Evening capital and Maryland gazette. (Annapolis, Md.) 1910-1922, 1918-03-26
STATEMENT OF
THE FIVE MAJORITY.
Democratic Members Of City
Council Present Their Side
Of Water Company
Matter.
BREACH OF FAITH.
Say The Three Minority Mem
bers Took Part In Caucus
And Should Abide BY 1t.
Latter Forced Bill.
To the Editor of The
Evening Capital

| To the Editor of The
Evening Capital
In connection with the Annapolis
| Water Company matter, the real facts
| have not yet been presented in the
columns of your paper, and, in order
| that the public may be informed of
| these facts, we ask you to publish the
following statement and give it the
! same prominence as your other publi-
/ cations on this subject
These facts are:
a. On March s. 1918. all of the
eight Democratic members of the City
Council met at the Council Chamber
and then and there actively partici-
pated in a caucus for the Democratic
nomination for President of the An
napolis Water Company. Before the
caucus began the point was raised as
to whether or not a caucus should be
held as ii was claimed that the meet
ing was called as a special Council
meeting. The Mayor announced in
effect, that if any member or members
did not care to participate in a eau
Gus they had the privilege of with
II.
present decided to remain and to go
ahead with the caucus. This they
actually did, and nominations were
made. The undersigned, being five of
the Democratic members, voted for
Mr. George T. Melvin, and the other
three Democratic members (Aldermen
Beavin, Levy and Parkinson voted
for Mr.. W. Meade Holladay In ac-
cordance with an unbrOken and un-
questioned custom, and in all honor
able dealing, it was understood with
out question that the nominee of this
caucus should and would receive the
votes of all the Democratic members
when the election came up at the reg
ular meeting of the City Council
However, when the Council did meet,
these three Democratic members re-
pudiated their obligations and refused,
and have still persistently refused, to
abide by the caucus in which they
took part and by which they were, of
course, bound. Right here is where
the whole of the present agitation is
caused. If these three Democratic
members had kept faith in this mat
ter, the election would have been
rightly and finally settled at the reg
ular meeting of the Council on March
II, 1918, and none of this present con-
troversy would have resulted.
(2) The three minority Demo-
tic members of the Council professed
TO fear some legislation that would
force a filtration plant against the
wishes of the City Council. This was
the only point that was ever men
toned concerning legislation What
the Mayor stated was that he could
assure the Council that no such legis-
lation would come to pass. This as
surance was repeated and re-affirmed
time and again, and it has been ad-
hered to and kept in absolute good
faith.
(3) The third fact is that the leg
islatiOn that has been introduced was
forced and brought about solely
through the action of the three Demo-
cratic minority members of the City
Council. They were in honor bound
to support their caucus nominee, and
for two weeks were given repeated op-
portunities to make the election in the
usual and regular course of business.
AS they had failed to make the cleo
tion at the regular meeting on March
18th, they had another opportunity on
March 18th. We can say with perfect
assurance that no legislation of any
kind was then thought of (and never
at any time legislation to force filtra-
tion) There was still another op-
portunity given for the Council to
make this election and for the three
Democratic minority members to keep
their obligations, namely, on Wednes-
! day evening, March 20th. However,
they still persisted in blocking the
proper administration of public af-
fairs. Then it was that the choice
had to be made between submitting to
this unwarranted course of action or
obtaining. some relief through proper
| legislation. not only for the present
emergency but for the future as we'll
Even then, before bill-was introduc-
ed. one of the three Democratic
minority members was given a final
| opportunity to adjust this situation by
keeping faith with the majority mem
bers. If that had been done we can
safely say that no legislation would
| have resulted. The choice presented
! to them was to abide by the caucus or
to have this legislation. They decided
on the latter course, and, therefore, if
the present situation is not satisfac-
| tory TO them, they have themselves
only to blame. AS a matter of fact.
the bill itself places the control of
the Water Company more directly
and firmly in the hands of the City
Council than it has ever been before.
| 1t puts on the Water Board of five
three members of the City Council.
AS to a filtration plant. the bill ex-
pressly states that none can be in
stalled without the express approval