Montgomery County sentinel. [volume] (Rockville, Md.) 1855-1974, 1948-11-25

EuIIOi, lHc w doiliilSlOH oSl,
Washington, u. c.
Dear Sir:
The editorial headed "Pctty la
rassment" appearing in your pa
per on November 18th indicates a
lack of understanding or desire
to understand the true import of
the issues involved in the proposed
action of the Montgomery County
Commissioners with reference to
the election of a new Ccrnev
Council.
While am a Democrat and
hold no brief for the local Rcpull.- 4
can administration, there is no
doubt in my mind that the action
which the Commissioners propos
is not only proper but is one which
they have an affirmative duty to
take. If the law gives lone tax
payer the right to sue to prevent
the illegal and unauthorized ex-
penditure of tax funds, certainly
it is the public duty of any govern
ing body to safeguard such funds.
You say eve have made no
study of the detailed constitutional
issues that the obstructionists have
raised" and blithely go on to say
that if any valid constitutional
issue is at stake, ut must neces-
sarily be carried to the courts for
whatever adjustment, if any, may
be required" and go further to
characterize enjoining the election
as Outrageous" The "study"
which you have not made could
lead you to but one conclusion, and
that is that the election is contrary
to the Constitution and should be
enjoined.
If you would make tie study
Of the issues involved you would
find that the "home rule" amend
ment under which the char ter was
prepared and adopted was ratified
in 1915 and makes no provision
whatsoever for any special election
for a County Council. You would
also find that Article II of the
Constitution, ratified in 1922, spe-
officially limits election to State
and County Office to every fourth
year after the year 1926 and fur
Their states that the purpose of
the article is to reduce the number
of elections. This amendment fur
Their repeats and abrogates any
other provision of the State Con-
stitution which may be inconsist-
ent with it, to the extent of such
inconsistency.
! believe that even Mr.. James ].
Hayden will agree that the follow
ing is a correct statement of the
law: IAN election held without
affirmative or constitutional au-
thority, or contrary to a material
provision of the law is universally
recognized as being a nullity." Do
you consider it preferable to elect
new County Council, have said
Council take office, and thereafter
be ousted on the ground that their
election was nullity? Or would it
be more sensible and more produc-
tive of orderly government. to set
tie such questions before some
S13,OO0.O0 of taxpayers money is
spent in holding an election which
has every likelihood of being sub
sequently declared null and void? |
In the recent case brought bv |
Hubert A. Schneider to test thu
constitutionality of one Of the nos;
ttal provisions of the ncE fo.rl OF
government, Charter roncnts
exhibited marked reluctance to
have the case tried on its merits
and settle the issue before any
harm could be done, even though
the result was contrary to the in
depreciation of the law urged by
Mr.. Schneider. These same Char
ter proponents announced them
selves as satisfied" with a decree
of the Circuit Court which emascu-
lated their Charter and it was Mr..
Schneider who noted the appeal to
save the chaos which would have
resulted from the adoption of a
charter in the form it was left by
the original decree.
1t appeared then that the Char
ter Committee wanted any charter
regardless of its form; it now APP
pears that these people want any
council regardless of the constitu-