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 1154   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space

1154 CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION OF MARYLAND [Nov. 22]

(At this point, the President, H. Vernon
Eney, Chairman of the Committee of the
Whole, resumed the Chair.)

THE CHAIRMAN: Are there further
questions of the Committee Chairman?
Delegate Chabot.

DELEGATE CHABOT: Section 5.30. I
see the Minority Report would prefer to
have the chief judges of the three lower
levels appointed by the governor.

Did the Committee give any considera-
tion to having the entire Court of Appeals
make the decision with regard to the chief
judges at the other levels rather than the
chief judge of the Court of Appeals alone?

DELEGATE MUDD: I do not recollect
that that was considered. We felt, as best
I can recollect, that consistent with the
provisions of the present Constitution tc
make the chief judge of the Court of Ap-
peals responsible for the functioning of the
court, it could best be accomplished by him
designating his subordinates or his associ-
ates in the other three tiers. The Minority
Report does propose that all four chief
judges be appointed by the governor, I be-
lieve.

THE CHAIRMAN: Any further ques-
tions of the Committee Chairman?

If not, the Chair calls on Delegate John-
son to present the Minority Report and
would ask him to come forward to the
reading desk.

While Delegate Johnson is coming for-
ward, the Chair would like to take the op-
portunity to recognize the presence in the
gallery of ten boys from the Boys' Village
of Maryland, here with their teachers, Mr.
Johnson and Mr. Marshall. Delighted to
have them with us.

(Applause.)

DELEGATE JOHNSON: Mr. Chairman,
fellow delegates, administration of a uni-
fied court system is extremely important,
but not at the expense of creating a dy-
nasty.

The majority would have you believe that
unless we provide for the exclusive judicial
operation of all the functions of the court,
the entire system will break down in chaos.
That will be the result. I feel I know a
little something about the general problems
of administering a judicial system. There-
fore, I can fully appreciate the concern of
judges in our system when they have urged,
as many have, that we, members of this
Convention, would be making a serious

mistake and placing too much power and
too much administrative detail in the ju-
diciary, or in the chief judge of the ju-
dicial system.

Benjamin Franklin at the United States
Constitutional Convention spoke of his con-
cern in a similar matter when he argued
against appropriations that would have
provided for an appointed president for
life. Perhaps he had Washington in mind
when he said that his concern was not for
the first man appointed to the position,
but the uncertainty of the others who might
come thereafter.

Fellow delegates, if we could be guaran-
teed the services of the highly distinguished
Hall Hammond, Chief Judge of the Court
of Appeals today, if we could be guaran-
teed his services forever, or someone iden-
tical to him, these matters would not con-
cern the minority. Interestingly enough,
Chief Judge Hall Hammond commented un-
favorably on a section of the commission
draft calling for the power of the chief
judge to move judges up and down the
ladder in the judicial system, and he cau-
tioned members of our Committee that this
would simply be too much power to place
in any one man.

The Committee accordingly amended the
section slightly.

The rule-making power of the courts
has been adequately handled by the Com-
mittee of the Whole to date. However, I
urge your further study of similar matters
which you may or may not find to be sub-
stantive issues in nature.

The administration problem with re-
spect to the court boils down to the two
main sections, sections 5.29 and 5.30. Chair-
man Mudd has already commented briefly
on sections 5.29 and 5.30. I would like to
take this time equally briefly to giving the
minority view.

You have perhaps noted that section 5.29
in the Majority Report calls upon the chief
judge of the Court of Appeals to designate
chief judges of the intermediate appellate
court, superior court and district court. In
the view of the minority, there is abso-
lutely no need, and in fact an injierent
danger, to concentrate this measure of
power in the hands of any one man.

I call to your attention that under sec-
tion 5.04 of the Majority Report, agreed
upon by minority members of the Commit-
tee, the governor appoints the chief judge
of the Court of Appeals. There is no ration-
ale, I submit, for the appointed chief judge

 

 

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 1154   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