|
the Ober law. It covers this entire field of
subversive activity.
This law came before the court on the
question of whether or not it was constitu-
tional. The lower court held it was not
constitutional.
I know. I wrote that opinion.
The case then went to the Court of Ap-
peals, and the Court of Appeals decided
there was no justiciable issue before it,
because nobody had been hurt in any way.
Two ladies working at the Enoch Pratt li-
brary had decided they would not take this
oath and had resigned, but nobody had been
hurt. And the Court of Appeals said, "We
will not pass on this question."
The Supreme Court, on a writ, refused
to hear the matter. Thereafter the United
States, through the Congress, passed what
is known as the Smith Act, dealing with
the entire subject of subversives and sub-
versive activities. The Smith Act then was
held to be pretty generally pre-emptive of
this entire field.
In the nineteen years that have elapsed
since that decision by our Court of Ap-
peals we have had one, sometimes two mem-
bers of the attorney general's office acting
in this field. There has never been an arrest
in the State of Maryland, nor has anybody
ever been changed with violating the Ober
Act.
Recently one of the professors brought
to Maryland refused to take the oath, and
the United States Supreme Court had be-
fore it, not the original oath under the
Ober Law, but a modification, which the
attorney general had attempted to work
out, based on decisions heretofore handed
down by the Supreme Court.
THE CHAIRMAN: You have one-half
minute, Delegate Sherbow.
DELEGATE SHERBOW: And under
those circumstances, the oath could not be
required.
As strongly as all of us feel on this sub-
ject that we do not want to be in favor of
people who want to overthrow the govern-
ment, this is still not a provision that be-
longs in the constitution. The legislature
has acted. If they can find a way to act
again, you and I know that they will; and
this is the way to meet this particular
problem, when and if it arises.
This, as it now reads, will accomplish
absolutely nothing. Therefore, I shall vote
against the amendment.
|
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there any other
discussion?
(There was no response.)
Are you ready for the question?
(Call for the question.)
The Clerk will ring the quorum bell.
The question arises on the adoption of
Amendment No. 7 to Committee Recom-
mendation R&P-2.
A vote Aye is a vote in favor of Amend-
ment No. 7. A Vote No is a vote against.
Cast your votes.
Has every delegate voted? Does any dele-
gate desire to change his vote?
(There was no response.)
The Clerk will record the vote.
There being 17 votes in the affirmative
and 92 in the negative, the motion is lost.
The amendment is rejected.
The Chair desires to correct the record
in one particular which has been called to
my attention.
Delegate Sickles, would you please get
before you Amendment 6 and your modi-
fication?
The Chair read the modification as strik-
ing out all of lines 24, 25 and 26.
I assume you intend also to strike the
word "the" in line 23?
DELEGATE SICKLES: That is correct.
THE CHAIRMAN: May we consider
that a modification?
DELEGATE SICKLES: You may, Mr.
Chairman.
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there any ob-
jection?
Amendment 6 is corrected to read ac-
cordingly; strike out the word "the" in
line 23.
The Chair would like to move on, but I
believe the next amendment is one that may
take some time in discussion or explana-
tion, and therefore the Chair regretfully
recognizes Delegate Powers.
DELEGATE POWERS: Mr. Chairman,
I move the Committee of the Whole rise
and report it has not yet completed con-
sideration of Committee Recommendation
R&P-2.
|
