Montgomery County sentinel. [volume] (Rockville, Md.) 1855-1974, 1902-05-02
ANTI-sALOON LEAGUE.

dered to be published:
The Anti-Saloon League of this county
having taken an active interest In maintain
ing the integrity of the law, and having
been the prime mover in bringing forth the
amendment for Strengthening it, and being
acquainted with much of the inside facts con-
nected with the progress of the legislation,
and also believing IL due in justice TO itset
as we'll as to others, desires to lay before the
people of this county the salient facts con-
nected with the failure to secure the passage
of the amendment at the last session OF the
Legislature.
The Anti Saloon League has nothing to
conceal or to apologize for so lar as Its
actions are concerned In these matters The
gentlemen who were elected TO the Legisla'
ture we're there to serve the people and their
actions are subject to criticism without any
right on their part to complain, provided
the criticism is fair and just When man
takes public Office he is answerable to the
people whom be represents. Ii he makes
mistakes but is willing to square himself, an
indulgent people will always rally again to
such man. But if he is wilful and defiant
in his errors, an indignant people will be
apt to refuse their suffrages to him II he
should seek them again.
Without malice, but in the interests oil
purer politics, we make the following state
ments:
Before the election, Mr.. John P. Sellman
told the League, through one OF its officers,
that he was in favor OF the proposed amend
mend to the local option law imposing an
Imprisonment penalty and would introduce
such measure and endeavor to secure its
passage through the House. Mr.. Sellman
not only failed to keep this promise, but
offered for passage bill radically opposed
TO it. 1t is true, he afterwards did offer the
Imprisonment bill, but under such circum-
stances as did not mitigate in the least the
violation OF his original promise. Under
the force of considerable pressure from the
many citizens of the county the members oil
the House and Senate agreed finally, sew
eral days before the close Of the session, TO
see that the amendment passed. Notwlth-
standing this unanimous agreement among
themselves, Mr.. Sellman, as explained IN
the appended article, secured possession Oh
the bill IRON the engrossng clerk, secreted
it, and the bill has not been seen from that
day.
1t is fair and proper it seems 10 US to say
that while Mr.. Johnston has never promised
to favor the amendment he acted 80 lar as
we could see in good faith with all the citf
Gems and seemed To endeavor to do his duty
as legislator in the matter. While not ex-
pressing himself as friendly TO the measure,
he stood ready to see that it got lair play.
We had depended on Mr.. Robertson Tor
much aid and comfort and believe he stood
ready so far as his experience and influence
could go TO give the will OF the citizens, as
expressed in the petitions, the right OF way
and would have endeavored To the last To
do his duty had he not been interiered with
by the mysterious disappearance oil the Dill.
So far as Mr.. Benson's aid or opposition
are concerned il is hardly worth while TO
speak Of
1t will be seen in the recital of the fore
going facts that the bill never reached the
Senate, and judging from all the circum
stances attendant on the case, II WAS never
intended that It should get there. II It had
been brought TO a vote ln the House We have
reason to believe 1t would have passed tina
body This would have sent 1t over to the
Senate. But II did not reach that stage be-
cause the bill was taken from the engrosslng
clerk and put out OF the way, and has never
been seen since.
The only known iriendliness OF Senator
Jones for the measure was his agreement
with the House delegates In conference that
the amendment be reported iavorably. Az
all other times, while openly avowlng his
friendship for the local option law, In con-
versation with the trends of the amend
ment he questioned the propriety OF It's pas
sage and invariably gave the impression
that he was opposed to 1t.
Fully twelve hundred bona fide citizen
voters signed the petitions for the passage
of the amendment These were not mere
pertunctory signatures. Every name was a
true name and meant just what 1t said. We
believe all these citizens were disappointed
that their request was 80 unceremonious!y
treated. They will probably not easily for
get it..
We are confident that If weather condi
tiOns had be n more favorable during Feb
ruary double the number of names TO the
petitions could have been secured. The
failure TO get the amendment this session
keeps this issue alive until the next session
The passage OF the amendment would have
laid the question aside as an Issue at the
elections. This we regret, but the members
of the Senate and House have only them
selves 10 charge with this. The Anti Saloon
League has no desire TO thrust issues into
the elections There are two things that
would induce them TO avoid 1t, viz: Enforce
the present law rigidly, and strengthen II 30
that the eniorcem ent of II Will make II
eHectual.
The following is tue appended article from
the Maryland SearchItg'H
OF the temperance bills that Jailed, none
perhaps is more 10 be regretted than the
Montgomery bill adding an imprisonment
penalty Tor offences against the local option
law, committed subsequent 10 first convic
ton. There was no reason for this failure
except the unwillingness OF Senator Jones
TO agree 10 its passage and the failure OF the
county delegation 10 unite on policy that
would insure It's success. BY combination
of circumstances, the bill was finally intro
duced by Mr.. Sellman, but not until after he
had introduced re submission bill by re
Quest. Later the re submissionisLs, part
OF whom were evidently anxious to empha
SIZE factional party opposition toward a
part OF the county delegation agreed to favor
the proposed amendment II they could not
get re.submission. Following which u con-
ference of the Senator and Delegates was
had. at which we understand II was agreed
that the bill to strengthen the law should be
reported lavorably with an amendment ma
| king the penalty Tor conviction subsequent
10 a first offence imprisonment without
| fine.
|
ing in the House, when after a protest had
been made by Mr. Almoney, Reading Clerk
in the Senate IRON Rockville, against the
progress the bill was making, Mr. Sellman
presented an order To have the bill recon-
mitted to the delegation, and although Mr.
Robertson a little later moved successfully
reconsideration OF that vote, the effect o
which was TO allow the bill 10 remain ou
the files, Mr.. Selman on the strength OF his
order, made undue haste To get possession o.
the bill, which thereafter remained 10 his
possession. This action OF Mr.. Sellman wat
nexcusable, as the ordinary course would
have been to allow the bill TO go 10 the chair
man, Mr.. johnson, even II Mr.. Robertson'i
motion to reconsider the action had not beer
carried. In this Mr.. Sellman sorely dsap
pointed his friends, and absolutely ignored
1900 Of the best voters In the county who
had pettioned for the bill. His record was
a sorry one.
At all times Senator Jones sought 70 ex
cuse himself from supporting the measure
although the House Delegates certainly IN
derstood him at the conference held TO agre'
IN TIA massage. Mr. Benson sought 10 re