Montgomery County sentinel. [volume] (Rockville, Md.) 1855-1974, 1902-03-14
Letter from Mr.. Johnston.
ANNAPOLIS, ma, March II, 19O9

| AuuapOlls, mu't mdICu II, l0Oo
Editor Sentinel, Rockville, Md
My Dear Sir: have read an editoria
printed In your paper of date of the 7th o.
March, 1909, entitled Treasurer Unneces
sary." A newspaper Is supposed to repre-
sent 10 Its columns, and especially the edi
torial column, the views Of the community
Now do not know whether your editorial
is intended to reflect the views of the commu
nifty or simply your own personal views upon
the question OF Treasurer. 1t certainly
does not represent the views of the taxpay.
ers OF Montgomery county, as expressed to
me and conveyed to me.
| think that your article, however, was a
little premature, because you undertook to
discuss the advantages and disadvantages OF
measure you had never seen.
| 10 answer to your article enclose to you
a copy of the bill which was reported by
me TO the House as chairman of the delega.
ton "Favorably," all the members assent,
Ing to same, and to meet your supposed OBJ
Jections TO this bill as il was amended last
week would say that the cost Of the pres
ent system of collector costs the county over
$1,000 annually, while my bill provides for
County Treasurer at a salary OF 1880,
| (which is more than the salary OF the Treas,
urer of Frederick county, who handles as
much II not more than the Treasurer of
Montgomery county would handle in a
year, and one clerk at a salary Of $720 per
annum. Under the changed conditions the
County Commissioners would not require
more than one clerk, and they now have
two, 80 this clerk would simply replace the
assistant clerk to the County Commission.
ers and be no additional expense to the
county.
And the saving TO the taxpayers of Mont
gomery county would not be few hundred
dollars, as you express 1t in your article, but
the difference between 81 800 and $1,000 or
over IS 900 annually, which could be used
to good effect upon the roads of the county
If 1t should be desired.
Now as regards the assessment Of new
property which you seem to think would be
affected by the removal Of the Collectors,
would inform you that my bill provides that
the County Commissioners shall assess all
new and unassessed property in their sew.
eral districts. The County Commissioners
are required to go over the roads in their
several districts, and who are better qualified
TO find improved property 10 their several
districts than theyp
You further say that it would be incon.
venent for the tax payers to go TO Rockville
to pay their taxes, &c. My bill especially
provides for that contingency by requiring
the County Treasurer 10 sit two days in the
month Of September at the principal town
or point In each collection district; one day
during the month OF October at each OF said
places and one day during the month of
November at each of said places for the
very purpose of receipting for taxes, giving
notice of the time of his arrival at each OF
the several places prior TO said dates, and in
addition to this he is required to keep an
office at Rockville, where either he or his
clerk will at all time be for the purpose OF
receipting for taxes, said Office TO be kept
open each secular day from 8 A. M. to 8 +.
M, excepting Saturdays, when it shall be
open from o A. NJ. TO Z. NJ.
My bill embodies, submit, all the ad-
vantages of the present system with saving
oil 5000 annually TO the taxpayers of the
county, and beg to assure you that while
my bill has none of the objectionable features
alluded 70 in your article, will willingly
withdraw it if the people of Montgomery
county do not want this system and saving
of money 10 the taxpayers,
am, very truly yours,
WALTER A. JOHNSTON.