Montgomery County sentinel. [volume] (Rockville, Md.) 1855-1974, 1936-02-27
MONTGOMERY COUNTY SENTINEL

OON1x OENItN Eli
apparent from an examination of the
statute under consideration that its
purpose was not in any way to pro-
mote the public welfare, or to serve
any public purpose, but to grant a
monopoly of the public advertising
authorized by officials of Montgom-
cry County. The only possible reason
or justification for the expense of
such advertising would be to bring the
information which it conveyed to the
attention of residents of that county
likely to be affected by or interested
IN it. While the circulation of this or
that newspaper in the county might
have substantial and important re-
latlon to the usefulness and available
lty of a given paper as a medium for
giving notice to persons affected BY
the matter advertised it is not posi-
bic that its usefulness as a medium of
communication could be affected by
the circumstance that the type from
which it was printed was set up in
one place rather than in another.
Newspaper readers are no more con-
cerned in where the type from which
the paper is printed was set up than
they are in the birth place of the type
setter, nor is there any perceptlDle
reason why matter printed from type
set in Howard County should not con-
vey as much information as though
printed from type set in Montgomery
County. The idea that matter printed
from type set in Montgomery County
has qualities different from or super
ior to matter printed from type set
any where else is interesting because
of its novelty, but wholly unreason-
able. 1t may fairly be assumed that
that condition was prescribed merely
as a convenient device to remove a
competitor from the field of COMPETE
ton, and to make it sure that the
county's advertising business would 90
to some newspaper which had its
typesetting done in Montgomery
County.
"That conclusion is confirmed by the
further conclusion that the type set
ting shall have been done in Mont
gomery County for a period of four
consecutive" years Immediately prior
to the insertion of the advertisement.
Even if there were any peculiar vir-
tue inhering in type set in Montgom-
cry County, there is no reason to be-
lieve that that virtue will increase
with age and that condition is if
possible more Objectionable than that
which requires that the type be set in
Montgomery County.
"For the same reasons the condi-
ton that the paper shall be printed in
Montgomery County, is wholly I'M
reasonable, for while the requirement
that it be published in that county
may be regarded as a reasonable pre-
caution to insure the communication
of notices local in character to the
persons most likely to be affected, the
printing of it is wholly mechanical
and in no way affects its usefulness
as a medium of public communication.
"These conditions therefore as
basis for classification are wholly I'M
reasonable, and the classification bas-
ed upon them, is void.
"There was indeed no direct grant
of the privilege to any paper, in its
own proper name, but the conditions
prescribed made the grant as direct
and unequivocal as though a paper
had been named, and so construed the
evils attending it were the same as
those denounced by the constitution.
1t eliminated competition, it compelled
the county either to give its adver-
Using business to specially favored
newspaper upon terms prescribed by
it, or to risk confusion and disorder in
the administration of the county's
business by not advertising at all. 1t
took away from competing newspa-
pers, without any compensating public
advantage or other valid reason the
equal protection of the law, contrary
to the XIV Amendment of the FEEDER
al Constitution, and it created a
monopoly of public work to be paid
for from public funds.
"The test of the constitutionality Of
a statute ordinarily is not what has
happened but what may happen under
it. So that the consequences of this
particular statute are referred to not
as in themselves sufficient reason for
setting it aside but as graphic illus
tration of what may happen under it.
And since it gives control of import
ant and perhaps lucrative public bus
mess to a class of persons engaged in
The puDlicdClOH VI newspapers W Ine
exclusion of all others lawfully engag-
ed in the same business, and since
that classification is based upon I'M
reasonable and improperly discrimina-
tory grounds, it tends to create such
monopoly as is denounced by Art Al
of the Maryland Bill of Rights, de-
prives persons so excluded from the
equal protection of the law, is null
and void.
Appellants suggest that the legis-