MARVIN MANDEL, Governor                      1767

The Council is confident that you will give this your fair and
considered judgment. We are fully prepared to submit testimony
and evidence in any hearing which you may wish to schedule on this.

Very truly yours,

/s/ David L. Cahoon,

County Attorney.

Senate Bill No. 463—Senatorial Scholarships

AN ACT to add new Section 263A to Article 77 of the Anno-
tated Code of Maryland (1965 Replacement Volume and 1968 Sup-
plement), title "Public Education," subtitle "Chapter 27. General
Assembly Scholarship Awards," to follow immediately after Section
263 thereof, to provide for certain conditions under which Senatorial
Scholarships may be revoked.

May 28, 1969.

Honorable William S. James
President of the Senate
State House
Annapolis, Maryland

Dear Mr. President:

In accordance with Article II, Section 17, of the Maryland Con-
stitution, I have today vetoed Senate Bill 463, and am returning it
to you.

This Bill was quite evidently conceived as a reaction to the
wave of campus disorders that have occurred recently throughout
the nation, and I must admit that generally I share the sentiment of
its sponsor.

Section 263 of Article 77 of the Annotated Code of Maryland
provides that a Senatorial Scholarship, once awarded, may not be
revoked for other than academic deficiencies. The original text of
this Bill would have permitted a further ground for revocation in
the event that the student participated in disruptive activities of a
serious nature. The language provided significant standards and
safeguards.

In the course of its progress through the General Assembly,
however, the bill was virtually rewritten. The carefully defined acts
which might lead to revocation of a scholarship were eliminated,
along with the standards and safeguards. The amended version
simply authorizes termination of a scholarship award "upon receiv-
ing a recommendation from the institution which the holder of the
award attends that the holder is guilty of misconduct or misbe-
havior." Just that and nothing more.

In my opinion, the result of the amendment was that a reason-
able reaction to campus unrest was translated into an unreasonable
overreaction. As finally enacted, the reference to "misconduct or
misbehavior" contains no definition or limitation whatsoever. It
could embrace anything from a panty raid to a controversial edi-