|
READING CLERK: Amendment No. 12
to Committee Recommendation JB-1 by
Delegate Macdonald: On page U section
5.10 Composition of District Court line 41
after the word "by" insert the words "law
or".
THE CHAIRMAN: Is the amendment
seconded?
(Whereupon, the amendment was duly
seconded.)
THE CHAIRMAN: Amendment having
been seconded, the Chair recognizes Dele-
gate Macdonald to speak to the amend-
ment.
DELEGATE MACDONALD: Mr. Chair-
man, somebody remarked that he had seen
this amendment before.
Fellow delegates, this amendment No.
12 is similar to Amendment No. 6. This
relates to the matter of functional di-
visions of the district court. A short time
ago you approved the same type of amend-
ment for the superior court. Everything
that was said in favor of Amendment No.
6 would apply with equal force and logic
to Amendment No. 12.
I urge that it be adopted.
THE CHAIRMAN: The Chair recog-
nizes Delegate Mudd.
DELEGATE MUDD: Mr. Chairman,
ladies and gentleman of the Convention,
there is very little I can say in opposition
to this amendment that I did not say and
that was not better said by other oppo-
nents to the identical amendment on 5.08.
I might add this. It is rather strange to
me that this body, after adopting an
amendment provided by Delegate Mac-
donald to section 5.08, allowing the func-
tional division to be created by law or by
rule, with all that flexibility adopted, and
the power granted concurrently to the
legislature, should then have an amend-
ment by my esteemed friend Delegate Ben-
nett to give us guidelines in the rule-
making power of the court after it has
already been shared with the legislature.
It seems to me that the thought of some
of the delegates in composing amendments
by way of guidelines in the rule-making
power is perhaps somewhat inconsistent
with their position in qualifying the rule-
making power of the courts in these func-
tional divisions. Other than that, I have
nothing more to say in opposition to this
amendment than I said in opposition to the
amendment to section 5.08.
|
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any other dele-
gate desire to speak in favor of the amend-
ment?
(There ?<;a,s no response.)
Does any other delegate desire to speak
in opposition to the amendment?
(There was no response.)
Ready for the question?
(Call for the question.)
The question arises on the adoption of
Amendment No. 12 to Committee Recom-
mendation JB-1. A vote Aye is a vote in
favor of Amendment No. 11. A vote No.
is a vote against. Cast your votes.
Has every delegate voted?
Does any delegate desire to change his
vote?
(There was no response.)
The Clerk will record the vote.
There being 86 votes in the affirmative
and 33 in the negative, the motion carries.
The amendment is adopted.
Is there any other amendment to section
5.10?
Delegate Grant.
DELEGATE GRANT: I have a point of
inquiry, Mr. Chairman.
THE CHAIRMAN: State your inquiry.
DELEGATE GRANT: In order to avoid
a confusing forty minutes again like we
went through the last time, I would like to
address a couple questions to Chairman
Mudd which I think would preclude the
necessity of amendment.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Mudd, can
you respond to an inquiry?
DELEGATE GRANT: Delegate Mudd,
as I understand section 5.10, it contem-
plates that there would be physically lo-
cated in each county a district court
facility.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Mudd.
DELEGATE MUDD: Yes, more spe-
cifically provided for under the clerk of the
court section wherein it is provided that
there shall be a clerk of the district court
in every county.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Grant.
DELEGATE GRANT: My second ques-
tion to you would be this: Am I correct in
|
