The Republican. [volume] (Oakland, Md.) 1877-current, 1931-09-03
DEFENDANTS In MT. LAKE
PARK CASE FILE ANSWER
Are Prepared To Argue Matter
Before Judges of the Circuit
Court On Saturday, Sept. 5
IL GROUNDS OF DEMURRER

The recently elected Mayor
and Town Council, defendants in
a case filed in the Circuit Court
for Garrett county on Saturday,
August %, praying that the
Court declare the act to incorpo-
rate Mountain Lake Park illegal,
unconstitutional and void, have
filed their answer and are pre-
pared to argue the case before the
Court on Saturday, September 5.
The demurrer to the bill of the
plaintiffs is based upon twelve ex-
ceptions and it is denied in the bill
that the Act of the General Assembly
passed at its 1881 session, is illegal,
unconstitutional or invalid.
The answer was filed by N. G. Fra
ley, attorney representing MacClellen
Clayton, Mayor, and W. L. Camden
Thomas Schooley, Floyd R. Utter
back, James F. Elliott and Albert F.
Schrock, constituting the Town Coun-
Gil elected along with Mayor Clayton.
Substance of the Answer
The answer of the defendants to the
bill of the plaintiffs states that the
plaintiffs are not entitled under the
law to file suit against the defend
ants; that the act does not impair OBJ
legation of contracts; that the acts
complained of are within the powers
of the Legislature and that they do
not violate any of the provisions of
the Federal or State Constitutions.
The question of the eligibility of
citizens of other states voting under
the provisions of the act under which
the referendum election was held, the
answer states, is not open to question
by the plaintiffs.
The defendants deny that the Noun
tain Lake Park Association has in
vested over 100000, as alleged in the
bill, but AYERS that said corporation
has an authorized capital stock of
1000 shares of the par value of $500
each, of which but 270 shares have
been issued, and AYERS further that
whatever sums have been expended by
the Association represent mainly
sums assessed upon the lot holders
and not capital invested by the Asso-
citation.
The answer denies that the opera
ton of the municipal corporation will
in any way depreciate or destroy the
investments and property of the in
dividual plaintiffs or prevent the at
tainment of the purposee and objects
for which the Park Association was
formed.
It is also denied in the answer that
citizens of other states are eligible
for the office of Mayor and Council
men.
The answer further alleges that
John R. Edwards and Frank E. Baker,
two parties plaintiff, are non-residents
of Maryland; and that H. v. Leighton
is a resident of Loeb Lynn; that each
of the defendants is a resident of Mt.
Lake Park and that they were legally
elected to serve as officers of the
municipality of Mountain Lake Park.
Mountain Lake Park was founded
as a religious resort and it's govern
mental affairs have always been in
the hands of an annual committee. At
a referendum election held on July
fourteenth it was decided to in
corporate the community and adopt a
municipal form of government. The
incorporation was opposed by the Mt.
Lake Park Association and the Board
of Foreign Missions of the Methodist
Episcopal church, now in control of
the Association and which owns all
the public buildings and much unde-
veloped real estate within the limits
of the Park.
A bill praying for an injunction to
prevent the Mayor and Council from
asserting the powers conferred upon
them by the Act of incorporation, was
filed in the court here on August %,
by Attorneys Fred. A. Thayer and
Ernest Raw Jones.