|
case, for which provision has been made,
by an existing general law", and then this
mandate: "The General Assembly, at its
first session after the adoption of this Con-
stitution, shall pass general laws providing
for cases enumerated in this section, which
are not already adequately provided for,
and for all other cases where a general law
can be made applicable."
It seemed to me what they tried to do in
the 1867 Constitution was to preserve the
flexibility of existing laws, and at the same
time to exhort the General Assembly to
pass general laws in as many areas that
they could think of so there would not be
a variety of special or private bills, as
Delegate Macdonald rightly said. The pro-
posed amendment is a more stringent ap-
plication than the 1867 language.
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding) : Dele-
gate Gilchrist.
DELEGATE GILCHRIST: To point out
the ridiculous lengths to which this kind of
language might result, I would like the
Convention to know of the situation which
Delegate Grant discussed with me on our
way home one weekend, a couple of months
ago. Delegate Grant pointed out to me that
a client of his had taken twenty-seven
young bulls to a stockyard in Garrett
County.
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding) : How
many bulls?
DELEGATE GILCHRIST: Twenty-
seven. In a case of mistaken identity, an
employee of the State Department of Ag-
riculture had castrated the twenty-seven
young bulls, changing their value from
bulls to hamburger meat.
There is in the present Maryland law
no way in which that man can be compen-
sated, except by the passage of a special
act. I respectfully suggest to the Conven-
tion that I can see no reason or no neces-
sity for the General Assembly to consider
whether or not it should pass a general act
permitting compensation for all bulls which
have accidentally been castrated by the De-
partment of Agriculture. It serves an ad-
mirable purpose, but I see no general pur-
pose served.
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding) : Dele-
gate Burdette.
DELEGATE BURDETTE: I should just
like to insert a little legislative history
when we have a moment of suspense, if I
may take the time. I remember when this
matter was brought up in the Committee
on the Legislative Branch, that I read the
|
language as a layman, that is, "is appli-
cable" in its generic sense, meaning if it
could be applicable.
But I want to be fair by saying since I
also serve on the Committee on Style, I
cannot be sure I was present at all the
discussions of the Committee on Legisla-
tive Branch on this point. When this mat-
ter got to the Committee on Style, the ques-
tion was raised whether "is applicable"
means "could be applicable". I commented
that I should so read it as a layman, but I
discovered that not only was the Committee
divided, but the lawyers were divided.
I subsequently said to the Committee on
the Legislative Branch that if one wants it
to be clear to the layman, one should put
in "an existing law." As a political scien-
tist, if I were advising the Court of Ap-
peals, I would read the language as ge-
neric, and would read this language as an
attempt by the General Assembly to pass
general laws if it would be policy.
I would advocate this as a matter of
policy. I would say to my friend, Delegate
Gilchrist, these special laws are not what
we want in this State. We have dropped
out protective proscriptions from some of
the present Constitution. I hope we will
not have divorce acts passed by the General
Assembly, and I hope the lawyers would
find some other clause which would protect.
However, it seems to me that we may have
a larger area of special law which I as-
sume the lawyers begin to interpret as pri-
vate law. I have no strong feelings, but I
wanted to make these additional comments.
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding) : Dele-
gate Gallagher.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: I want to
say a few words to our descendants, as
seems to be the custom this morning. In
order to make it perfectly clear if Mr.
Boyles' amendment fails to insert the word
"existing" before "law" on line 19, so it
would read "for which an existing general
law is applicable," thereby using almost
precisely the same terminology of the 1867
Constitution.
The colloquy which Delegate Burdette
spoke about did take place, as he stated,
and I interpret the present language to
talk about existing general laws. I think
the Committee did as well, and in order to
make that perfectly clear for those who
labor over these debates in the future, I
would be happy to sponsor the addition of
the word "existing" at this point.
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding): A
point of inquiry: Did your Committee make
|
