recognizing moreover that there was an-
other 30 per cent of the work load to be
done, it appeared we should have at least
another third over and above the total in
the House Judiciary and Ways and Means.
We arrived at the figure of 35 and 105 on
those multiples, taking the committee work-
load potentialities into consideration.
As I said before, there is no magic about
the numbers of 35 and 105, but there cer-
tainly is great justification for it.
If someone wanted to argue two or three
in any direction I could not say they were
wrong. I simply say we felt we were com-
pelled, and I believe rightly so, to address
ourselves to the question of the proper
number, and we believe that we have in
this house at this moment a majority of
the members who will agree to vote for 35
and 105. That is the science, call it what
you will, by which we arrived at the fig-
ures.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any other dele-
gate desire to speak in favor of the amend-
ment?
Delegate Grant.
DELEGATE GRANT: I would like to
ask —
THE CHAIRMAN: You have been rec-
ognized; let me see if anybody else desires
to speak.
DELEGATE GRANT: I wish to address
a question to Delegate Hanson.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Hanson,
will you yield for a question?
DELEGATE HANSON: Yes, sir, I yield
for a question.
DELEGATE GRANT: Delegate Han-
son, you described in detail how they ar-
rived at the figures in the Maryland legis-
lature. However, yesterday, you were urg-
ing on us unicameralism and it was de-
scribed in detail how the State of Nebraska
arrived at unicameralism. In both cases
perhaps the means were disreputable, but
do you consider that necessarily makes the
end disreputable?
DELEGATE HANSON: I have not yet
fully considered Nebraska history as accu-
rate as the Maryland history which I just
represented. I think there were some other
factors that were involved.
Now that the unicameral question has
been resolved by this house, by this Com-
mittee of the Whole, I think the question |
now before us is the proper composition of
the Maryland General Assembly. To my
mind, if we cannot have unicameralism the
report of the Committee is by far the best
alternative which has been presented to
this body.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any other dele-
gate desire to speak in favor of the amend-
ment? Delegate Rybczynski.
DELEGATE RYBCZYNSKI: Mr. Chair-
man, let us not be so distrustful of legis-
lative bodies. Yesterday, the City of Balti-
more elected eighteen members to its City
Council. Four years ago we elected twenty
members to the same City Council. It was
through an ordinance submitted to the City
of Baltimore which enabled the City to re-
duce its Council size, reduce the size from
twenty to eighteen. This was done by the
body itself plus the voters of the City of
Baltimore. I do not know that we have to
distrust, them to the point where we are
afraid of what they might do in the future.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any other dele-
gate desire to speak against the amend-
ment? Delegate Koss.
DELEGATE KOSS: Mr. Chairman, 1
rise to speak in opposition to the amend-
ment. Much has been said here about the
impact of our action here today in terms of
ratification of the Constitution. As I look
upon this amendment, I think it freezes
into the Constitution the status quo. If that
is so, it makes a mockery of our whole ef-
fort here, and we need not worry about
ratification by the people because in fact
they will have the same document we come
out with if they do not ratify our words.
Thank you.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any other dele-
gate desire to speak in favor of the amend-
ment? Delegate Gilchrist.
DELEGATE GILCHRIST: Mr. Presi-
dent, Mr. Chairman, I simply desire to
make one observation. I just took a look at
the vote on the roll call on Amendment 5.
I find that of the people who have expressed
concern for small counties, their votes
scarcely reflect that concern. Seven of the
Senate votes which were cast against the
amendment came from four counties and
Baltimore City. I suspect that this may be
a reflection of attitudes which we really
should not have. I wonder whether there is
not some method of solving the dilemma
which will permit this constitution to go
forward with a little more unanimous sup-
port than it is apparently going to produce.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any other dele- |
