for the Court of Appeals. Determined in the a
affirmative.
Mr. THOMAS then moved to amend said 5th
section of the report of the committee by strik-
ing out these words "the Slate shall be divided
into three judicial districts, one on the Eastern
and two on the Western Shore, which said districts
shall be laid off as the gubernatorial dis-
tricts are," and inserting in lieu thereof the fol-
lowing:
"The State shall be divided into four judicial
districts, Allegany, Washington, Frederick, Car-
roll, Baltimore and Harford counties shall com-
pose the first; Montgomery, Howard, Anne
Arundel, Calvert, St, Mary's, Charles and Prince
George's counties the second; Baltimore city the
third; and Cecil, Kent, Queen Anne's, Talbot,
Caroline, Dorchester, Somerset and Worcester
Counties shall compose the fourth district."
Mr. BOWIE demanded the yeas and nays,
which were ordered.
Mr. THOMAS. This is an arrangement of dis-
tricts precisely like that he had proposed for the
election of Governor, He did not know what
arguments were used here the other day, but
he would state the principle reason he had for
desiring this arrangement. Among those to sit
in the court of appeals we ought to have, he
thought, a gentleman of the bar, who had prac-
ticed in the Baltimore city courts, where he has
had an opportunity to study commercial law,
and the law of insurance. Every member of
the bar knows perfectly well that in the country
these branches of the law are nut so thoroughly
understood. In the absence of such a judge on
the bench in the court of appeals, the court
would be dependent entirely upon the assiduity
and learning of the members of the profession
practicing before the court in those branches of
law; and if it should so happen that the lawyers
practicing before the court should overlook or
omit to notice a very material decision bearing
upon those branches of law, there would be no
member of the court to prompt his associates;
and it might very often happen that decisions in
the court of appeals touching those branches of
the law would be directly in conflict with what
they would be with a member of the Baltimore
bar upon the bench. He took for granted that
in the organization of the judiciary, there is a
desire on both sides to see a fair participation
in the honors and advantages of a position on
the bench of the court of appeals. Is it right
under these circumstances, to associate the city
of Baltimore and the counties of the Potomac
together when they have 378,000 inhabitants
while the other counties on the Eastern Shore
have 128,000? Would it be equitable to consoli-
date Baltimore city and all these counties in one
district, and to leave the Eastern Shore for
another district, and the remainder of the western
counties the third. The effect of this would
be to consolidate them, and there would be a
continued struggle between the counties con-
nected with Baltimore and that city for a judge
The reasons that he bad assigned will be so co-
gent, when urged in behalf of selecting ajudge
from the Baltimore bar, that it would be almost
*7 |
in ostracism of all the members of the bar in
the Potomac counties if connected with that
city. Whether these judges shall be elected by
a general ticket system or by districts is a ques-
tion that the house can decide independent of
this question whether the districts shall be four
or three. As to the advantages we derive from
having four judges on the bench of the court of
appeals, he took it for granted, as it has been a
matter of discussion heretofore, that there is no
necessity for my going into that branch of the
subject. He would say, however, that it will
often happen that if you organize a court of
three judges, one of them may be absent, and
the others divided. We do not expect men to
go upon the bench of the court of appeals who
are not experienced practitioners at the bar;
and in the case he had mentioned of an equal
division of the court of appeals, the case may
be decided by the presiding judge below, who
may not be experienced in such questions. If
you make the number of judges four, one judge
can be absent by reason of indisposition, or his
private affairs, and there will still be three to
progress with the business. He did not feel it
necessary to go further in vindication of his in-
tended vote. He wished only further to say
that he had no unkind reminiscences to indulge
in. He had no feelings of that kind that would
induce him to put on the bench of the court of
appeals no one not of the political party which
shall predominate in the State. His proposi-
tion, however, to fix the election by districts,
secures a representation to both parties, not
merely as at present organized, but in any
organization of party which would be likely to
take place in the State.
And the question being taken, resulted as follows:
Affirmative—Messrs. Ricaud, President p. t.,
Morgan, Lee, Chambers of Kent, Mitchell Don-
aldson. Dorsey, Wells, Weems, Dalrymple, Sol-
lers, Merrick, Jenifer, Howard, Buchanan, Bell,
Welch, Ridgeley, Sherwood of Talbot, John
Dennis, Dashiell, Hicks, Hodson, Goldsborough,
Eccleston, Phelps, McCullough, Bowie, Tuck,
Bowling, Spencer, Wright, Thomas, Shriver,
Gaither, Biser, Annan, Sappington, Stephenson,
Nelson, Gwinn, Brent of Baltimore city, Schley,
Neill, Harbine, Kilgour, Hollyday, Smith, Show-
er, and Brown—50.
Negative—Messrs. Sellman, Colston, Miller,
Grason, George, Dirickson. McMaster, Fooks,
Jacobs. Johnson, Stewart of Caroline, Hardcastle,
Stewart of Baltimore city, Sherwood of Balti-
more city, Ware, Fiery, Anderson, Weber, Sli-
cer, Fitzpatrick, and Parke—21,
So the amendment was adopted,
Mr. Gwinn moved further to amend the 5th
section by striking out from the word "elected,"
to the word " who," and inserting in lieu thereof
the following:
"On general ticket by a majority of the legal
and qualified voters of the State, as judges of the
said Court of Appeals."
Mr. GWINN observed that he would only say
in support of the amendment, that whatever
reason there might be on the ground of conve- |
