|
(The motion was duly seconded.)
THE PRESIDENT: All in favor, signify
by saying Aye; contrary, No. The Ayes
have it. It is so ordered.
(Whereupon at 2:47 P.M., the Convention
resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole.)
(The mace was removed by the Sergeant-
at- Arms.)
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
NOVEMBER 22, 1967—2:47 P.M.
PRESIDENT H. VERNON ENEY,
PRESIDING
THE CHAIRMAN: The Committee of
the Whole will please come to order. We
are still under Part 3 of the Debate Sched-
ule. Does Delegate Johnson still desire to
offer his amendment T?
DELEGATE JOHNSON: Yes, Mr.
Chairman.
THE PRESIDENT: The pages will
please distribute the amendment T. This
will be Amendment No. 57. The clerk will
read the amendment.
READING CLERK: Amendment No. 57
to accompany Minority Report JB-1, to
Committee Recommendation JB-1, by Dele-
gates Johnson, Harkness, Hickman, Kahl,
Murphy, Siewierski, and Rush: On page
10 after section 5.31 add the following sec-
tion, section 5 Right of Removal. "There
shall be the right of removal in each case
before the Superior Court and the District
Court in a manner prescribed by rule or by
law."
THE CHAIRMAN: The amendment hav-
ing been seconded, the Chair recognizes
Delegate Johnson.
DELEGATE JOHNSON: Mr. Chairman,
fellow delegates, in the opinion of the mi-
nority, a section should be added to the
judicial article to insure a right of re-
moval. This right of removal is found in
article 4 Section 8 of the present Maryland
Constitution, and Rule 5.42 of the Mary-
land Rules of Procedure.
In the opinion of the minority, deleting
it may suggest an intention to diminish or
downgrade this right. As I have indicated
previously, eliminating something previ-
ously included in a constitution frequently
appears to be a stronger action than fail-
ing to include something originally.
|
The minority regret any action tending
to minimize the importance of the right of
removal of litigant and persons accused of
crime.
Mr. Chairman, we very strongly recom-
mend that the judicial article contain the
section as it appears in the amendment.
May I also take this opportunity to add
that a right of removal appears in the ma-
jority record of the Committee on Personal
Rights and the Preamble. Although it is
not official, I understand from some mem-
bers of that Committee that this right of
removal would better solve the problems
than the right of removal in and under the
personal rights and preamble article.
I assure you, fellow delegates, that this
is a very important right and I urge you to
give it very deep consideration before
eliminating it from our Constitution.
(At this point, Second Vice President
William S. James assumed the Chair.)
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding) : Does
any member wish to speak against the
amendment? Delegate Mudd:
DELEGATE MUDD: Mr. Chairman,
ladies and gentlemen of the Committee of
the Whole: Delegate Johnson, the spokes-
man for the minority, is entirely correct
that there is a section in the present Con-
stitution with respect to right of removal.
However, I respectfully suggest that the
section to be added to our proposed article
5 in the language of this amendment is
much broader than the provision in the
present Constitution, and would apparently
have the right of removal to extend equity
cases and all types of cases, which is very
much more extensive than under the pres-
ent system, which in many instances has
been found to disrupt docket schedules and
work a hardship on litigants and lawyers
and the courts as well.
It is further correct that the recommen-
dation which will be shortly considered by
this Convention of the Committee on Pre-
amble and Personal /Rights does contain
a section dealing w(th this right of re-
moval. ^
It was the view of the majority of the
Committee on the Judicial Branch that this
was a matter which might properly and
easily be taken care of by statute or rule,
of course, and is not of constitutional
statute. If we were wrong in that respect,
then it has already been provided for, or
this Committee will have an opportunity
to provide for it in adopting the recom-
|
