The Cecil Whig. [volume] (Elkton, Md.) 1841-current, 1910-10-01

~ ii decision OF the court in the
case of McKelvey VS.. The
County Commissioners, as re-
ported on another page, s OF moment
Gus significance to the people of this
county. Carried to its logical conclu-
sion it seems to leave them without
means of redress Tor damages TO per-
son or property i'll any matter con-
nected with the building or the use OF
the public roads. Before questioning
this statement, let us consider:
In delivering the opinion OF the
Court, Chief Judge Pearce rested that
opinion on the broad ground that the
Act OF 1904 (Ghe Shoemaker AcD had
Invested the Commissioners OF their
duties and responsibilities and there
fore OF their liability. That is to say,
as the State and county are neither OF
them. according to this Act, liable, the
people are left up i'll the air, living
under a condition where no local gov
eminent can be held to account for
what may happen in connection with
the building OF these roads. This
would seem to be bad enough as
specimen OF what Mr.. Marbury called
Outrageous legislation" But even
this is not half SO serious and menac-
ing as the results which further follow
from the principle upon which the
Courts decision is rested. Let us see,
The new road law ior Cecil county,
the one OF 1910, strips the County
Commissioners OF the last vestige OF
control over the roads and bridges,
and vests that control absolutely in a
Road Engineer, appointed by the Gov
ernor. ii the Commissioners are di-
vested OF all control OF the roads and
bridges, freed from all responsibility
for their care and condition, it follows
from the Courts opinion that they are
exempted OF all liability. That is to
say, whatever damage may result to
the people OF this county. in person
or property, in connection with the use
of its roads and bridges or with the
building or repairs thereof there is
no local responsible government to
which appeal can be made for redress.
Referring to the condition created
by the Shoemaker Act, Judge Pearce
recognized the injustice which might
result from such a situation, and sug-
gested that remedy might be sought
by resort to the Legislature or to
an injunction. The latter remedy
would OF course be. only serviceable in
the case OF projected road and only
for very limited situations. 1t could
avail nothing for one whose person
or property was already damaged by
neglected bridge or dangerous road
or any such thing. And this is what
we face as the significant and very ser
ious import of the decision when we
come to apply it to the county situa-
ton under the Act of 1908 and that OF
1910 If our only remedy for this
situation is a resort to the Legislature
then to the Legislature let us go
But let us go there in the shape OIL
the election OF men who are pledged
to lift from this county the CALLING
yoke OF Outrageous legislation which
the important measures of Governor
Crothers have imposed upon it. We
are discovering what are those I'm
portant measures" which he was Sc
anxious to put through at Annapolis
and we are already getting bittel
taste of the chaos to which they ar,
reducing Our county government. Ever
Marbury, sent here to defend in thu
suit of the Commissioners, did no
hesitate to denounce the situation. TIL,
people OF Cecil county were calle'