|
The Chair hears none.
Are there any with respect to section
1.04?
The Chair hears none.
Are there any with respect to section
1.05?
With respect to 1.06?
Delegate Willoner.
DELEGATE WILLONER: I have
Amendment Q, a committee amendment to
section 1.05.
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Willoner,
as the Chair understands the amendment,
you are in effect restoring section 1.05 to
exactly the form before the amendments
as to style were inserted?
DELEGATE WILLONER: That is cor-
rect, Mr. Chairman.
THE PRESIDENT: Then I do not think
the amendment is necessary. The procedure
would be simply to ask for a separate
vote on section 1.05 and to vote against the
amendments proposed by the Committee on
Style. This would accomplish the same
purpose.
DELEGATE WILLONER: And when do
I make that motion?
THE PRESIDENT: I will give you the
opportunity when we have finished consid-
ering amendments but before we adopt the
amendments of the Committee on Style.
DELEGATE WILLONER: Thank you,
Mr. Chairman.
THE PRESIDENT: Are there any other
amendments to section 1.05 as to style?
As to 1.06? 1.07? 1.08? 1.09? 1.10? 1.11?
1.12? 1.13?
Delegate Marvin Smith. Mr. President,
we have an amendment that has just been
submitted on 1.12.
THE PRESIDENT: As to style?
DELEGATE M. SMITH: As to style,
yes, sir. I will admit some mental reserva-
tions when I read it to you.
On line 42, at the beginning of the line
we would insert the words "arising out
of". We would delete the word "or", so
that the section would read "No person
shall be imprisoned for debt, but an obli-
gation created by a valid decree of a court
arising out of an agreement approved by
decree of a court for the support of a wife,
|
or of dependent children or of illegitimate
children, or for alimony, shall not consti-
tute a debt within the meaning of this
section."
THE PRESIDENT: It does not seem to
the Chair that the amendment is one of
style. It seems rather one of substance. I
think the time to offer it would be at a
later point.
Delegate Rybczynski.
DELEGATE RYBCZYNSKI: Many of
us are concerned about this 1.12. We do be-
lieve that it is a question of style.
The problem, if I might suggest to the
President, is that line 41 appears to hang
by itself when in fact it should not. It
should somehow be tied into the support of
a wife or dependent children, or for the
other things, so that what we are afraid
of is that line 41 might possibly be read
by a court some day whereby a person,
say found in debt under a mechanic's lien,
might find himself in jail. This is just a
word or two.
I think Mr. Smith is right that it is a
style problem here.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, the problem
may be one of style, but the amendment
suggested I think would go beyond the
question of style.
DELEGATE RYBCZYNSKI: I think
you are right. It would change it completely.
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Kiefer.
DELEGATE KIEFER: I think that the
words you suggested, "by a valid decree of
a court incorporating an agreement ap-
proved", and so forth, just say what nor-
mally happens. I would have no objection
to your suggestion whether it is substance
or style, Delegate Smith. The court incor-
porates the agreement in its decree, and
that is what we are really talking about.
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Rybczyn-
ski, is that the thought you had in mind?
DELEGATE RYBCZYNSKI: Yes, sir,
but then I think you would have to go down
to line 43 and then add "or a decree of a
court for the support". You have to have
both, in other words.
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Kiefer.
DELEGATE KIEFER: If I might an-
swer that, it has been held by the Court of
Appeals that decrees for alimony, decrees
for the support of children, decrees for the
support of illegitimate children, are within
|
