|
1
|
not correct, but I won't take the time now to do it. If
|
|
2
|
you want the to, I will be glad to bring you my views about
|
|
3
|
that, and you can do with it whatever you please.
|
|
4
|
THE CHAIRMAN: We would appreciate having them.
|
|
5
|
|
|
6
|
go into that. There shouldn't be any difference between
|
|
7
|
nisi prias and Court of Appeals. If they don't have one,
|
|
8
|
they shouldn't have the other. If they have on? , they
|
|
9
|
should have both.
|
|
10
|
MR. MARTINEAU: You: recommendation would be
|
|
11
|
we have both?
|
|
12
|
JUDGE WARNKEN: By all means, as you have it
|
|
13
|
here.
|
|
14
|
THE CHAIRMAN: The next section has to do with
|
|
15
|
the removal of judges. It is very general language, per-
|
|
16
|
mitting the chief justice to either retire or remove a judg
|
|
17
|
for cause. I think there are certain phrases in this
|
|
18
|
section that we will perhaps want to omit or tighten up a
|
|
19
|
little bit, but the general idea is that the removal
|
|
20
|
power will be in the Supreme Court of Appeals.
|
|
21
|
JUDGE PROCTOR: Isn't this the same thing the
|
