|
DELEGATE MUDD : Yes.
DELEGATE RYBCZYNSKI: It occurs
to me in some of this material there was
some qualification put on that. Is the Mis-
souri Plan used in the entire state of
Missouri?
DELEGATE MUDD: No, only with re-
spect to some courts. It has been expanded
over the years. It began, I think, with the
Court of Appeals and has now been ex-
tended to courts in St. Louis and Kansas
City possibly, but it is being expanded as
the legislature there implements it.
THE CHAIRMAN : Delegate Rybczynski.
DELEGATE RYBCZYNSKI: So that
the experience in Missouri is not statewide
after twenty-five years of use. I want to
ask you a question about term of office.
We talked about wanting judges who would
feel secure and would not have to stand for
re-election against live opposition and all
this. Does this not knock your own theory
in the head in reducing the term from fif-
teen years to ten years?
DELEGATE MUDD: Not in the judg-
ment of the Committee in view of the in-
formation available to us. The fifteen-year
term in Maryland is one of the longest
terms allowed for judges in any state and
with the non-competitive election and our
recommendation with respect to removal
and retirement, all that was more con-
sistent with the ten-year term and running
against the record of ten years.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Rybczynski.
DELEGATE RYBCZYNSKI: Mr. Chair-
man, with reference to the lay members of
the nominating committee, I can greatly
appreciate the facility with which lay mem-
bers would know the various members of
the Bar Association in your county, for in-
stance, or Mr. Grant's. But how could a lay
member possibly know the 2,500 different
lawyers of Baltimore City and their quali-
fications for the office?
DELEGATE MUDD: The answer is that
I doubt if there is any lay person in Bal-
timore City who would know intimately all
2,500 lawyers of that city, if you have that
many. But I would assume that there are
laymen there who are knowledgeable in the
business affairs of the city and by hearsay
at least would have a rather generous
knowledge of a great number of lawyers.
THE CHAIRMAN: Are there any fur-
ther questions? Delegate Weidemeyer.
|
DELEGATE WEIDEMEYER: Mr.
Chairman, did the Committee give consid-
eration to the fact that both the Chairman
and I have enjoyed many happy and suc-
cessful years of practice under the present
system of judicial appointments?
DELEGATE MUDD: Did I give con-
sideration to that?
DELEGATE WEIDEMEYER: Did the
Committee give consideration to the fact
that both you and I have enjoyed many
happy and successful years of practice un-
der the present system of judicial appoint-
ments and elections?
DELEGATE MUDD: I forgot to remind
them you did, but it was obvious from my
position as Chairman I was not enjoying
it so they could not reach that conclusion.
THE CHAIRMAN: Are there any fur-
ther questions, Delegate Grant?
DELEGATE GRANT: Delegate Mudd,
you were asked a question regarding the
power of the judiciary over the governor.
Was it not true that in the transition
period from 1864 to the 1867 Constitution
was a case arose relative to appointment
of a judge in which governor Swan refused
to appoint a judge and the court issued a
mandamus and directed him to do so. The
court ruled that Marbury v. Madison was
not applicable to Maryland on the governor.
DELEGATE MUDD: You are thought-
ful and kind. I received your note. You are
entirely correct.
THE CHAIRMAN: Are there any fur-
ther questions? If not the Chair calls on
Delegate Johnson, spokesman for the mi-
nority, to present the minority report with
respect to this portion of the committee
recommendation. Delegate Johnson, please
come forward to the reading desk.
DELEGATE JOHNSON: Mr. Chair-
man, fellow delegates, I might be somewhat
more detailed in my presentation hopefully
to clear up questions in advance.
Let me say at the outset that all note
matters under consideration pertaining to
the judicial article must be divided to in-
sure some semblance of order and under-
standing. The members of the Judicial
Branch Committee majority and minority
alike have a responsibility to remind the
Committee of the Whole to consider each
and every section as an indivisible part of
the entire article and emphasize those areas
where a break with a proven and workable
system occurs. I say this partly because I
feel the action of the Committee of the
|
