|
Mr. Chairman, I notice that probably due
to a typographical error a sentence was de-
leted from our amendment. I do not think
that it is particularly material, but inas-
much as we attempted to adopt everything
in the majority except that which per-
tained to the appointment of the chief
judges, I wonder if we could move that a
sentence that is in the report of the ma-
jority but not of the minority be included?
THE CHAIRMAN : What is the sentence?
DELEGATE JOHNSON: The sentence
in the Majority Report, Mr. Chairman, on
page 9, at line 33, is "Administrative
judges shall perform the duties prescribed
by rule" and that —
THE CHAIRMAN: That is the sentence
that appears in the committee recommenda-
tion on page 9, lines 33 and 34?
DELEGATE JOHNSON: Yes, Mr.
Chairman.
THE CHAIRMAN: Where would you
put it?
DELEGATE JOHNSON: I would put it
on line 21 of the amendment, after the
word "rule".
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there any objec-
tion to considering the amendment modified
to insert in line 21 after the word "rule"
a sentence reading, "Administrative judges
shall perfrom the duties prescribed by
rule"?
In the absence of objection, the Chair
will consider the amendment as having
been so modified.
You may proceed, Delegate Johnson.
DELEGATE JOHNSON: Thank you,
Mr. Chairman. That is all.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Mudd, you
have a little more than one minute.
For what purpose does Delegate Armor
rise?
DELEGATE ARMOR: I wonder if Dele-
gate Johnson would yield for a question?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Johnson,
do you yield to a question?
DELEGATE JOHNSON: Delegate Ar-
mor, state the question.
DELEGATE ARMOR: I am reading
from your amendment, line 16: "Each shall
serve the remainder of his service on the
court", referring to a chief judge of one of
the tiers who has been appointed by the
governor.
|
Now, suppose the governor pulls a boo-
boo, and this man cannot quite do the job.
How would he get him out?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Johnson.
DELEGATE JOHNSON: I would say
that he would have the same responsibility
in getting rid of an unqualified chief judge,
as we would an appointed chief judge of
the Court of Appeals, if in fact he has per-
formed some misconduct. However, I sub-
mit that a judge should not be removed
for any other reason than the chief judge
of the Court of Appeals could be. Under
the majority proposal the chief judge of
the Court of Appeals could not be removed
either.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Mudd, you
have little more than a minute.
DELEGATE MUDD: Mr. Chairman, la-
dies and gentlemen of the Committee. I
think the last question proposed to the
spokesman for the minority pointed up the
basic weakness in the minority position in
this regard, and I can offer nothing more
than the reason that the other speakers in
opposition to this amendment have ad-
vanced. The reason is that if you are going
to give the chief judge of the Court of
Appeals a job to do, namely, the efficient
administration of the court system that we
now have adopted for the State, then why
run the risk of possibly curtailing or sabo-
taging him within the operation by giving
the governor the power to name his as-
sistants, who might not share his views in
the administration of the court system?
I think it is essential to the effective op-
eration of this system that the man who
has the responsibility, namely the chief
judge of the Court of Appeals have the
power to appoint those assistants who will
assist him in his administration and not
run the risk of appointees who may be un-
sympathetic with those procedures that
he feels so essential to the efficient ad-
ministration of justice in this State. I
therefore urge you to vote against this
amendment.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any other del-
egate desire to speak in favor of the
amendment? Delegate Cardin.
DELEGATE CARDIN: Mr. Chairman,
I would like to ask a question of Delegate
Mudd if I may.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Mudd, do
you yield to a question?
DELEGATE MUDD: Yes, Mr. Chair-
man.
|
