1892. ] OF THE SENATE. 581

The Constitution provides for a Judiciary, separates
it into different Courts, specially provides for the
jurisdiction these Courts are to exercise and fixes the
term of office of the Judges and ascertains and names
the amount of salary the Judges of the different

Courts are to receive during the term of service, and
furthermore declares that the salaries "shall not be
diminished during the continuance of the Judges in
office. "

The bill, if enacted into a law, annuls and abrogates
'the provisions of the Constitution ascertaining and
appropriating the salaries to be received by the Judges
of the different courts.

It does so, not by attempting to repeal the express
provision of the Constitution, that "the salaries shall
not be diminished during their continuance in office"
but by repealing an equally express provision
thereof, that the salaries shall be so much, to wit:

Circuit Court Judge $2, 800; Court of Appeals Judge
$3, 500; Judges of Baltimore City Courts $3, 500; sub-
ject to the additional provision, that the salaries as to
Baltimore City Judges may be increased by the ad-
ditional sum of $500, to be granted by Baltimore city,
in which latter event, said additional sum is neither
to be increased or diminished.

In support of this bill, it is urged that the express
provision attached to the salaries as ascertained and
appropriated by the Constitution that they shall not
be diminished during the continuance of the Judges in
office necessarily implies, if it does not expressly pro-
vide (which latter is conceded not to be the case) that
the salaries named may be increased through legislative
action. We cannot see the logical force of this reason-
ing, that because there is an express prohibition to do
one thing, ergo, there is an implied authorization to
do another thing, though exactly and diametrically
opposite, Suppose the Constitution had said neither
one thing or the other, but had simply ascertained
and named the salaries to be received during the term

of office, will it be contended that legislative power
could have either diminished or increased the sum
named ? What is the use of a Constitution, if it has
no binding, mandatory and obligatory effect? Why