196 court of appeals of maryland

have been in general no perceptible change in
the character of the men chosen for the Court
of Appeals since the inauguration of the system
of election in this state. And in this, the testimony
of older members of the bar is given. The judicial
ability of one judge and another is debated,
of course, but no instance is known of reproach for
deficiency in judicial or personal character. In-
deed, none is known with respect to any judge in
the history of the state judiciary, appellate or trial
judge, except these: In 1860 a judge of the Crimi-
nal Court in Baltimore City was removed from
office for rough conduct and intoxication; the testi-
mony taken is accessible, in print, and it contains
no suggestion of a lack of integrity in the man.
Later, in 1882, the trial judges in Baltimore City
were opposed for re-election and defeated, after a
somewhat bitter campaign, but no instances of cor-
ruption were charged; the ground of dissatisfac-
tion, and of their defeat, appears to have been, gen-
erally, that of too close association by them with
local politicians of the time and, with respect to
one judge, that he made a practice of assigning
a nephew, a lawyer who had political connections,
to defend prisoners who asked for the assignment
of counsel, and by doing this to some extent ob-
structed the proper working of the law. No sug-
gestion of any other misdoing or lack of charac-
ter is found in recorded references to the judges
of the past, and living lawyers have heard of no
such thing.

And as to the possible, or logical effects
of a system of choosing judges by election—
which seem hardly to have been realized in Mary-