Proceedings and Debates of the 1864 Constitutional Convention pg 355

From Wikisource
Jump to: navigation, search
Proceedings and Debates of the 1864 Constitutional Convention
Volume 102, Volume 1, Debates 363
From (1864)


"Resolved, That the Senate having re-
ceived and considered the reports made from
its select committee, to whom was referred
the memorial for the removal of the Hon.
Henry Stump, Judge of the Criminal Court
of Baltimore city, hereby fixes Friday, the
9th day of March, 1860, for the trial of the
said Henry Stump, as Judge of the Criminal
Court of Baltimore city, upon the charges
made against him by the said memorial,
Resolved, That the said trial shall com-
mence at 11 o'clock A. M., and shall he pro-
ceeded with in preference to all other business,
and the Secretary of the Senate is hereby
directed to notify, forthwith, said Henry
Stump, and the said memorialists, of the
passage of these resolutions, by furnishing
said parties, or their counsel, with a certified
copy of the same.
On the same page follows the memorial of
Judge Stump, in which he asks that he may
be heard by counsel at the bar of the Senate,
upon charges preferred against him in his
official capacity. Then testimony was taken,
as appears by the journal, and the trial was
had. I think some general provision like
that suggested by the gentleman from Som-
erset (Mr. Jones) should be made for the trial
of these cases. The PRESIDENT, The Chair has a full re-
collection of the case referred to. Judge
Stump had a full trial and was allowed to ap-
pear by counsel.
Mr. THOMAS. The action in that case may
be followed as a precedent, but not necessa-
rily so.
Mr. EARLE. Judge Stump had a full trial
under the present Constitution. When we
come to consider the article on the judiciary
I shall have no objection to making it obli-
gatory that the person charged shall have
due notice and opportunity for trial.
Mr. MILLER. I am in favor of the proposed
amendment, because the great object of this
article in the Declaration of Rights is to se-
cure the independence of the judiciary. If
there is ever to be ajudge in Maryland, tried
or impeached for misconduct, and the Legis-
lature undertake to do it, I want it to be
done under a general law, so that every
Judge may come in the same category. I
know that in the case of the trial of Judge
Stump, every opportunity was given him to
defend himself, and his case was tried fairly,
and an impartial decision rendered upon it.
But It may not be so hereafter in all cases,
and I wish this provision to be inserted in
the bill of rights. The reference made by
the gentleman from Allegany (Mr. Thruston)
to the article on the judiciary does not re-
move the difficulty at all, because the words
there are; precisely the same as those used in
the hill of rights. "Removable for misbe-
havior, on conviction in a court of law, or by
the Governor, on the address of the General
Assembly, provided that two thirds of the
members of each House shall concur in such
address." Now I want some general law,
providing for full notice, and a fair trial, and
I want it in both places, in the Declaration of
Bights and the article on the judiciary.
The question was stated to be upon the
amendment of Mr. JONES, of Somerset, to in-
sert after the words "General Assembly"
the words after such notice and trial by the
General Assembly as shall be prescribed by
general law."