clear space clear space clear space white space
A
 r c h i v e s   o f   M a r y l a n d   O n l i n e

PLEASE NOTE: The searchable text below was computer generated and may contain typographical errors. Numerical typos are particularly troubling. Click “View pdf” to see the original document.

  Maryland State Archives | Index | Help | Search
search for:
clear space
white space
Proceedings and Debates of the 1967 Constitutional Convention
Volume 104, Volume 1, Debates 589   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space
[Nov. 9] DEBATES 589
sent a small county in a senatorial district.
However, we would not know until the elec-
tion returns whether any particular county
was without a legislative representative.
Who would appoint the representative
agent by this proposal? Would it be after
the election? Would the Governor appoint
him, or the Speaker of the House or the
President of the Senate? I believe the Com-
mittee voted 15 to 5 against this proposal,
primarily because of the lateness of his
appointment.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any other dele-
gate desire to speak in favor of the amend-
ment? Delegate Ritter?
DELEGATE RITTER: Mr. Chairman,
fellow delegates, what the Vice-Chairman
says is true, there will be no way of know-
ing until the election is over who the dele-
gate is. However, I am sure the legislature
can pass Enabling Acts to take care of
these things because in 1970 there will be
many counties without a delegate and in
1980 a few more, perhaps some of your
own counties. This is something that has
been going on in the federal government for
a number of years, in the halls of Con-
gress. We do not say that it is the best,
but we have already lost the best so this
is what we have left.
We feel that Alaska, and Hawaii and the
Virgin Islands have been represented this
way. As the Chairman of the Committee
said, this representative will have all of
the privileges of the legislature so we as-
sume that he would be paid by the State,
the same as any other legislator. It might
be said that this is representation without
taxation, but we are still paying taxes to
those counties.
My county will not be completely obliter-
ated by the reapportionment; we will still
have representation. However, there will
be some of our neighboring counties and
some of those on the Eastern Shore with-
out representation. I now ask the delegates
from Baltimore City as Delegate Sherbow
asked those from the smaller counties to
give a little consideration to those areas
that do not have a representative at this
Convention, and put somebody down here
who can introduce local legislation, and
look after them as they should be looked
after, because they are still part of the
State of Maryland.
THE CHAIRMAN: The Chair recog-
nizes Delegate Scanlan to speak in opposi-
tion to the amendment.
DELEGATE SCANLAN: I think the
Vice-Chairman Della has made the essen-
tial points and reflected further the Com-
mittee's views. I will not add anything to
what he has said.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any other dele-
gate desire to speak in favor of the amend-
ment? Delegate Grant.
DELEGATE GRANT: I would like to
speak in favor of it. The hour is late. The
argument has been long. I think you have
heard everything that has to be said by
the small counties. We asked that the legis-
lature be big enough to give us a vote, the
answer was No. We asked that the legis-
lature give us a tenth of a vote; the an-
swer was No. We are asking merely, to
let us appear in the legislature for the
purpose of introducing our legislation, and
to testify on the conditions in our county.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any other dele-
gate desire to speak in opposition to the
amendment? Delegate Neilson.
DELEGATE NEILSON: Mr. Chairman,
I rise to speak in opposition to the offered
amendment, or proposal. A question came to
my mind as Mr. Ritter made his state-
ment, I think the keyword was, "someone
to introduce our local legislation." It was
my impression that we were going to have
Home Rule in the counties, possibly to take
care of local legislation, and a county rep-
resentative as such was not necessary. We
need people to be represented by the legis-
latur. I speak in opposition to the idea.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Harkness,
do you desire to speak in favor of the
amendment?
DELEGATE HARKNESS: Mr. Presi-
dent.
- THE CHAIRMAN: To whom is your
question addressed?
DELEGATE HARKNESS: I wish to
speak infavor of it.
THE CHAIRMAN: You may proceed.
DELEGATE HARKNESS: Mr. Chair-
man, I have sat here now for two days as
a delegate from the county in which the
first legislature of this State was ever held,
and sat here in a complete spirit of frustra-
tion. As Delegate Grant has told you, we
asked for a vote, we asked for a fractional
vote, and for God's sake, now do not deny
us the right to at least appear in this
legislature. Now, I realize this is a half a
loaf, or a part of that loaf, but any morsel


 
clear space
clear space
white space

Please view image to verify text. To report an error, please contact us.
Proceedings and Debates of the 1967 Constitutional Convention
Volume 104, Volume 1, Debates 589   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>


This web site is presented for reference purposes under the doctrine of fair use. When this material is used, in whole or in part, proper citation and credit must be attributed to the Maryland State Archives. PLEASE NOTE: The site may contain material from other sources which may be under copyright. Rights assessment, and full originating source citation, is the responsibility of the user.


Tell Us What You Think About the Maryland State Archives Website!



An Archives of Maryland electronic publication.
For information contact mdlegal@mdarchives.state.md.us.

©Copyright  October 06, 2023
Maryland State Archives