|
fifteen-year term such as we have in the
judiciary today really amounts in a sense
to election for life. The average lawyer is
in the neighborhood of fifty-five when he is
appointed to the bench, and the fifteen-year
term really gives him a lifetime service,
so that the incentive in a sense for doing a
good job is removed because he never has
to be responsible to the people again.
My conclusion simply is that the elective
aspects of Maryland's judicial system is
simply one grand illusion. The law should
be adopted to the practice, appointment of
running against election and reduction of
the term to permit more frequent reviews
of that record, and this system would pro-
vide an incentive to stimulate energetic ju-
dicial service.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Mudd.
DELEGATE MUDD: May I yield three
minutes to Delegate Gallagher?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Gallagher.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: Mr. Chair-
man, ladies and gentlemen of the Commit-
tee: I think it is important to realize some
of the very unfortunate effects that occur
when a member of the bar runs against a
sitting judge. In many communities, and in
Baltimore City, oftentimes the lawyer may
appear before the judge during the period
of time in which he is conducting his cam-
paign, and regardless of the best intentions
on the part of judge and lawyer who is
seeking the office, the client, of course, can
indulge in some considering wonderment
about whether or not his case is being
properly considered and properly repre-
sented, so that there is this aspect of a re-
flection on justice and a certain suspicion
that falls over litigation which involves
the judge and the lawyer who is running
against him.
Also it is quite apparent that in these
campaigns the lawyer who is running
against the sitting judge certainly is not
as restricted and confined under the rules
of ethics as Senator James has read them
to you, and consequently, the lawyer can
indulge in a great deal of freewheeling
politicking, so to speak; he can afford to
go out on the fringes of what is proper
and prudent and make public statements
that perhaps may be intended only to cast
discredit upon the judge against whom he
may be running, but ultimately, of course,
cast discredit and suspicion upon the ju-
diciary itself. So what you really have, it
seems to me in these elections as they are
|
conducted and as it is suggested they be
conducted is a member of the judiciary,
both of whose hands are tied behind his
back. He cannot honestly and fully present
himself to the public. He cannot campaign
in the full sense of the word, and yet he
has running against him an attorney who
has really no limitations placed upon him
with respect to the extent to which he can
go.
THE CHAIRMAN: You have one-half
minute.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: The ques-
tion of finances I alluded to yesterday — it
is very difficult and unwise, it seems to me,
for judges to deal with political leaders,
and to pay to be placed upon the ballot,
and unfortunately this entire process is one
which can only do, and has done, consider-
able injury to the judiciary.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Mudd, you
have one minute.
DELEGATE MUDD: May I yield that
to Delegate Needle?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Needle,
the Chair recognizes you for one minute.
DELEGATE NEEDLE: Mr. Chairman,
this section, along with section 5.14, which
was adopted by this body yesterday by a
95 to 42 vote, are the two sections which
will provide Maryland with the most quali-
fied judges. They are two companion sec-
tions, which must be enacted by this body;
and I suggest that we should do so by an
even more overwhelming vote with regard
to this particular section and reject the
amendment.
Let me tell you of a couple of experi-
ences I had during my campaign and since,
when I appeared before a couple of po-
litical clubs. A number of lawyers, some of
whom I knew and some of whom I did not
know, indicated that they did not approve
of the commission draft with regard to
noncompetitive elections because they
wanted the opportunity to become judges.
They said that they know a nominating
commission would never put them before
the governor, and so they would never be-
come judges. They knew that they had the
backing of their political clubs and poli-
ticians in their areas, and they thought
they could beat incumbent judges. That is
not the way I want my judges selected.
I suggest that there is no reason to pro-
vide any different method for the election
of trial court judges and appellate court
judges, and I refer you to page 15 of the
Committee Memorandum of the majority,
|
