THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Bryson,
you have thirty seconds.
DELEGATE BRYSON:—each of which
would be represented by one delegate and
each three of which would also be repre-
sented by one senator. I do not see that the
senatorial representation of three districts
would be significantly different from the
representation of the same three districts
by the three delegates. It would simply be
more of the same. That is sheer duplication
of representation. I find no need for it or
advantage to it.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Gallagher?
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: Mr. Chair-
man, in view of the fact that I have no
further delegates who have indicated a de-
sire to take part in the controlled time de-
bate, I will simply bow to Mr. Hanson and
the continuation of his presentation.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Hanson?
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: Excuse me.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Gallagher.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: If there
are members who wish to be given even
time, I will be happy to do so.
THE CHAIRMAN: How much time do
you yield to Mr. Bennett, five minutes,
hoping it is sufficient?
DELEGATE BENNETT: Thank you,
sir, but I rise, Mr. Gallagher, for another
purpose.
(Laughter.)
THE CHAIRMAN: For what purpose
does Delegate Bennett rise?
DELEGATE BENNETT: I wish to ask
him a question if he will permit me, one
that 1 neglected during this period of so-
called clarification we had.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Gallagher,
will you yield for a question?
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: I am
afraid I will.
(Laughter.)
DELEGATE BENNETT: In your very
effective service here in the legislature,
Mr. Gallagher, you have at times, I take
it, served on conference committees when
there have been disagreeing votes of the
two branches of the legislature. In that
conference committee, you have come out,
I take it, as does the Congress of the
United States, with a bill which is com- |
pletely different from that either passed by
the House of Delegates or the Senate and
enjoying a low visibility, that that sort of
procedure presents.
What 1 want to know is whether or not
such a procedure not only is of low visi-
bility, as I say, but does it not also thwart
the will of both houses, and therefore some-
thing not to be applauded ?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Gallagher?
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: I would
say on those occasions when I was a mem-
ber of a conference committee 1 merely, per-
ceived more aptly than the members of the
House their true intention.
(Laughter.)
Answering the gentleman specifically—
THE CHAIRMAN: I might add that
that is the Irish answer to the question.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: I would
say to the gentleman, there were occasions
when the conference committee improved
considerably upon the product of both the
House and Senate, but I will admit there
may have been a genuine variation from
what they thought they had agreed to.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Hanson?
DELEGATE HANSON: Mr. Chairman,
I should like to yield three minutes to Dele-
gate Hardwicke.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Hardwicke.
DELEGATE HARDWICKE: Mr. Chair-
man, members of the Committee of the
Whole, in order to add something perhaps
new and different to what has been said
here this afternoon on this very important
subject, I would like to speak as one who
sat for four years in this bicameral legis-
lature. I would like to point out that a
great many of the problems which 1 ob-
served in our legislature in action were
irrevocably and inseparably tied to the bi-
cameral system.
1 recall one occasion where a local bill
in Harford County was passed in the House
of Delegates and was lost on its way to
the Senate. 1 see our Senator is here as a
delegate this evening. He may recall the
occasion. It was lost on its way to the Sen-
ate and never found until after the session
was over, much to our embarrassment.
This kind of thing happens more often than
the public ever realizes. Those of us who
are lawyers may recall many occasions
when certain bills passed the House of |
