Montgomery County sentinel. [volume] (Rockville, Md.) 1855-1974, 1932-11-25

'ne TAX OiiiS IN each of the oOu,s..
of Maryland. We are all fo. n
/ After cOmplimenting Mr.. La
his apparent knowledge of the as.' ~
of the State Roads Commission =
Balch launched into terse 49,, y"
what he called "a sophistcatad
ment." He said the Federal por,'
ment spent four billions a vs,,
such way as to cause the peon,0
rise up in protest. "Yet, anv bn
head will tell you and prove :,
by argument. like my distinguish,
friend from Montgomery county ,s.4
such expenditures are rAoo,..
There is nothing in our disnr..
to the integrity and high ;a.,
of the gentleman who has ;ust s ~
dressed you, but the time has ~.
when the people of the Sta+a 49,,
have relief and not resort 70 Tvs
Cling figures. The operation was IS
cessful but the patient died will =,
DO for an answer. When Won ~
back to your people you want 10 -
able to tell them whether or ~.
we effected reduction"
.
Mr.. Lee again took the floor ~,
reiterated his position as cit;,an
with reference to the schools. saviro,
1t was not a part of the governments
problem and that he adhered to a Inv
ury tax rather than curtailment ~
the school system. "No one bo,o
seems to favor reducing expendit,ros
for roads," he said.
Several attorneys, representing III.
various county boards Joined in ths
debate and when, at two o'clock an
effort was made to adjourn for lurch
which had been scheduled for I.SO ana
OF the Garrett county commissioners
saying that the resolution was mora
important than lunch, blocked an
attempt which was made to tempor.r
lily withdraw the resolution and tbs
debate continued.
Mr.. Lee said "Some of the lsrper
counties, which have large bases, NOR.
registration Of vehicles and mon.
mileage, have never favored the Fast
ern Shore program and they don't
want to scrap the State road system.
To which Mr.. McSherry retorted that
1t occurs to me that the problem is
one for the counties to solve. Under
the present conditions, the county
commissioners are told by the STATE
Board of Education what thew shall
do. Now it's proposed that the State
Roads Commission shall tell the cOup.
ties what they shall do. If the county
commissioners propose to maintain
their status, then they certainly en-,
not agree to Mr.. Lees proposal to
turn over the expenditures of funds in
their counties.
1t goes without saying that the
county commissioners in their coun-
ties know their problems better than
the State Roads Commission. We ap-
prove of public education, but dlsap.
prove most heartily of any waste Of
money and favor a fair share of the
taxes levied for gasoline"
At this stage of the proceedings
Senator Melvin urged the commits
sioners defer action on the resolutions
until some future day and suggested
that a committee, consisting Of one
commissioner from each county be ap-
pointed to draft resolution to be pre-
scented at another meeting.
Major Lee also urged that action be
deferred and stated that no member
Of the State Roads Commission had
0een invited to attend the meeting,
and that he just happened to walk in
He called attention to the fact that
the Legislature does not meet until
the first week in January and 81 cant
understand why you come here six
weeks before the meeting of the
Legislature and bang off this way on
the first public occasion that these
matters are discussed. I think this is T
very important question and you are
jumping too quick"
The call for the question was per-
sistent and the vote taken shortly be-
fore three o'clock. Cecil and Prince
Georges counties passed without ex-
PLANTATION. Commissioner Frank s.
Given, of Baltimore county, which
passed, stated that his board wanted
more time to discuss the matter
Allegany passed because that county
has a road board which builds the
roads and the county commissioner
have nothing to do with local rOsu
construction. All of the remaining
counties voted for the resolution, eS-
NJ