entity with
respect to the federal system in which we
live. I say to those prophets of doom who
tell us what will happen to the State of
Maryland if we have an appointed attorney
general that the United States of America,

 

 

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 1353   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  August 16, 2024
Maryland State Archives