Montgomery County sentinel. [volume] (Rockville, Md.) 1855-1974, 1909-07-23
Letter of John II. Bogley, Ex-Cofn-
missioner, to the Voters of
Montgomery County.

Inasmuch as Mr.. Lee has seen fit to drag
the names of Mr.. Charles G. Griffith and
myself into his letter published in last
weeks papers. l take this opportunity Of
correcting all differences therein contained
and setting out my views upon the issues
in the present senatorial contest.
In the first place, by inference, he would
have the voters believe that Mr.. Griffith
and |, when we were your Commissioners
opposed the system of County Treasury.
He knows that is not correct. ] never OPP
posed the County Treasury system, and in
fact always said that we should have a
County Treasurer, but did always and now
contend that the County Treasurer should
be elected by the voters. l believe the
voters should say who they want to repre-
sent them in the handling of the county
funds. Under the present system. where
the Treasurer is appointed by the Board OF
County Commissioners the Treasurer is
not the choice of the people. but is the
choice of the few who control the majority
of the Board of Commissioners. Therefore
we get for our Treasurer whoever the pet
of those few might be, whether or not he
happens to be competent and suitable.
Mr.. LEES REASON FOR OPPOSING THE ELEc-
TON OF Our TREASURER.
| Four years ago one of the most promi-
nent Democrats in the county, and at the
same time one of Mr.. Lees staunch sup
porters, suggested to Mr. Griffith that the
Commissioners see Mr.. Lee and arrange to
have the taxes collected at half cost until
the next election, so that the Treasurer
could be elected by the people. Carrying
out this suggestion, Mr.. Griffith and did
see Mr.. Lee at his office in Washington
a,,A ~ odO OIo Hic
reply, in substance, was that it would not
do to have the Treasurer elected by the
voters. because the people of the county
were not competent to select the proper
person.
The OFFICE OF COUNTY TREASURER AND THE
OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE COUNTY CoMMIs-
SIoNERS SHOULD BE SEPARATE.
Not only do contend that the voters
should elect their own Treasurer, but by
all means the office of County Treasurer
and the office of Clerk to the Board of
County Commissioners should be separate.
so that one Office would be complete
! check upon the other. Under the present
system there is not proper check. Mr..
Lee attempts to explain that the auditing
| system we now have and the examination
of the bonding company is good and
adequate check Without the slightest re-
Election on the Auditor. from my personal
knowledge of affairs in the Board of Com
missioners, know that the present system
i of auditing the affairs of the Treasurer s
office is insufficient and incomplete, and it
is absurd to say that the bonding company,
the very people who would have to make
good any leakage, would use their talents
! in finding leakages. 1t is equally as absurd
to say that the county is protected because
the Treasurer and his assistants are bonded,
for the reason that we all know the bonding
companies are not making good any losses
until we first detect those losses. We all
know bonding companies are not going
around finding shortages in order to make
them good. These views | set out without
the slightest reflection upon our present
County Treasurer. but feel it my duty to
call to the attention of the voters the ex-
IRENE loOseness of the system. No bank
/ ing institution or any financial institution
where as much as $175,000. or even much
| less, is handled yearly would tolerate for q
moment such loose system. Should we
not have for our county funds the same
protection and safeguards that business
men require in banking or any other busi-
ness affairs? We should have and we will
get il If we nominate Mr.. NewcOmb for
the Senate That is the only way we can
get it.
! Mr.. Lee states positively in his open
letter that he intends to continue the pres
ent system, while Mr.. NewcOmb states posi-
lively in his letter that he will separate
the office of County Treasurer from the
Office of Clerk to the County Commissioner
and have the County Treasurer elected by
the people.
Mr.. LEES FURTHER REASON FOR OPPOSING TIL
ELECTION OF COUNTY TREASURER AND THE
SEPARATION OF THE Two OFFICES.
Mr.. Lee in his letter endeavors to have
the voters believe that he stands for thu
present system of the Treasurer being ap
pointed by the Board of Commissioner
and continuing to have the Treasurer ant
the Clerk to the County Commissioners the
same person OH the ground that II results
in large saving to the county. How car
he correctly contend that electing the
Treasurer would add any additional cost
OF course it does not as you will see be-
low. His reason is political one. He
wants to dictate who shall be the Treas
urer also he would give us the impression
that the present cost of the County Treas
urer's office is only $1,000 year ID
course he must know that is not correct
He also wants us to believe that to sepa-
|
the office of Clerk to the County Commits
sioDers would cost great deal more thar
the present system That is not fact
The fact is as shown below by actual fig.
ures. The cost of the present system OF
County Treasurer is as follows:
Salary of the Treasurer. $4,000 0C
Salary of two men assistants. 1900 0C
Salary Of one lady ASSISTANT. 800 0l
Cost of the Treasurer's bOnd...... 100 OC
Cost of the two men assistants
bonds .......,..."................. 6z ou
Sundries, including postage. sta
tionery. horse and buggy hire.
about '......................,......... 500 OC
Total ........................... $5.262 So
Cost of the system with the Treasurer
office and the office of Clerk to the County
Commissioners separated:
Salary of the Treasurer. ........,. $4,000 0O
| Salary of one assistant (Which
is all that is needed when the
offices are separately ........... 9OO w
Salary of Clerk to the County
Commissioners" l,3UU Uu
Sundries .............................. 500 0l
Cost Of bond for assistant to
Treasurer ...,...."..........."..... 81 ~
(Treasurer should pay his own
bOnd.) --
| Total. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. |,fjl 11
It is not difficult therefore. to see that
Mr.. Lees real reason for opposing the cleo
ton Of the Treasurer and the separation OF
the Office of County Treasurer and the office
of Clerk to the County Commissioners Is
based upon political reasons and not upon
economy. We can elect our Treasurer and
separate the Offices without any greater
cost whatever, and in fact at smaller ex-
pense.
The leading reasons for my voting against
( Mr.. Lee are as follows:
Firstly. Because Mr.. Lee opposes the cleo
ton of the County Treasurer and the sepa-
ration of the Offices of County Treasurer