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 622   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space
622 CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION OF MARYLAND [Nov. 10]
DELEGATE CHABOT: All right.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate L. Taylor.
DELEGATE L. TAYLOR: Dr. Bard,
you make a historical reference to the fact
that right after the Civil War the 90-day
session was instituted because of the fear
of some people that the state legislature
would pass certain laws that would really
work against the welfare of a certain group
within the state.
I would like to ask this question: wasn't
it this particular 90-day session, short ses-
sion, geared to a period when the need for
certain laws did not require a great length
of time for legislative debate, and also
legislative attention?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Bard.
DELEGATE BARD: Delegate Taylor,
your point about having come into being
in 1867 when our rural economy did not
require solutions to complex problems is a
good one. However, the overriding issue is
true, namely, there was fear of the strong
legislature. If we study not only this mat-
ter of number of days, but restrictions on
legislative possibilities, you will note there
was overriding fear that the legislative
body might do harm to the government as
such. There was not confidence in the body
that we have today. That lack of confidence
grew out of some of the divisiveness of the
Civil War in Maryland.
We do have confidence in our legislature,
though we are certainly not showing it by
some of the symbolic treatment in our con-
stitution.
THE CHAIRMAN: Are there any
further questions?
Delegate Koss?
DELEGATE KOSS: lam at a slight
disadvantage because I do not think I have
the language of Delegate Bard's proposed
amendment.
I have great sympathy for the situation
cited in regard to education and aid to
junior colleges. My question is when would
the legislature decide on how long it would
meet? Would this be just by the simple
process of a motion to adjourn or would
there be a predetermined time for adjourn-
ment? If so, when would that be estab-
lished? I wondered whether this would.
DELEGATE BARD: In the 17 states
where it operates, this decision comes at
various points. First, it may come at the
point where you feel you reach consensus.
Some years ago I took a course with
Charles Beard on the History of Ideas. You
know when you are reaching consensus. As
a matter of fact, those who are a member
of the Society of Friends never vote on
consensus. They know when consensus is
coming into being.
When the body recognizes consensus has
come into being, it moves toward an ad-
journment date.
At another time there is the recognition
that there would not be very much point to
continue to debate over issues that have
already been stated with clarity. You say
we shall give this six more weeks. There-
fore, a time is stated in the middle of the
session, the time, however, can be stated
early in the session. It could easily enough
be determined if you find that the issues
before you are not of great moment.
In other words, it is stated at differing
times in terms of the requirements of that
particular year.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Mitchell?
DELEGATE MITCHELL: Mr. Presi-
dent, we would like to acknowledge the
presence in the front balcony of 80 stu-
dents from the Douglass Senior High School
in Baltimore, Maryland, with their teach-
ers, and in the rear balcony a delegation
from the Charles County Branch of the
NAACP led by Mr. Monk, Mrs. Adams,
Mrs. Queen and Mr. Evans,
(Applause.)
THE CHAIRMAN: We are delighted to
have them. If there are no further ques-
tions, Delegate Bard will return to his seat
and will present the amendment.
While he is doing that, the Chair would
like to take the occasion to announce that
Honorable R. Samuel Dillon, former mem-
ber of the House of Delegates from Wash-
ington County is also in the gallery and we
are delighted to have him here.
(Applause)
May I take this moment to answer an
inquiry I had from a number of delegates,
and I intended to the first thing this morn-
ing.
All of you, I am sure, have noticed the
absence all this week of Delegate E. T.
Miller. As I think all of you know from his
previous announcements, he is undergoing
treatment which has required him to be in
the hospital for several days at a time.
Heretofore these treatments have taken


 
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 622   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