44 CONSTITUTION OF MARYLAND [Arts. 33-36]

It was only in art. 30 of the Bill of Rights and art. 4, secs. 4 and 9, of the Constitu-
tion of 1851, that judicial officers were subject to removal by the Governor. Cantwell v.
Owens, 14 Md. 227.

This article referred to in construing art. 8—see notes thereto. Board of Supervisors
v. Todd, 97 Md. 263; Close v. So. Md. Agri. Assn., 134 Md. 641.

For cases dealing with this article as it stood in the Constitution of 1776, see State
v. Chase. '5 H. & J. 297; The Chancellor's case, 1 Bland, 595.

As to the judiciary, see art. 4 of the Md. Constitution.

Art. 34. That a long continuance in the Executive Departments of
power or trust is dangerous to liberty; a rotation, therefore, in those
Departments is one of the best securities of permanent freedom.
As to the executive department, see art. 2, Md. Constitution.

Art. 35. That no person shall hold, at the same time, more than one
office of profit, created by the Constitution or Laws of this State; nor shall
any person in public trust receive any present from any foreign Prince or
State, or from the United States, or any of them, without the approbation
of this State.

This article does not justify an injunction to stop the proceedings of a class of
officers with the registration of voters, because a few of the officers in certain districts
were not proper subjects of appointment. Hardesty v. Taft, 23 Md. 529.

The position of councilman of Snow Hill held to be an "office of profit" within
the meaning of this article. The acceptance of this office vacates the office of super-
visor of elections held by the same person, and a subsequent resignation from the
former does not restore such person to the office of supervisor. Truitt v. Collins,
122 Md. 527. And see State Tax Commission v. Harrington, 126 Md. 162.

The act of 1910, ch. 180 (establishing the public service commission), creates one
indivisible office, and does not violate this article. See notes to art. 23, sec. 347, of
the Code. Thrift v. Laird, 125 Md. 60.

This article referred to in discussing meaning of term "citizen"—see notes to Code,
art. 25, sec. 144. Fitzwater v. Hydro-Elec. Corp., 149 Md. 466.

Same individual cannot be justice of the peace in Montgomery County and a justice
of the peace in Prince George's County, as each office is separate and distinct. Day v.
Sheriff, 162 Md. 227.

This Article does not apply to member of General Assembly who also holds office of
Justice of Peace, as Art. 3, Sec. 11 of the Constitution exempts members of the General
Assembly from ineligibility if they happen to be Justices of the Peace. Kimble v.
Bender, 173 Md. 615.

Art. 36. That as it is the duty of every man to worship God in such
manner as he thinks most acceptable to Him, all persons are equally
entitled to protection in their religious liberty; wherefore, no person ought,
by any law to be molested in his person or estate, on account of his religious
persuasion, or profession, or for his religious practice, unless, under the
color of religion, he shall disturb the good order, peace or safety of the
State, or shall infringe the laws of morality, or injure others in their
natural, civil or religious rights; nor ought any person to be compelled to
frequent, or maintain, or contribute, unless on contract, to maintain any
place of worship or any ministry; nor shall any person, otherwise compe-
tent, be deemed incompetent as a witness, or juror, on account of his re-
ligious belief; provided, he believes in the existence of God, and that under
His dispensation such person will be held morally accountable for his acts,
and be rewarded or punished therefor in this world or the world to come.
A plea in abatement alleging that one of the grand jurors who indicted the traverser
did not believe in the truths of the Holy Scriptures, is bad; this article does not so
require. The provision that no one should be deemed incompetent by reason of his
religious belief 'provided he believes in the existence of God and His dispensation of
rewards and punishments, means that no one is competent as a juror who does not so
believe If a grand juror is incompetent, the indictment is void. State v. Mercer 101
Md. 537.

This article and art. 37 referred to in holding that the act of congress of February
26, 1885, prohibiting the immigration of aliens under contract, etc., had no application
to a minister of the gospel. Church,, etc., v. United States, 143 U. S. 457.