|
Let me say first that a superior court
in each county came about, not because of
the need of the judiciary, but for other
reasons, and was continued in the present
document because that is the system we
now have. We do not have a district court
system, and therefore the Committee
started out afresh attempting to bring to
this State the best possible system that it
could have.
I can say to you from personal experi-
ence that there are courts in this State
under the one judge to one county rule
which are not working full time. This is
just as true as it can be, and therefore the
analogy fails.
Secondly, it is suggested that justice will
not be brought to the people, and Delegate
Grant quite properly made an analogy of
a person having to go 90 miles back to
Cumberland for trial.
THE CHAIRMAN: You have one-half
minute, Delegate Case.
DELEGATE CASE: But this person was
not a resident of Garrett County, but one
travelling through. Justice will be brought
to the people when these judges go to them,
and bring them justice, and now one final
thought. What we are trying to do here is
to make a court of dignity, one that we
can all be proud of, one that we can all
look up to. This is the need in the lower
courts, the courts of limited jurisdiction.
The Malkus amendment I submit will
place them once again on the same basis as
the justice of the peace. We will fail in
our mission.
I ask that the vote to reconsider be
adopted.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any other dele-
gate desire to speak in opposition to the
vote to reconsider this? Delegate Key?
DELEGATE KEY: Again, Mr. Chair-
man, I do not really know. I want to ask
Delegate Malkus a question.
THE CHAIRMAN: Let me see if some-
one desires — well, he is in opposition. Dele-
gate Malkus, do you yield to a question?
DELEGATE MALKUS: Very happily,
Mr. President.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Key.
DELEGATE KEY: Delegate Malkus,
you have caused me some concern with
your statements. We are here supposedly
setting up a state system of courts, which
|
means that judges will rotate, or be used
in areas according to caseload.
Now you are telling me that a judge in
Wicomico County cannot give a fair judg-
ment to a wife-husband beating in Dor-
chester, when it is my understanding that
a judge from Dorchester can come to Balti-
more City and give an adequate, just judg-
ment to a murder or a rape case. Is that
what you are telling me?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Malkus.
DELEGATE MALKUS: Let me say this
to you: I was saying that if it is im-
portant enough to have a superior court
judge, which is the court higher than the
Almighty, who come in very little contact
with the people, if it is important enough
to have such a judge in every county, it is
important enough to have a judge in every
county that becomes involved with ths real,
personal subject matter of each and every
person in that court.
THE CHAIRMAN: Do you have a fur-
ther question, Delegate Key?
DELEGATE KEY: Yes.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask Dele-
gate Mudd a question, please.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Mudd, do
you yisld to a question?
DELEGATE MUDD: Yes.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Key.
DELEGATE KEY: Delegate Mudd, does
this recommendation as your Committee
has outlined it leave to the legislature or
the appeals judge, for that matter, the
opportunity to assign the superior court
judge that is resident in the county to try
district court cases, perhaps?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Mudd.
DELEGATE MUDD: Yes.
DELEGATE KEY: Thank you.
THE CHAIRMAN : Does any other dele-
gate desire to speak in favor of the motion
to reconsider?
Delegate Marion.
DELEGATE MARION: Mr. Chairman,
I do not think I can appeal to the emotion
of this body. I hope I might appeal to your
reason.
I support the motion to reconsider and
hope that when it is reconsidered that we
will vote down Amendment 18.
|
