|
One further remark, if you will, Mr.
Chairman. Another reason why Maryland
should pass this and put it in its constitu-
tion, even though we are the first state to
do so, is that this is historically a very
proper thing to do because Maryland was
the first state that ever ceded any land to
the federal government, and that land is, of
course, what the City of Washington is on
now. So it is in keeping with our tradition
and with Maryland experience that we
should adopt this in the constitution and
take the lead among the states.
I am going on at great length, but I have
one more remark. Delegate Henderson
asked a question as to why we did not in-
clude lands prior to this, and I might say
that I believe that under an unfortunate
decision of the Court of Appeals we could
not have done this, but the federal authori-
ties hope that after one congressman leaves
Congress, they will be able to enact a fed-
eral act to re-cede to Maryland all of the
land which we have ceded to them, and
then our legislature would respond by again
ceding back to the federal government the
same lands, with this constitutional pro-
vision.
Then all of the people now living on
these enclaves would get their full rights,
which we can figure no other way to do
unless the Court of Appeals reverses itself.
THE CHAIRMAN: Are there any other
questions?
Delegate Sherbow.
DELEGATE SHERBOW: Will Delegate
Boyer yield for a question?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Boyer.
DELEGATE BOYER: I would be very
happy.
DELEGATE SHERBOW: Would the
presence of this article in the Maryland
Constitution adversely affect Maryland in
an attempt, for example, to obtain for our
State the patent office in competition per-
haps with some other state which may have
no restrictions?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Boyer.
DELEGATE BOYER: We would cer-
tainly not want to do anything that would
adversely affect the State of Maryland. To
the best of my knowledge, it would not. In
fact, it might put us in a better bargain-
ing position.
There is a Supreme Court case, Humble
v. Louisiana, I believe it is, where land was
ceded to the federal government under very
|
similar circumstances that we would have
in Maryland now. Exclusive jurisdiction
went to the federal government, and it is
impossible without the acquiescence of Con-
gress to return it back to the state again.
This would, for all time, retain to the
State of Maryland all the exclusive juris-
diction that is not turned over to the fed-
eral government, and we certainly have no
intention, nor do I believe it would have
any deterrent effect in obtaining the patent
office or any other federal accommodations.
THE CHAIRMAN: Are there any other
questions of the Committee Chairman?
Delegate Singer.
DELEGATE SINGER: Delegate Boyer,
under section 4 of RP-2, you have removed
the obstacles of voters in United States
enclaves to vote in state elections.
Other than that and the rights hereto-
fore recognized under the cases by statute,
what other rights are involved if we adopt
this provision?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Boyer.
DELEGATE BOYER: I am again going
to have to yield to my expert on this mat-
ter, Delegate Storm.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Storm, can
you reply to the question?
DELEGATE STORM: I appreciate the
Chairman calling me an expert. I certainly
am not. However, I will list you some of
the rights which are affected here.
The first group of rights are those cited
by the majority decision which denied, in
a divorce case, the relief sought. The ma-
jority opinion in that case, said,
"The State cannot take cognizance of
any acts done in the ceded places after
the cession. The inhabitants of these
places cease to be inhabitants of the
State and can no longer exercise any
civil or political rights under the laws of
the State. They cannot vote, they cannot
have the benefit of the common schools
of the State for their children, they are
exempt from all state and county taxes,
they are not entitled to receive State
support for the relief of the poor, they
are not affected on the reservation by
state liquor laws. The law concerning
delivery of products within the State has
no application to deliveries within a
federal enclave, and so on."
Then the minority opinion in the same
case brought forth the fact that the conse-
|
