clear space clear space clear space white space
A
 r c h i v e s   o f   M a r y l a n d   O n l i n e

PLEASE NOTE: The searchable text below was computer generated and may contain typographical errors. Numerical typos are particularly troubling. Click “View pdf” to see the original document.

  Maryland State Archives | Index | Help | Search
search for:
clear space
white space
Proceedings and Debates of the 1967 Constitutional Convention
Volume 104, Volume 1, Debates 3312   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space

3312 CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION OF MARYLAND [Jan. 5]

pended to permit immediate consideration
of section 30 of the schedule of transitional
provisions and sections 21, 22 and 23 of the
schedule of legislation in GP-13.

Is there a second?

(Whereupon, the motion was duly sec-
onded.)

THE PRESIDENT: The question arises
on the adoption of section 30 as amended
of transitional provisions and the adoption
of sections 21, 22 and 23, all as contained
in GP-13.

A vote Aye is a vote in favor; 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 97 votes in the affirmative
and 0 in the negative, the motion is carried
and section 30 as amended of the schedule
of transitional provisions; and sections 21,
22 and 23 of the schedule of legislation, all
as contained in Committee Recommenda-
tion GP-13 is adopted on second reading.

The Chair now calls up Resolution 29
which has been printed. Has it been dis-
tributed, Mrs. Marx?

Resolution No. 29, has it been distributed?
Delegate Barrick.

DELEGATE BARRICK: I am sure by
now each one of the delegates knows Dean
Wheeler from Hollins College. He has been
with us throughout the session, consistently.
He has been a great help to many of us
individually and has been a great help to
the Convention as a whole.

We have a double pleasure today in that
he has with him in the gallery over your
head his lovely wife, Trudy, and I wish you
would give them a warm welcome.

(Applause.)

THE PRESIDENT: The resolution has
been read. The Chair recognizes Delegate
Scanlan.

DELEGATE SCANLAN: Mr. Chairman
and fellow delegates: I would like to move
for suspension of the rules to consider
Resolution No. 29, since it is a proposal to
amend Rule 29, it would ordinarily have to
be referred to the committee and lay over

for two days. I request suspension of this
rule.

THE PRESIDENT: Is there a second?

(Whereupon, the motion was duly sec-
onded.)

THE PRESIDENT: Is there any discus-
sion? Are you ready for the question?

(Call for the question.)
This requires a roll call vote.
All in favor, vote Aye; opposed, No.
Cast your vote.

Has every delegate voted? Does any dele-
gate desire to change his vote?

The Clerk will record the vote.

There being 91 votes in the affirmative
and none in the negative, the motion is car-
ried and the rules are suspended.

The Chair recognizes Delegate Scanlan
to speak to Resolution No. 29.

DELEGATE SCANLAN: Hopefully we
will take up and perhaps complete tomor-
row third reading. Rule 59 as it now stands
would appear to require that on the third
reading we would have to approach each
individual section of the entire constitution
by a majority of the delegates.

Rule 59 was drafted at a time when there
was some uncertainly in our minds as to
what the enabling act meant, whether it
required approval of the majority of the
delegates on any article or division of the
constitution.

We now have in hand, and there was pre-
viously distributed to you an opinion of the
attorney general dated December 26, 1967,
in which it makes it perfectly clear that
the majority of the delegates is required
for the approval of each article of the con-
stitution, and that the legislature appar-
ently used the word "division" contemplat-
ing the possibility that we could use some
other term, other than an article.

In any event, his opinion is perfectly
clear that the requirements of the enabling
act would be satisfied if each article of the
proposed new constitution were approved
by a majority of the delegates; that is, 72.
He specifically points out that our Rule 59
imposes a requirement that is not in the
enabling act and which goes beyond the en-
abling act.

I therefore think it wise that we return
to the requirements of the enabling act and



 

clear space
clear space
white space

Please view image to verify text. To report an error, please contact us.
Proceedings and Debates of the 1967 Constitutional Convention
Volume 104, Volume 1, Debates 3312   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>


This web site is presented for reference purposes under the doctrine of fair use. When this material is used, in whole or in part, proper citation and credit must be attributed to the Maryland State Archives. PLEASE NOTE: The site may contain material from other sources which may be under copyright. Rights assessment, and full originating source citation, is the responsibility of the user.


Tell Us What You Think About the Maryland State Archives Website!



An Archives of Maryland electronic publication.
For information contact mdlegal@mdarchives.state.md.us.

©Copyright  October 06, 2023
Maryland State Archives