|
The Committee considered at some length
the names of the courts in the four-tier
system. The name "county" was proposed
and considered at length as a possible name
for the fourth tier of courts, namely, the
district court, but was disapproved by a
majority of the Committee.
We respectfully suggest to Delegate Car-
son, as I believe our memorandum indi-
cates, that the title of superior court for
the third tier, or trial court, is in very gen-
eral and popular use throughout the United
States to designate the trial court in many
jurisdictions.
We respectfully suggest, as Delegate
Carson has indicated, that to maintain, or
retain the name "circuit court" for the
courts at this level would now be a mis-
nomer and confusing.
Accordingly, that name of "circuit court"
was abandoned by the Committee and the
title superior court was substituted as be-
ing descriptive of the superior court at that
trial level, and also for the purpose of
being consistent with the trend of nomen-
clature throughout the United States to
designate trial court at this level.
We therefore feel that, although this
may appear to be a matter of some incon-
sequence, that consistent with the majority
recommendation it is desirable and effec-
tive, we believe, to retain the name "su-
perior court."
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any other dele-
gate desire to speak in favor of the amend-
ment?
(There was no response.)
Does any other delegate desire to speak
against the amendment?
Delegate Schneider?
DELEGATE SCHNEIDER: Mr. Presi-
dent, I think Delegate Carson brought up
one of the many objections to the amend-
ment and that is that it is not a county
court. It is a state court. It is a state court
for and in that county and to call it county
court is a misnomer. I submit that if we
start playing the name game here on the
floor, which we have already played in the
Committee, and which the Commission
played, we could be here for days, with
four tiers, and perhaps as many as ten dif-
ferent names for each tier, and I would
hope that this would be unanimously re-
jected.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any other dele-
gate desire to speak in favor of the
amendment?
|
Delegate Mason, do you desire to speak
against the amendment?
DELEGATE MASON: I rise to speak
against this amendment. I do not particu-
larly like the name superior court, being a
resident of Baltimore City, I like even less
the name of the county court of Baltimore
City.
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there any further
discussion?
(There was no response.)
Are you ready for the question?
(Call for the question.)
The Clerk will sound the quorum bell.
The question arises on the adoption of
Amendment No. 2 to Committee Recom-
menation LB-1.
A vote Aye is a vote in favor of Amend-
ment No. 2. A vote No is a vote against.
Cast your votes.
Has every delegate voted? Does any dele-
gate desire to change his vote?
(There was no response.)
The Clerk will record the vote.
THE CHAIRMAN: There being 9 votes
in the affirmative and 111 in the negative,
the motion is lost. The amendment is re-
jected.
Is there another amendment to section
5.01?
Delegate Needle?
DELEGATE NEEDLE: Mr. Chairman,
I rise on a point of personal privilege
to ask this body to welcome to the cham-
bers today my wife and her mother. I
would like to say a word on behalf of all of
our wives, those who perhaps are the most
abused as a result of this Convention, and
husbands too in those cases.
The wives unfortunately do not have the
pleasure and satisfaction of the great work
of this Convention, but suffer all of its in-
convenience, along with the delegates. Many
husbands and wi\^es do not return home
until weekends or ungodly hours in the
evening, and the wives have to prepare din-
ner at unusual times for those husbands.
Mine is very thoughtful and considerate.
I ask this body to express special acco-
lade to all wives and husbands as the case
may be and form itself at this time into a
functional division, a family court, and as-
|
