Evening capital and Maryland gazette. (Annapolis, Md.) 1910-1922, 1921-05-12

Riley.
To the Editor Of the Evening Capital:
During the period in whica the mat
ter of the issue of $4,000 worth OF
bonds for the purpose Of constructing
school buildings was being discussed,
| availed myself of your columns to a
very considerable extent. ! was very
strongly opposed to the proposition
and you favored 1t, but with great
fairness and consideration you placed
no limit upon the amount OF space IN
your papers which | was permitted to
consume.
The voters Of the county approved
the issue. and | have had nothing to
saw since. / have not see. anytm' 3
10 discuss: the duty OF :he School
Commissioners TO max: fair eflort
TO sell the bonds was so clear thai
never considered it necessary to COM
ment upon it.
A new phase of the matter is now
present, however. TIE Commissioners
have tried to sell the bonds, and not
an offer was made for them. 1t is also
we'll known that no offer at more than
95 will be made for them upon pure
Iy business basis.
There never was any question In
my mind that the scheme for raising
the money for the schools was UNI
! sound and monstrous. II has now
been demonstrated that the whole
scheme was lacking in the essential
feature of providing for the sale OF the
bonds. The bonds could not be sold
at par as provided in the bill, and
there was less reason to hope for 1T
| al the time the bill was framed and
| passed than there is now. Just why
the bill was framed in this way does
not have any practical value at this
| time
| 1t has been proposed that the Com
nissioners should make another at
tempt to sell the bonds. the people in
the communities in which schools are
to be placed subscribing enough for
their own needs | am Informed that
they do not intend to keep the bonds,
bet to sell them at their market value
and stand the loss themselves.
| do not think that this is a wise
move. nor do believe that it is legal.
There is no reason why the residents
of any section should be made to pay
a special tax for their school build
| .ngs, though it was required OF Anna
polls when its school building was
/ constructed, and the plan is some
| thing entirely different from that pro-
vided by the Act.
The Ac. provides that, tha money IS
expended in the places which the
| Commission considers are in greatest
need Of school buildings. This plan
| proposes to put them in the places
where the residents are able to sub
scrite to the bonds. The whole spirit
| OF the Act would be contravened, and
1t could not be made to conform to it
| except by indirection.
Moreover. we are not to lose sight
OF the fact that the people of the
whole county will have to pay for
these bonds. and t,iat, as has been
| demonstrated so often they will pay
| considerably more than two dollars
| for each one which is expended in
| school buildings. So it is not mat
ter at all of the poole OF any par
| ,icrlarly section paying for their own
| school
! am writing to you. however. for
the purpose OF suggesting a method
| by which additional school buildings
can be constructed and by which a
great deal more can be obtained than
under the bond issue, and | ask fair
| consideration of my proposals. / be-
lieve in the entire sincerity of the
llaajority OF the advocates of TINS
measure and nm glad that they are SO
much interested in their schools, but
they should be fair to the people of
other sections of the county, and
those who expect to be favored now
should not want to receive benefits.
even for their children. by a method
which will prevent fair treatment of
other peoples children. | insist that
this would be done under the bond
issue. and that school buildings can
be obtained by a better method and
o, tanned Just as soon.
Somehow, the idea has become fA-
ed that there can be no school Lu;ld-
ings. except under this bill, unit; sad-
ditional legislative authority is OBJ
sained / feel certain that this is an
error. and that the County Commits
oners and School Commissioners
can obtain money and use it for such
purposes Tfshout any special author
ity. / know OF no legislative limita-
ten at al upon their power to bor-
row. ana this IS the opinion of sew
erai LAWYERS with whom l have dis
cusSei the matter.
II this IS true, why cannot the adj
vocasos CT this proposal. many of
whom see clearly that the bonding
scheme is unfair and oppressive,
abandon 1t. and consider plans for
obtaining the funds in another ways
Ava 10 suat, n nlan can ho fo,ud con