Evening capital and Maryland gazette. (Annapolis, Md.) 1910-1922, 1921-09-21

- sJtNRs AAN WI
To the Editor Of the Evening Capital:
Engineer Hayman may have better
reasons than we know for distressing
the safety OF his own plans and speci-
tications for the proposed bridge over
South River at Riyeryiew. These
plans have been drawn up four years
and were the ones furnished 10 the
contractors who responded TO the
original advertisements. The repudi-
alton of the plans al this inopportune
moment by the man who made them
is difficult to explain, except as a pur-
posely designed obstacle, now that
lower prices are making the PROPOSE
tion attractive to contractors.
This is the sort of opposition the
bridge has had from the beginning. Ii
has not been based on the wishes of
the people. for there has never been
any open and public opposition to the
substitution of a bridge for the pres
ent inadequate ferry. And certainly
there has been no public advocacy of
any kind for the removal of the ferry
without the substitution of a bridge
without the substitution 70 a bridge.
Yet bill to abolish the ferry, and at
The same time TO kill the authorization
for a bond issue for bridge, was
passed by both houses at the eleventh
hour of the last session. The people
who would thus have been deprived of
their ferry and right of way without
warning or justification were obliged
to make hurried protest before it
was signed by the Governor. The lat
ter called conference to determine
public sentiment and TO find out who
was backing the bill.
The only advocate who appeared
was Commissioned Barber. All the
rest were protesting. In the face of
such numbers Mr.. Barber could do
nothing else but join the majority,
and the Governor vetoed the bill
This was the first time Mr. Barber
had appeared openly in opposition 10
he people he is supposed TO repre-
sent as Commissioner On this bridge
and ferry question he had hitherto
exerted all his influence privately
One is led to infer that this latest
obstacle in the form of Mr.. Hayman's
sudden and belated expansion of con-
science has some connection with the
sorp,cr Snhtia and o,,fafr hr;de,o taot;oo
MIR. Barber is againIa candidate for
Commissioner. Does he represent his
constituents or merely himself?
This matter will be decided at the
next meeting of the Board of County
Commissioners. Tuesday delega-
tion appeared before the Board and
requested that the bridge proposition
should be again advertised at once as,
at least one contractor was convinced
it could be built within the amount
allowed. namely, $4,000.
This request should secure nothing
but immediate compliance on the part
sary. legislation has been already Sc
cured and they can have no interest
in blocking it except personal mo-
lives. They voted to lay it over I'M
til the next meeting while the matter
OF changing the plans is considered.
Can anyone doubt that these tactics
are the same that influenced the pol
iticians responsible for the failure of
the bridge plans in the past and the
effort to remove the
Jerry and make void the authority
for a bond issue.
Assuredly. if the Commissioners do
not act favorably at the next meeting
and advertise at once the original
plans, the matter will certainly call
for thorough investigation as to
what motives are blocking the will of
the people.
(Signed)-
CHARLES ]. WILSON.