would have. been a Constitutional amend-
ment to achieve that and provide that after
1966 the size would revert to 123. Because
the General Assembly only had five days in
which to act and this was quite a new prob-
lem at the time, having just arrived on the
judicial scene, the spirit of compromise
was much in the air.
It was determined that there would not
be very much possibility of getting a bill
through the General Assembly if seats were
cut as well as added, especially since the
primary election for the 123 seats had
already been held.
So the number 123 was divided into the
entire population of the State to determine
the number of representatives in the House
that each county should have. Then those
seats were all indicated and it means in-
creasing the size to 142, allocating 19 addi-
tional seats. But in order to meet the prac-
tical problem of timing, 19 seats were not
taken away from the small counties at that
time. The House and Senate then declined
to enact the Constitutional amendment to
bring the size of the House back down in
1966, and later when the problem arose as
to reapportioning within the 142, it was
left at that figure for convenience.
As to the Senate apportionment, the
critical problem I believe there was to find
a total number of senators equally divisible
by six, because that was the number of
legislative districts in the City of Balti-
more whose senators would have to vote on
the question in order to assure its passage,
so that senate districts in the City of Balti-
more would not have to be redistricted.
This is the kind of science that was ap-
plied to this kind of problem.
It seems to me incredible that this Con-
stitutional Convention would involve in the
constitution of this State this kind of
measure. Instead we should look at what
we need in the State. This is what the
Committee has done. We should look at the
kind of General Assembly that can address
itself to those needs, and this is what the
Committee has done.
I urge the Committee of the Whole to de-
feat this amendment so that we can vote
on the proper question, the proper size of
105 in the House and 35 in the Senate.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any other dele-
gate desire to speak in favor of the amend-
ment?
Delegate Adkins.
DELEGATE ADKINS: I wonder if |
Delegate Hanson would yield to a ques-
tion?
THE CHAIRMAN: Do you yield for a
question?
DELEGATE HANSON: Yes.
DELEGATE ADKINS: You explained
in great detail the manner in which the
present size of the two bodies was arrived
at, the science, as he referred to it.
Would he give us a brief explanation of
the scientific manner in which the 80 and
the 105 was arrived at.
DELEGATE HANSON: You mean the
35 and 105.
DELEGATE ADKINS: Yes.
What is the scientific justification?
THE CHAIRMAN: You mean 35 and
105?
DELEGATE ADKINS: Yes, as in the
Committee report.
DELEGATE HANSON: I would be
happy to yield to the chief scientist in
charge, the Chairman of the Committee.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Gallagher,
can you respond to the question?
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: I do not
want to trespass too much on the time of
the Committee, but I think 1 explained that
the attempt was to get, first of all, a three-
to-one ratio, which we felt to be important
so that the senate districts and the house
districts would be different and distinct on
the basis of population. We felt three-to-
one was satisfactory.
We then approached the question of how
large the Senate should be. We believed
with Edward dark and Senator James
that 20 was too small. We realized it would
have to be some number in excess of 29,
so that we would eliminate the element of
clubbiness, and we decided that 35 was
probably enough of an addition to 29 to
make it a less personal body.
I think we have their testimony to that
effect, that they believe this is the case.
We then applied a multiple of three, and
we arrived at a figure of 105. Working
from the committee assignments point of
view and recognizing that Ways and Means
and the Judiciary each carried about a
third of the total load, meaning two-thirds
of the house carried about 30 or 31 mem-
bers of the house on each committee, and |
