pride themselves on their good manners and the decorum maintained
in their courts. These, I like to think, predominate in our State. My
observation has been that the conduct required of laymen in court
is impressed on all persons present by the manner in which the pro-
ceeding is conducted. An orderly room makes work easier for all in-
volved. Laymen become more attentive when the matters before the
court are audible and understandable. The explanation of rights to
individual defendants in open court informs the defendant of his stand-
ing before the court and sets the atmosphere for his trial. Spectators,
or other defendants waiting trial, learn what is expected of them and
what they can expect of the court. This also decreases the amount
of time necessary for succeeding cases.
The not-so-good magistrate is a man who talks with his head down
and does not look at the people who speak to him. He interrupts
witnesses, and sometimes browbeats young attorneys. He makes up his
mind, or appears to have made up his mind, at the beginning of a
case. He loses his temper and shows contempt for his customers as
well as for his place of work. I say, without fear of contradiction,
that this judicial type does not exist in Maryland. No system, humanly
operated, can completely circumvent the pitfalls of human fallibility.
The best that can be hoped for is that there will be built into the
system adequate protections against the destructive effects of these weak-
nesses. The problem is rendered doubly serious by the realization that
judicial independence is so tremendously important that any adminis-
trative limitations must be scrutinized again and again to insure against
abuse by the administrative power which might infringe upon such
independence.
Reading the subject matters of your panel discussions, I am impres-
sed with the broad emphasis placed on traffic violations and the trial
of violators. You all are well aware of my interest in this field. On
two occasions in the past I invited you to Annapolis to discuss motor
vehicle and traffic violator problems. It is with some satisfaction that
I recall my conversations with Chief Judge Brune which resulted in
his calling a Conference of Trial Magistrates in October, 1962. It was
at this meeting that you elected to launch an annual Conference. I
congratulate you on carrying on the program through this, your second
annual Conference. I hope that it is but the beginning of a healthy
partnership looking for the better administration of justice and that
you have laid the foundations for meaningful future conferences. They
are a highly valuable means of conducting studies and exchanging
ideas. Multiple common interests, problems and objectives indicate the
desirability of a close working relationship.
452
|
 |
