Evening capital and Maryland gazette. (Annapolis, Md.) 1910-1922, 1922-03-31
FRIDAY, MARCH 81, 1922.
PROTECTION OF MILK MEANS
PROTECTION OF HEALTH

IhVlbN tiVi VIZ hhhLih
Is there any need of, or de
mand for, a protected milk sup
ply for the citizens of Annapolis :
Alderman Douw. i'll his commu
nication in Wednesdays Even
ing Capital, says From all ]
have been able to learn there Is
10 real demand for any milk or
dinance by the citizens of Anna
polls" He then proceeds to Of
fer a proposed ordinance, in
place of the one submitted by
the Rotary Club" on the ground
that 'it is the duty of the City
Council to protect the citizens
whether they demand it or not,
and owing to the fact that the
question Of an ordinance has
been agitated, it might be harm
full if the dairy interests were
given to understand that they
are to have no supervision. /
framed the enclosed with the in
tent that Annapolis receive some
protection without appreciable
cost, giving the question OF the
danger of increasing the price, or
preventing the reduction in the
future, the greatest considera-
tion."
1t, therefore, may be taken for
granted that there is sufficient
need of. and demand for, some
ordinance that will regulate the
milk supply and that the City
Council will seize the opportu-
nifty of passing such an ordinance
at an early date. The practical
question now is, what form of or
dinance to adopt.
The choice at the present time
lies between the Rotary Clubs
proposed ordinance. with amend.
mepts indicated at the public
meeting of March 20, and Alder
man Douw's proposition. The
main object OF both is identical.
namely, as stated by Mr.. Douw
THAT Annapolis receive some
protection without appreciablo
cost" and the adoption of some
ordinance that will accrue to the
benefit of the city"
The ordinance presented by the
Rotary Club has this very decid
ed advantage to start with; it
was submitted for public conSid-
Grafton several months ago (the
December meeting of the City
CounciD, and since that time it
has been subjected to the closest
scrutiny, particularly by the
dairymen of this vicinity who.
after open meetings and commit
tee meetings, have given it their
endorsement. Moreover. it was
the main-in fact. the only-con-
crete proposition before the pub
lie meeting held at the invitation
of the City Council on March 20.
and there passed muster without
objection, as to its essential pro-
visions. 1t was shown that j,
was the product of careful study
and investigation. that it had met
the test of actual experience III
the City of Frederick for over a
year, and that it could be made
effective here on practically a
self-supporting basis. That is.
that the revenue from the license
fees could be made sufficient TO
take care of the operating ex-
penses. 1t was also shown that
1t provided the machinery. in a
reasonable and simple way, for
enforcing its provisions and
placed the responsibility definite
" on city officials named in the
ordinance. the City Health Off
Ger being the one official directly
charged with the enforcement of
details. Right on this point, Al
derman Douw's ordinance is con-
spicuously lacking, in that it IS
indefinite as to any direct respon-
sibility~being placed on any Off
cial or as to the definition OF du-
ties. 1t would seem to invite nom
compliance. and at best, is rather