|
Secondly, it was my distinct understand-
ing, Mr. President, that the word "un-
reasonable" found in lines 27 and 28 applied
so as to read "unreasonable searches, un-
reasonable seizure, unreasonable intercep-
tions of their communications, unreasonable
other invasions of their privacy", so that
I think that that was our Committee's in-
tent. It was our understanding, and I think
that the amendment to strike the subsequent
amendments of the Committee on Style
should be carried through.
I agree with Delegate Henderson that
in order to have our language conform as
closely as possible to the federal language,
where we have a body of federal law on it,
that our state law should run along the
same course.
THE PRESIDENT: Is there any further
discussion?
Delegate Bennett.
DELEGATE BENNETT: A parliamen-
tary inquiry, sir.
When you referred to the fact that this
language of the Style Committee carried
out the wishes of the Committee, you were
referring to the wishes of the Committee
of the Whole, were you not?
THE PRESIDENT: That is correct; it
carried out what the Chair understood and
recollected as the result of the colloquies
which occurred in the discussion in the
Committee of the Whole. I was not re-
ferring to the intention of the Committee
on Personal Rights.
DELEGATE BENNETT: And if, Mr.
Chairman, this amendment should be
adopted, it would be contrary to the under-
standing of the Committee of the Whole?
THE PRESIDENT: I cannot say that.
It would be contrary to what I thought was
the understanding of the Committee of the
Whole, but that is for this body to decide,
and what the understanding of the Com-
mittee of the Whole might have been is not
controlling now, it is what the Convention
wants to do.
Are you ready for the question? (Cull for
the question.) The Clerk will ring the
quorum bell.
Delegate Willoner.
DELEGATE WILLONER: So it is clear
what happened, since some members indi-
cate they want to vote for it, will you
please point out that a vote no —
|
THE PRESIDENT: I will restate the
question as soon as people have responded
to the quorum bell.
The question arises upon the adoption of
the committee amendments to section 1.05
as set forth in lines 28, 29 and 30 on page 2.
A vote Aye is a vote in favor of the
amendment suggested by the Committee
on Style. This in effect, then, is a vote
against the recommendation of the Com-
mittee on Personal Rights. A vote No is a
vote ag-ainst the recommendations of the
Committee on Style, and would restore the
language to the form in which it was sub-
mitted by the Committee on Personal
Rights, and therefore in effect is a vote
in favor of the recommendation of the Com-
mittee on Personal Rights.
A vote Aye favors the recommendation of
the Committee on Style; a vote No favors
the recommendation of the Committee on
Personal Rights.
Are you ready for the question ?
(Call for the question.)
Very well, cast your votes.
(Whereupon, a, roll call vote was taken.)
THE PRESIDENT: Has every delegate
voted ?
Does any delegate desire to change his
vote?
Delegate James Clark.
DELEGATE CLARK: I vote No.
T.HE PRESIDENT: Delegate Clark votes
no.
The Clerk will record the vote.
There being 20 votes in the affirmative
and 93 in the negative, the motion is lost.
The amendment proposed by the Committee
on Style in lines 28, 29 and 30 on page 2
are rejected.
Delegate Willoner, do you now desire to
take action or speak to the amendments
proposed in this same section by the Com-
mittee on Style in lines 31 and 32?
DELEGATE WILLONER: Mr. Chair-
man, having I believe at one time or
another read every Supreme Court case
in this area, and not being able to remem-
ber whether or not this change of language
would mean a change in substance, I cannot
honestly say.
I would only say to the body that it has
not been checked, and the change may be a
|
