|
Delegate Beatrice Miller.
DELEGATE B. MILLER: Mr. Chair-
man, previously when we were discussing
section 4.01, we were told that the protec-
tion for a family or some other such type
court as the people would request or would
like to have was in this particular area.
Now we are told that this is a matter of
judicial manpower.
I do not think that this is a matter of
judicial manpower only. I do think that
there might be some time in the future
when the people would prefer to have a
distinct type of court on a functional divi-
sion, if you will, that would answer their
needs, and I do not see how under the sys-
tem that we are now setting up that we
would have any recourse, any place at al)
to indicate that need.
I remind the assembly that the other
day we voted on referenda to protect the
, rights of the people in cases where mem-
bers of the legislature are before them
every four years for a vote, but in the
cases where we appoint judges for a long
time, there does not seem to be any pro-
tection written in for the kinds of wishes
that the people might have in this area.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any other dele-
gate desire to speak in opposition to the
amendment?
Delegate Bushong.
DELEGATE BUSHONG: I would like
to ask Delegate Mudd a question.
DELEGATE MUDD: Yes, I will yield.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Bushong,
if a person desires to speak he will have
priority.
DELEGATE BUSHONG: I would first
like to ask him a question.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Sherbow.
DELEGATE SHERBOW: I rise to speak
in opposition to the amendment, and remind
this assembly that in Baltimore City, when
the supreme bench determined that there
should be a functional division so that we
could have a special juvenile division, long
before it existed anywhere else by order of
the court, this was done. When the su-
preme bench, by its own studies, and with
outside aid decided the time had come when
youths between 18 and 26 should have a
special court geared to the problems arising
from the crimes that they committed, the
supreme bench by order so provided.
|
Likewise, in the lower court, when a se-
ries of housing cases developed into a situa-
tion where it was necessary that magis-
trates, or as we now have them, judges of
the municipal court, be specially assigned
so that these cases be given priority and
could be heard, this was done by the courts.
This is peculiarly not a matter of man-
power, but a matter of providing justice
at the time justice should be served; as
for example, this past summer, when it
became necessary to have not one, two, or
three criminal courts in Baltimore City,
but five.
This is a matter that should rest with
the judges who are attuned to the times,
aware of what is needed, and by rule may
provide for the best disposition, not of the
manpower, but of the cases that come be-
fore the courts.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any other dele-
gate desire to speak in favor of the amend-
ment?
DELEGATE BENNETT: Mr. Chairman.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Bennett,
do you desire to speak in favor of the
amendment?
DELEGATE BENNETT: If I may be
permitted to say so, I wish that I had the
confidence that Judge Sherbow has in the
willingness of the courts to reform them-
selves. I do not know so much about what
goes on in the courts of Maryland with re-
gard to reforming themselves, and adopting
new and creative ideas, but I do know that
in the federal system we have had a great
deal of difficulty in getting the courts to
recognize the need, for instance, for redis-
tricting themselves, a great deal of diffi-
culty in getting them to determine under
what rules the appellate court should grant
a bench hearing, a great deal of other diffi-
culties relating to assignments of judges
from one district to another.
I have great respect for all of our courts
but it seems to me it is most desirable to
have some sort of appeal, some sort of ap-
peal above the judges. We are creating a
system here where we have a chief judge
as powerful or more powerful than the
governor of this State is going to be, and
it seems to me that a little concession to the
public by way of granting them an appeal
is well worth the attention of this Conven-
tion.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate L. Taylor,
do you desire to speak in opposition to the
amendment?
|
