Catoctin clarion., 1914-03-05
THURSDAY, MARCH 5, 1914.

Very Much Like Banquo's Ghost
Is LeGOre's Bridge.
Bill Now Before Legislature.
1t has not been very long ago since
the Bridge question above referred to
was quite bit discussed by the peo-
pie of the county (n 1900 and for
some time thereafter, but for the past
five or six years nothing much has
been heard of it.
1t has not been dead by any means.
That it is very much alive will be seen
from a pamphlet of 40 pages extcn-
sively circulated in the county by MIR
IeGore within the past ninety days,
its title bearing the words "A few
facts concerning the LcGore Roads
and Bridge with an opinion by Hon.
Isaac Lobe Straus, former Attorney
General of Maryland, of the Act of
the Legislature under which they
were built" 1t is mighty interesting
reading and serves as an index of
what Mr.. LeGore is doing to accom-
plish his purpose of selling his ''hold-
ings" (bridge and roads, to the coun,
ty. 1t cost some money to get that
opinion and it cost lot more to have
this 40 page pamphlet published and
circulated.
Mr.. LeGore is progressive citizen,
and doubtless in many ways liberal
man, but his intention is that the tax
payers will eventually pay for his
roads and bridge, plus the cost of this
elaborate opinion and its distribution.
1t is not our purpose at this time
to publish the contents of this pam
phlet, but simply to call our readers
attention to it in casual way. Later
on we may have something more to
say about it and may give its contents
in full.
tits preposterous proposition that
any one private citizen could be per-
I mitted to do what Mr.. LeGore has
done and then by one way or another
attempt to compel the county to take
over his private enterprise. If this
were done, then any other progressive
citizen like Mr.. LeGore could do like
wise, and the taxpayers would be
called upon to foot the bill.
Mr.. LeGore has his paid attorneys
working on this project, and we as
sumo that the preface in the pam
phlet is their statement, though no
name is signed TO it for it ends thus
1--WE solicit your good will and in
huence in procuring for Mr.. LeGore
an equitable and honorable adjust
ment."
Mr.. Straus in his opinion says that
the Act of the Legislature which Mr..
LeGore was instrumental in having
passed is mandatory upon the County
Commissioners and that they can be
compelled to take over the bridge.
If this were true it is our opinion
that Mr.. LeGore would have asked
the Courts some time ago to compel
the Commissioners to act. However,
without discussing the matter further
at this time, it is our opinion that
public sentiment should not be man
ufactured as is now being attempted.
If this bridge is so important the
citizens who want it ought to come
to the Commissioners and not Mr..
LeGore. 1t will then be time enough
for those opposed to shed some light
on the subject of its worth and its
usefulness to the citizens of the
county.
As we have pointed out before that
Mr.. LeGore is very persistent fight
er, is evidenced by the fact that he
has had prepared and placed in the
hands of Delegate Nelson, bill which
has for its purpose a scheme whereby
Mr.. LeGore proposes to have his
bridge "arbitrated" over to the tax
payers Of the county.
1t is an ingenious scheme Of expert
engineers who will decide the cost of
the bridge and then the taxpayers are
to do the rest-pay t he bill. Mr..
IeGore is to appoint two, the County
Commissioners to appoint two and
these four to select the fifth and their
decision as to cost and worth is to be
what the Commissioners must pay,
or rather what the taxpayers must
pay for this piece of public spirited
improvement on the part Of Mr..