DELEGATE BAMBERGER: Amend-
ments are being distributed on the desk
which have not yet been offered. For in-
stance, I had prepared an Amendment No.
4. I had it prepared in the eventuality that
I would want to offer it. I have not offered
it.
THE CHAIRMAN: I was just recog-
nizing you for that purpose. Do you desire
to offer it?
DELEGATE BAMBERGER: No, sir.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Bamberger,
the Chair has another amendment which
bears the number 5 by you. Do you desire
to offer it?
DELEGATE BAMBERGER: Yes, Mr.
Chairman, I offer it.
THE CHAIRMAN: The Chair recog-
nizes Delegate Bamberger. Will you please
mark this as Amendment No. 4. The Clerk
will read the amendment.
READING CLERK: Amendment No. 4
to Committee Recommendation GP-I, by
Delegate Bamberger. In line 14 of page 1
of Committee Recommendation GP-I, strike
out the words "at such time," and in line
15, strike out the words "may occur" and
insert in lieu thereof the words "is immi-
nent".
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there a second?
(The motion was duly seconded.)
THE CHAIRMAN: The Chair recog-
nizes Delegate Bamberger for the purpose
of speaking to Amendment No. 4.
DELEGATE BAMBERGER: Mr. Chair-
man, the purpose of the amendment is to
clear up the ambiguity pointed out by
Delegate Henderson with respect to the
words "at such time," to make it clear
that they do not refer back to the ante-
cedent paragraph. Its second purpose is to
make more definite that future calamitous
events may occur and the governor should
be empowered to order the militia to ac-
tive duty. The words now in the draft or
in the committee recommendations are too
indefinite. I suggest that the substitution
of the words "is imminent" makes it more
definite, and somewhat more restrictive of
when the governor may exercise power to
take such drastic action as to order the
militia to active duty.
DELEGATE JAMES: Point of inquiry.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate James. |
DELEGATE JAMES: Would the spon-
sor of the amendment accept a request for
a division of the question?
DELEGATE BAMBERGER: Yes.
THE CHAIRMAN: All right, the
amendment will be divided and we will take
separately the portion embraced in lines 1,
2, and 3, and the portion embraced in lines
5 and 6. We will consider first the portions
embraced in lines 1, 2, and 3. Delegate
Wheatley, do you desire the floor with re-
spect to that portion of the amendment?
DELEGATE WHEATLEY: Will the
sponsor of the amendment yield for a ques-
tion as to the first section of the amend-
ment as presented?
DELEGATE BAMBERGER: I would if
1 knew what was expected of me.
DELEGATE WHEATLEY: I am won-
dering what the effect would be if the first
part of the amendment were passed and
the second part defeated. Would the pro-
ponent of the amendment care to speak?
DELEGATE BAMBERGER: I think
they are clearly divisible and they have
been divided.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Wheatley.
DELEGATE WHEATLEY: In that
case, Mr. President, I would like to speak
in opposition to this amendment.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Wheatley.
DELEGATE WHEATLEY: The Com-
mittee spent great time and delved into
this matter very deeply. Perhaps the his-
tory of this fourth aspect would best clear
up the matter under discussion.
The proposal as presently stated would
indicate four categories, the first being ex-
ternal causes, "to repel invasion"; the sec-
ond, "to suppress insurrection", to be in-
terpreted as those attempts to overthrow
the government from an internal source;
the third portion to be a more general pro-
vision, that of the traditional role of the
executive "to enforce the execution of the
laws" of the State; and the fourth to pro-
vide for those situations not specifically
enumerated in the preceding three, "at
such times" being to designate national
disasters and in some instances perhaps
man-made disasters.
It would seem to me that a comma after
the word "laws" would accomplish the pur-
pose intended by the maker of the motion
if his intention is to divide the four into |
