10,128

1

bewilderment, there. I thought he was going in circles,

2

too.

3

DELEGATE MACDONALD : My question is this:

4

If it was necessary to have the provision in the Constitu-

5

tion previously so that the father who failed to support

6

his children could be held in contempt of court, and in ef-

7

fect imprisoned for that particular debt, why isn't it

8

necessary today?

9

DELEGATE SCANLAN : If the Constitution has a

10

provision preventingimprisonment for debt, problems are

11

raised as to exactly what that means.

12

As I understand the majority's report, they con-

13

cede in their report that the General Assembly has absolute

14

power to prohibit this sort of thing; and that even if the

15

General Assembly took no action the common law would pre-

16

vail.

17

The cases of which you speak are traditional. It.

18

is imprisonment for failure to obey a court order.

19

I see no reason for retaining this provision in the Constitu-

20

tion.

21

THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Macdonald, I could give