|
Delegate Grant.
DELEGATE GRANT: I have one amend-
ment with respect to style with regard to
section 10.04. It is designated as "A".
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding): The
pages will distribute Amendment A.
Does everyone have a copy ?
This will be Amendment No. 3.
The Clerk will read the amendment.
READING CLERK: Amendment No. 3
on Style, as amended by Report S&D-17
to Committee Recommendations GP-7,
GP-8, GP-9, GP-12, R&P-1, and LB-3 on
second reading, by Delegate Grant: On page
3, section 10.04, Effective Date of Consti-
tution, in line 5 after the word "except"
insert the following: "as provided in sec-
tion 10.01 of this constitution and".
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding): Dele-
gate Grant.
DELEGATE GRANT: This simply is a
style amendment to the constitution as a
result of a colloquy when this section,
GP-12, originally came up.
What it does is make the date at which
the old Constitution ceases to be effective,
July 1, 1968, except as provided by section
10.01 of this constitution, and as otherwise
specifically provided in the schedule of
transitional provisions attached to this con-
stitution.
Section 10.01 is a Mother Hubbard clause
intended to preserve all rights which exist
at the date the old Constitution goes out of
effect.
Now, the bulk of these rights, of course,
are statutory rights, but there are a few
of the rights that are based on constitu-
tional provisions.
Because of the language in the last
clause of the Mother Hubbard in 10.01, one
of the provisions of this Constitution is
that the old Constitution will go out of
effect. It in fact avoids those rights, which
is not what the Committee of the Whole
intended.
There is no difficulty with getting a
clause in which conflicts with the present
Constitution, because you already have in
lines 10 and 11, "insofar as it is not in
conflict with this Constitution," so that
clears out anything that would be in con-
flict.
T(his simply provides that any rights
which are not specifically provided in the
|
schedule of transitional legislation will nev-
ertheless continue under the Mother Hub-
bard.
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding): Dele-
gate Penniman, do you wish to comment
on this proposed amendment?
DELEGATE PENNIMAN: We did it as
it came to us.
As you will note, we made no changes.
I confess that I am not sure what has been
added, and perhaps this is a question that
Delegate Boyer might wish to address
himself to.
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding): Dele-
gate Boyer, will you yield ?
DELEGATE BOYER: I will be glad to.
I can see no particular harm that
Amendment No. 3 does, neither can I see
any particular good. It certainly spells out
the intent of this Convention. I am certain
that the Mother Hubbard clause is retained
in toto.
If you will look on line 3 of section 10.04
it says "this Constitution becomes effec-
tive" on such and such a date.
If this constitution becomes effective, it
would include also section 10.01, which is
part of the constitution. So we feel that it
would be adequate to leave it as it is.
At the risk of throwing a bone to Mother
Hubbard, I think that probably Amend-'
ment A does clarify it, and yet I am re-
luctant to concur on it because it violates
one of the rules of the Style Committee by
referring back to a previous or any other
inclusive amendment, so I would reluctantly
oppose my good friend.
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding): A
point of inquiry:
Does section 10.01 not deal with the ex-
isting law, whereas section 10.04 deals with
the constitution which is being replaced ?
It seems to me they are two entirely dif-
ferent subjects.
DELEGATE BOYER: I would feel they
are very much interconnected, Mr. Chair-
man.
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding): Dele-
gate Hardwicke.
DELEGATE HARDWICKE: I think the
Chairman has it correctly. The 10.01 is in-
tended to preserve law, and the Constitu-
tion is not intended to be preserved under
the language of 10.01. If you were to adopt
this amendment, you would preserve the
|
