judicial interpretation, Delegate Hard-
wicke. I know the court has in other in-
stances drafted legislation.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Hardwicke.
DELEGATE HARDWICKE: The court
has? You do have instances, Mr. Chairman,
where a court has drafted legislation pro-
viding for such things as conservation?
DELEGATE BOYER: Of course, I am
referring to the historic case of reappor-
tionment—and we are getting off into a
far distant natural resource here—but
there was, as I understand it, the decree
of the court that if the legislature did not
do so the court would; so if they had that
authority there, I can see no difference
here.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate L. Taylor.
DELEGATE L. TAYLOR: Delegate
Boyer, in your recommendation 1 see that
you include the word "environment". Does
the word "environment" relate to any de-
gree to the need of human beings?
DELEGATE BOYER: No, sir, abso-
lutely note That was not our intention.
DELEGATE L. TAYLOR: In the prob-
lems of air and water pollution, what is the
primary role of trying to correct water
pollution and air pollution?
DELEGATE BOYER: The primary
what, Delegate Taylor?
DELEGATE L. TAYLOR: What are the
primary aims of abating water pollution
and air pollution?
DELEGATE BOYER: The primary aims
of abating air and water pollution, it ap-
pears to me, would be self-evident, to try
to protect and clear the air and water.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Taylor.
DELEGATE L. TAYLOR: Would it be
for the purpose of human beings or for
the purpose of the lower animals?
DELEGATE BOYER: Could we include
both in that, sir?
DELEGATE L. TAYLOR: Yes.
DELEGATE BOYER: My answer would
be, both.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Taylor.
DELEGATE L. TAYLOR: I do not see
how you can limit the word "environment"
to natural resources and not include the
environment of man. |
DELEGATE BOYER: The consideration
we had was for natural resources. There
are many other considerations of personal
rights that would include social environ-
ment.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Taylor.
DELEGATE L. TAYLOR: I would like
to read you a statement.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Taylor,
this session is for the purpose of questions
only. You will have an opportunity to de-
bate a little later.
DELEGATE L. TAYLOR: I wanted him
to answer a question in connection with
the statement.
THE CHAIRMAN: You may proceed.
DELEGATE L. TAYLOR: This is an
article on air pollution, and it deals with
the effect of air pollution on heart disease.
It says,
"Extreme general air pollution also ap-
pears to lead to an increase in deaths
from coronary artery disease. So far as
I know, there is little or no evidence con-
cerning the possibility of an association
between coronary artery disease and gen-
eral air pollution not exceeding the levels
ordinarily present in many large cities."
This article is in a publication put out
by Harvard University, Academy of Arts
and Sciences, and it examines natural re-
sources and the effects that they have on
man. I cannot see how you failed to include
the human needs and the natural environ-
ment.
THE CHAIRMAN: What is your ques-
tion?
DELEGATE L. TAYLOR: The question
is, isn't that so?
THE CHAIRMAN: What is the ques-
tion, Delegate Taylor?
DELEGATE L. TAYLOR: My question
is, how were you able to exclude the human
needs, the needs of man in relationship to
natural environment, natural resources?
DELEGATE BOYER: It was not our in-
tention, nor is it ever the intention to ex-
clude human needs, when it refers to the
natural resources and air pollution. I do
not know how else to answer your question.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Taylor, if
the Chair may paraphrase what the Com-
mittee Chairman was saying, I think he
was saying that the section is intended to |
