The aegis & intelligencer. [volume] (Bel Air, Md.) 1864-1923, 1905-08-11
The Baltimore and Ohio Railroads Reply.

BEL AIR, MD, August ., 1905.
To TIE .EGI$:
In the issue of June 3Oth last there appear
cd ed Arial entitled An Imposition On
TaNpayc#' i'll which you noted the fact chat
tLirt Y-Six 3ncn had been sent to the House of
Correction during the preceding two months
convicted in Hartford county of violation the
| law regarding treSpaSScrs on railroad lines,
and then went on to show the great expense
attending such convictions. The article fur
thcr says: 1t Is not our purpose to shield
anyone from proper cenSurc, but, so far as we
can learn. no blame can be placed either
the magistrates who tried the cases the
officers who carried out the mandates of the
| law. there being no evidence 70 indicate any
connvance on their part. But do criti-
else a railroad company that we are credihly
| informed emplnySa special detective to work
up such cases" 1t then goes to allege
| that every such prosecution has been the
| work of the detectives in the employ of the
| baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company, and
| to criticiSc the railroad company for putting
| the county to the expense i'll these cases
| which is there stated to be about one thouS-
| and dollars. The article in question then
| concludes Us follows: There are two ways
| OF rcmedying the trouble Either repeal the
| law allo wing such sentences, or perhaps bet
ter still, raise the assessment OF its 1.-THE rail-
| road) property located i'll this county so as
| to produce Il sufficient revenue to pay for the
| large cost cntailed i'll prosecutions that ought
| never to be made burdens of the landhoders
| of this county,
Noticing this edit oraI and not having pre-
| viOuSlv learned of any such cases. forwarded
| it to Mr.. II. l.. Bond, The Second Nice-PrcS-
| dent and General Attorney OF the Baltimore
and Ohio Railroad Company with the state
| ment that il was my first notice OF these
cases and with the request that the Railroad
| Company take such action in reference there
to as it might deem proper. In reply to that
| letter received the following:
| BALTIMORE, MD, July 81, 1905,
| Subject: Arrests i'll Hartford County.
:. y. WILLIAMS, ESQ. Counsel.
Bel Air Md.
Referring to your letter OF June 3Oth en-
closing newspaper clipping regarding costs to
| the county caused by the arrest of persons
| ;rrSpaSsing on the COmpany's property,
please note attached letter from Supcrinten-
| dent OF Police Ogline. which shows that these
| panys officers and that no arrest has been
made by them since July LIST, 1901.
| Kindly use yonr discretion rs to the best
use TO be made OF this information for tiIc in
| tercst az the company.
Your truly,
II. l.. BOND. JR.
The parts of the letter of the Superintendent
| OF Police referred to 10y MIR. Bond as relating
to the Hartford county arrests are rs follows
BALTIMORE. MD. July ~, 1905.
! MIR. T. FlTZGERAi.D.
General Manager.
| DEAR SIR:
Referring to your let ter 10th inst. and re.
| turning papers relative to arrcsting trcspaSS.
crs. Hartford County. Md. l had this matter
| under investigation prior TO receipt OF your
| papers, as the newspaper article had beer
| brought to my attention.
| From July lst. 1904, to the present date
| we have not mad: an arrest in HartOrC
County, Md
The docket OF Justice w. Crawford Norris
and Walter X. McCu m;fS Hartford county
were looked over. ON the formers docket
we find Sheriff ). y. Whiteford. MAY 9th
90. secured warrants for fuIr parties, June
10th, %, he secured warrant for one part
and John {. Temple, u II mer employee OF uui
Police Service. resigned Dee. 9TH. 1901 sc
cured from the same Justice, same date war
rant for six parties; the latterS docket show:
| AIIN 18TH 'rCtn.Ile nTel "A f,i
four parties. and on May 24th Whiteford Sc
cured warrants for three parties. all of whom
| were charged with riding on cars of Bulti
more and OHIO unauthoIiz d and were sem
to the House Of Correct IN; from Shcrit
| Whitctord'S record we sCcu cd the names o
| twcnt y-niue prisoners who Had been commit
| . - to I've n ousc o. Correc lion between y pri
| Goth, 90, and June 10th, %. all charged t.
| the baltimore aAu Ohio Rnilrc ad.
| The arr usually M ude in lunches
| -, 10, = sc, by Sheriff 5. "a. Whitetord AN,
his deputies, assisted by Joan {. Temple an,
David M; Smart, OF the Maryiani petectiv
Agency, No. 20 y. Eutaw street, Baltimore
: Md, with an understanding between then
| that the costs $4,000 in each case is to y
divided between them.
| When arrests are made by officers 10
MINOR otfenseS, viz. trcSpaSSiug &c. and tn
justice before whom the case is tried, will per
INIT, we handle the case entirely, actin. Il
constable for the Court. taking the pri<opc
or prisoners to Jail OF workhouse. as the cas-
may he, without cost TO the county. our off
GERS not being allowed to col Get costs. hcuc
the saving to the yar.ous counties of conSta
bic and sheriff fees. which latter itcr:- is til
subject of the newspaper criticism and doe
not strike us.
; John {. Temple qualifi,d a constable Han
ford county, December, 1902. said authorit
expiring december, 1904, therefore he has no
, been a constable since latter date.
Company'S Counsel = \. Williams. Bel All
Hariord County, Md, desires :: letter truI
I'd V. Z. and General Attorney Bond, confirm
2 ing our statement that John Z. Temple is no
an employee of this company, won't you kline
ly arrange accordingly as above stated. Ioh
{. Temple resigned from our service Decembe
! 9Th, 1904.