Evening star., 1948-10-27
9Lawyers Raise
New Doubts on
Charter Legality
Declare All Questions
Are Not Decided by
Appeals Court Ruling

New doubts over constitutional
fly of the proposed Montgomery
County charter to be voted on Tues
day were raised today In almost
identical statements by nine county
attorneys.
Norman B. Ames, president of the
County Charter Committee which
indorses the proposed new form of
government, charged opponents with
bad faith in bringing forth substi-
tute proposals in the last stretch OF
the campaign"
Seven of the nine attorneys is
sued one statement while the re-
manning two combined In making
another yesterday.
The first group includes James
C. Christopher, former Bethesda
trial magistrate, Emory H. Bogley
Charles w. Prettyman, former as
sistant States attorney for the
county; Donald A. DeLashmutt,
former Rockville trial magistrate,
Joseph NJ Matthias, David E. Belts,
and Clitus o. Bourdeaux, unsuccess-
full candidate for the House of Dele
gates on the Democratic ticket two
years ago.
The other two attorneys are F.
Barnard Welsh, attorney to the
county commissioners, and former
State Senator Robert Peter.
Hold Questions Unsettled.
Both groups contended the re-
cent Maryland Court of Appeals de-
eisions upholding the constitution
ality of key charter provision has
not settled all questions concern
ing validity of the home rule"
plan.
AS result, they said. adoption of
the charter would bring confusion
and uncertainty in county affairs"
and would throw the affairs of this
county in a virtual whirlpool of
litigation"
The appellate court had ruled
that the charter provision permitting
q county council to appropriate bud
get funds and fix the county tax
levy in June executive session was
constitutional. In so doing, the
court overruled Montgomery Cir
cult Court opinion which held the
provision invalid and ordered its
deletion from the plan.
Court Statement Quoted.
In their statements, the attorneys
quoted the Court of Appeals as en-
phasizing it was deciding not on
the questions which conceivably may
arise as to the validity, construction
or application of the various other
provisions OF the proposed charter
or OF actions taken hereunder"
consequently" the attorneys
said, 'it is obvious that all questions
regarding the validity of the char
ter have not been decided. 1t is
further obvious tosus, aud appar-
emily ohxleus to tn Courof Ap-
peals. that great numbers of ques-
tons remain undeciied"
Mr.. Welsh and MP Peter urged
that the charter be defeated. The
seven other attorneys claimed that
the aims of charter supporters can
be realized under the existing con-
stitutional government, if the people
Of the county so desire and work
together to that end q"
"Divide and Conquer" Tactics.
Mr.. Ames sadi several plans have
been offered lately to separate the
rural and suburban sections of the
county.
IF these plans were proposed in
good faith" he inquired, why were
they not brought forward earlier?
These are clearly repetition of the
old harassing tactics of divide and
conquer"
THE limitation of bonded debt to
7 per cent for charter counties is
contained in the State code"
he said. 1T is a hangover from past
years and can be changed by a
simple majority vote of the State
Assembly. Since all major bond
issues must now be approved by the
Assembly, there certainly would be
no difficulty in having the bond
limit changed to a level high enough
to meet all the county's legitimate
needs. There are no grounds for
worry on this score"