DELEGATE DORSEY: Mr. Chairman.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Dorsey.
DELEGATE DORSEY: Mr. President,
I was a member of this body in the session
of 1931 and 1933, when the population of
this State was just a little over a million
people. The membership of this house then
was 123. My good friend, Glenn Beall, and
Stuart Bushong, who were members of the
General Assembly at that time, will testify
that it operated in an efficient manner and
was not unwieldly.
Now that the population of this State
has more than tripled, the leadership here
now is trying to reduce the membership
even lower than it was when there were
only a little over a million people in this
State.
You have called, Mr. President, to the
attention of this body what happened in
New York yesterday. If we want to present
to the people of this State a draft which
they can vote for, we should not deny them
a voice in representative government.
If you reduce this number to that
brought in by the majority report, it will
be taking away from the small counties of
this State a voice in the General Assembly.
I feel, Mr. President, in view of what has
happened in this present body, when the
leadership, when the membership is as it
is, when the press not only in Maryland
but in metropolitan Washington praises the
past session for the splendid work, saying
it was outstanding as a legislature, I feel
the membership of both bodies should re-
main as it is. Therefore, Mr. President, I
hope this amendment is adopted.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any delegate
desire to speak in opposition to the amend-
ment?
Delegate Chabot.
DELEGATE CHABOT: Sometimes we
make one change and find that we have
done a number of different things. I am
afraid if we adopt this amendment we will
not only have affected the size of the legis-
lature, but we will also have made a num-
ber of changes without at all considering
the matter with regard to residence re-
quirements. I see no great magic in con-
tinuing the present number. I see great
value in not discombobulating the other
parts of the Constitution in order to con-
tinue the present number which was ar-
rived at by happenstance and under the
court gun. I suggest we vote against this
amendment. |
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any delegate
desire to speak in favor of the amendment?
Delegate Kiefer.
DELEGATE KIEFER: Mr. President,
I hesitate as a delegate from that small
county known as Baltimore County to get
involved in this kind of argument. However
there are several things that occur to me
to be important:
One, I sense a distinct state of unhappi-
ness on the part of those people from small
rural areas. I frankly have sympathy for
them because we are making a constitution
for the entire State of Maryland.
I also note that the figure of 105 dele-
gates and 35 senators was a compromise
suggestion arrived at after serious hard
debate. However, I have also heard the
statement made by the Chairman of the
Committee on several occasions that the
legislature during the last session worked
effectively and efficiently. The proposed
amendment does only one thing, as I see it:
it provides a ceiling, it shall not exceed the
present legislature. But if it will make the
people from the rural areas happier, if it
will protect their interests to a fairly log-
ical and legitimate extent, I frankly would
much rather see the compromise of this
number than to have people going away
unhappy, feeling they have been slighted.
I frankly don't think the argument in
favor of a more efficient operation carries
nearly as much weight when there is only
a difference of approximately 45 in the en-
tire group. I would therefore vote in favor
of it.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any delegate
desire to speak in opposition?
Delegate Scanlan.
DELEGATE SCANLAN: I am against
this amendment. If the Gilchrist compro-
mise was not a good amendment—and by a
majority the delegates have indicated it
was not—this one is far worse. I will not
repeat the arguments against the amend-
ment made by Chairman Gallagher. The
Gilchrist amendment at least had some
flexibility to it, some elasticity that per-
mitted some intelligent arrangement in the
future.
In opposing the amendment, I would like
to remark upon an argument that has been
made on this floor several times today in
connection with the various amendments
that have been before the Convention. Con-
stant reference has been made to the sad |
