|
and for any form of indeterminate sentence
and for release upon parole, etc.
The reason for the provision — I do not
think I can say anybody has researched
behind every provision in the Constitution —
but the history behind this particular pro-
vision was for the purpose of getting around
the separation of powers. In other words,
this is apparently considered to be executive
power exercised by the court. Yet today we
figure it almost universally as part of the
judicial power. It seems to me there are a
lot of jokers in this particular provision.
We set it up within the framework. We
may have set up the legislative department,
executive department, and judiciary. That is
where we get our separation of powers,
and not in this language that has been set
up in this particular provision.
I might also point out that these ques-
tions were raised in the Committee and
never answered en masse. There were pre-
vented appeals and they had to require con-
stitutional amendments to determine wheth-
er or not a statute was constitutional or to
interpret statutes. It is a crazy provision
and has given a lot of problems and has
been observed more than it needs observ-
ance.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Pullen.
DELEGATE PULLEN: Mr. Chairman,
I am not sure whether you are talking in
opposition. I want to be in opposition.
THE CHAIRMAN: You may speak.
DELEGATE PULLEN: I would like to
read a political statement upon which our
founding fathers put this in to the Consti-
tution, and I think that it should stay there.
This is from Montesquieu, 1748.
"The political liberty of the subject
is a tranquility of mind arising from the
opinion each person has of his safety.
In order to have this liberty, it is req-
uisite the government be so constituted
as one man need not be afraid of another.
"When the legislative and executive
powers are united in the same person, or
in the same body of magistrates, there
can be no liberty; because apprehension
may arise, lest the same monarch or
senate should enact tyrannical laws, to
execute them in a tyrannical manner.
"Again, there is no liberty, if the ju-
dicial power be not separated from the
legislative and executive. Were it joined
with the legislative, the life and liberty
of the subject would be exposed to arbi-
trary control; for the judge would then
|
be the legislator. Were it joined to the
executive power, the judge might behave
with violence and oppression."
I state my objection to a statement by
he who said, he only earns his right to
freedom and existence who daily conquers
them anew.
I think this a matter of historical de-
velopment of the rights and liberties of
democratic people. I am not concerned with
the hypocrisies of the law.
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there any further
discussion?
Delegate Macdonald.
DELEGATE MACDONALD: Mr. Chair-
man, I rise to support the amendment. I
can state from personal experience that
this amendment is contrary to the govern-
mental structure in Montgomery County,
and the structure that they have had since
late 1948.
Under the charter in Montgomery
County, the executive and the legislative
branches are combined. The County Council
is the executive and it is also the legisla-
tive branch.
This is in accordance with good mu-
nicipal practice. This is the governmental
structure which is recommended by the Na-
tional Municipal League. It is a govern-
mental structure which is practiced
throughout the United States in hundreds,
if not thousands, of municipalities. Since
we have mandated home rule under the
constitution, and the various counties of
this State will be adopting their own char-
ter, they certainly should be at liberty to
adopt the charter which embodies that
structure, and we should not put an im-
pediment in the way.
I support the amendment.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Grant, do
you desire to speak in opposition?
DELEGATE GRANT: I desire to speak
in opposition.
In 1776 by a margin of exactly one
vote the separation of powers doctrine was
adopted for Maryland. It is one of the
most fundamental doctrines in the Ameri-
can constitutional law.
Following up what Delegate Pullen said,
I only have to point out, when it is vio-
lated what results. I think you know the
case of the runaway agency. You cannot
tell which agency is doing what to whom,
and that is because an agency is estab-
|
