|
I will read it again, just so that every-
body can have it in their minds. "It is
settled by the decision of this court," mean-
ing the Supreme Court, "that the right of
trial by jury does not extend to every
criminal proceeding. At the time of the
adoption of the Constitution," meaning,
of course, the Constitution of the United
States, "there were numerous offenses com-
monly defined as 'petty' which were tried
summarily without a jury."
Now, all I am saying is that I think this
is a valuable principle that ought to be
continued in our law, and it is my under-
standing that the Committee in no way
intended to eliminate that principle from
the constitution when it drafted the words
that are before you. But because there was
confusion on the matter, I offered this
amendment really as a clarifying amend-
ment to make sure that this concept was
continued.
I do not believe I can say any more to
you, ladies and gentlemen on this subject,
except to say that I think it is a valuable
concept and one which will be a forward
looking thing in the constitution in the
years to come. And I think, therefore, that
because of this confusion I would hope
that we would adopt the amendment.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Weide-
meyer.
DELEGATE WEIDEMEYER: Mr.
President and members of the Committee,
Delegate Child and I worked on this as a
subcommittee, and we had before us Ar-
ticle 5 of the present Declaration of Rights.
We felt that this Convention would
eventually adopt Article 5. We also had
before us Article 21 of the present Declara-
tion of Rights, and if you will notice, the
language in our Recommendation follows
very closely the language of Article 21. We
did not intend to change anything existing
in our present Maryland law regarding
jury trials. We did not intend to enlarge
or disparage any of the rights now known
under the criminal trial by jury system. We
did add two words, "of 12," inasmuch as
we felt it imperative that we peg into the
constitution that jury of twelve inasmuch
as there was some slight movement among
the Convention to change it and lower the
number of jurors, or to get into the area
where we might have majority verdicts.
And so I think I can speak for Delegate
Child, because he and I, in conferring on it,
had no idea of enlarging or disparaging
any rights as guaranteed under our present
Constitution provided in Article 5 in the
|
present Declaration of Rights and in Ar-
ticle 21 of the Declaration of Rights.
And I think that it is a matter of con-
stitutional construction, Mr. President;
that when we adopt pretty much the same
language without any change in wording
that we necessarily carry along with that
all the judicial construction of the past.
We carry with that all the judicial con-
struction concerning the development and
origin of the common law, and so I think
that any further amendment to try to
clarify this issue is certainly unnecessary.
I do hope that this amendment is de-
feated, because if we get into areas trying
to clarify it, or be more specific, we are
going to limit, and perhaps get ourselves
into a worse sea of confusion.
I hope this Committee takes this section
without amendment, and later on in R&P-2
or as part of the general provisions report,
I hope that section 5 of Article 5 of the
present Declaration of Rights also be in-
corporated into the constitution.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any other Dele-
gate desire to speak in favor of the amend-
ment?
Delegate Bamberger.
DELEGATE BAMBERGER: I rise to
offer an amendment to the amendment to
make the intention perfectly clear. The
amendment would provide after the present
language, "as it has not heretofore been
required."
THE CHAIRMAN : "As it has not here-
tofore been required"?
DELEGATE BAMBERGER: "As it has
not heretofore been required," so that it
would then read that "Trial by jury shall
not be required for petty offenses, as it has
not heretofore been required."
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Case, do
you accept the amendment?
I might say that the Chair is rather
lost as to the meaning. What is meant by
the "has not heretofore been required"?
DELEGATE BAMBERGER: As I
understand it, the sense of (this amendment
is to say that in the trial of petty offenses,
whatever they may be, to -the extent that in
such offenses there has not been under the
common law a requirement for trial by
jury, in the future there shall not be a
requirement for trial by jury.
THE CHAIRMAN: The Chair is un-
clear whether you are limiting it to the
|
