DELEGATE GALLAGHER: Mr. Presi-
dent, the exact text of this change is con-
tained in Amendment No. 14, if it could
be distributed. It would be the actual lan-
guage.
THE CHAIRMAN: Would you please
distribute the amendment marked No. 14?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Barrick,
you have a copy of the new No. 14?
DELEGATE BARRICK: Yes, I do.
THE CHAIRMAN: Would you be will-
ing to withdraw your amendment and sub-
stitute that language.
DELEGATE BARRICK: Yes,l would.
THE CHAIRMAN: Amendment No. 11
is—is the seconder satisfied?
DELEGATE BAMBERGER: Yes.
THE CHAIRMAN: Amendment marked
No. 11 is withdrawn. Please substitute in
place of it Amendment No. 14, and change
the number to 11. It is offered by Delegate
Barrick and amended by Delegate Galla-
gher. So the record may be clear, I ask
the Clerk to read the amendment.
READING CLERK: Amendment No. 11
substituted by 14 to Committee Recommen-
dation GP-I, by Delegate Gallagher: in
line 15 on page 1 of Committee Recommen-
dation GP-I, strike out the words "may
occur" and insert in lieu thereof "is threat-
ened or may have occurred."
THE CHAIRMAN: The Chair recog-
nizes Delegate Barrick. Do you desire to
speak further to the amendment?
DELEGATE BARRICK: Mr. Chairman,
I think it is pretty well self-explanatory.
It is just a matter of trying to take care
of a situation after great damage to prop-
erty or life has occurred and you may want
to call in the militia to do a clean-up opera-
tion.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Harry
Taylor had sought recognition. Does he
still desire to be recognized?
DELEGATE H. TAYLOR: Mr. Chair-
man, I thought we had some free time. I
had a parliamentary inquiry that can wait
for a more appropriate time.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Gallagher.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: Mr. Chair-
man, I used the words "is threatened"
rather than "may occur" because I thought
it was a compromise between "may occur"
and "is imminent," which we discussed |
earlier today. I felt that the "is threatened"
perhaps more accurately conveyed what the
sense of the Committee of the Whole might
be with respect to the question of "when
great destruction of life or property is in-
volved."
Then recognizing the same difficulty
which Delegate Barrick recognized, that
there was no after-the-fact power conferred
upon the governor with respect to this
fourth category to allow him explicitly to
use the militia, it was the intention of the
amendment to take care of both the pre-
happening and the post-happening of the
great damage to life and property. The
purpose, therefore, is to take care of both
situations, one before the fact, and one
after the fact.
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there any further
discussion?
Delegate Hardwicke.
DELEGATE HARDWICKE: Will Dele-
gate Gallagher yield for a question?
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: Yes.
DELEGATE HARDWICKE: Is your
language "may have occurred," intended to
be indefinite or did you not really mean to
say "is threatened or has occurred"?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Gallagher.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: I think it
is a question of the use of the language.
My intention is to allow the governor to
act after the occurrence.
DELEGATE HARDWICKE: Will the
Delegate yield for a further question?
Would you not accept an amendment to say
"is threatened or has occurred"?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Gallagher.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: I do not
want to hang up in word surgery, but it
would seem to me, as I read the sentence,
"The governor may order the militia to
active duty to repel invasions, suppress in-
surrection, enforce the execution of the
laws and provide assistance when great
destruction of life or property is threat-
ened or may have occurred" that the phrase
as is is a better combination of the tenses
in the verbs.
It is subject to argument among literary
purists, and I will yield to any literary
purists, including the Style Committee, on
the question.
DELEGATE HARDWICKE: May I
speak on the amendment? |
