|
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any delegate
desire to speak in opposition to Amend-
ment No. 13?
Delegate Marion.
DELEGATE MARION: Mr. Chairman,
the extremely important job of being a
commissioner will be a political patronage
job only if we treat it as much. Under the
present situation they are so treated and
as Senator James has so aptly pointed out,
it is wrong, and it needs to be reformed.
Under the situation that prevails in the
United States District Court, where dis-
trict court judges appoint United States
commissioners, it is not so treated and
therefore is not a political patronage job.
It has been said here before that the
life of the law is not logic, but experience.
The experience in this regard, I submit, is
a sorry one. Under the present situation
which is essentially what the minority pro-
poses we continue, we have, according to
the figures submitted by the Institute for
Judicial Administration, which reviewed
our state court system, at least 328 com-
mitting magistrates in the State of Mary-
land, excluding Allegany County, for which
no figures were available. Of that 328, 200
are in Baltimore County alone. To show
you that there is no need for this kind of
thing, only 25 are said to exercise the func-
tion of their office. The other 175 are what
that report describes as "honorary."
I submit we need to change this system
and urge defeat of this amendment.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any delegate
desire to speak in favor of the amendment?
Delegate Siewierski.
DELEGATE SIEWIERSKI: Mr. Chair-
man, I would like to suggest to the mem-
bers of the Committee of the Whole what
the duties of a commissioner are probably
will be set out specifically in the constitu-
tion, or they will be assigned specific
duties by the court. Hence, they are so-
called "assistant judges" or "assistants to
the district court judge." They are a sepa-
rate officer, perhaps a constitutional officer,
as recommended by the majority, and also
by the minority.
I therefore feel that their selection, be it
appointment, election or however you wish
to do, should be considered in the same light
as the selection of a judge. Here we are
having two separate offices. I do not be-
lieve there is any direct connection of au-
thority or responsibility between the com-
|
missioner and the judge himself. There is
a responsibility perhaps, between the com-
missioner and the judicial system, but not
directly between the commissioner and the
judge.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any delegate
desire to speak in opposition?
Delegate Hopkins.
DELEGATE HOPKINS: Mr. Chairman,
I am becoming quite alarmed by some of
the expressions by some delegates that
should the judges be selecting the commis-
sioner, they would become dispensers of
patronage in a not very flattering sense.
I have respect for the present bench and
all future judges, and I submit that in se-
lecting these people to work with them and
help carry out the duties of their office
that they will do this with great care, and
I do not think we should be assuming that
they are going to participate in some kind
of a greenback operation.
This reminds me a little of the problems
we had in the Committee on the Legisla-
tive Branch. We did our best to figure out
a way to assure the election of the most
able legislators possible, and after that
and actually following it, we did not want
to hamstring them, but wanted things to
be as flexible as possible, so they could
carry out the responsibilities with which
they would be charged.
I feel the same thing applies here. A
little later on we will talk about the best
way to get the most able judges and having
once secured them, I do not think we want
to hamstring them. I would think we
should let them have as much flexibility as
possible in carrying out their very heavy
responsibilities, and this would include se-
lecting the personnel to work in their offices.
Therefore, I urge you to vote against
the amendment.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any other dele-
gate desire to speak in favor of the amend-
ment?
Delegate Mitchell?
DELEGATE MITCHELL: Mr. Presi-
dent, I speak in favor of the amendment.
There are other ways to improve the quality
of those who serve our courts than by the
political patronage, either of political offi-
cials or judges. All of us know the quality
of the judiciary needs to be improved
otherwise we would not have the article
that we have before this Constitutional
Convention.
|
