The Republican. [volume] (Oakland, Md.) 1877-current, 1950-09-14

My opponent for the Senatorial nomination, Clifford
Friend IN his advertisement in last weeks made
many misleading statements about the fifty million dollar
bond bill passed at the 1919 Session of the Legislature
that feel called upon to tell the people of the County the
truth about the matter.
Mr.. Friends statement as usual is about 90 percent
wrong 1t is calculated to brighten the people of this county
into believing that and other officials are deliberately and
reckessy pungng the people into bankruptcy and certain
doom.
1t the overwhelming sentiment of members of the
General Assembly the 1919 Session the should
bear greater part the cost of new school building con-
structon and introduced increase the
school building incentive fund which could have been done
and paid for of the sales However, the
Lane administration would not give its approval to the
and instead proposed State bond issue of twenty
million dollars and from the proceeds of the direct
grants would be made to Baltimore City and the Counties
on matching basis, the to be used in school build
approximately 1000 from this issue THIS
MONEY DOES NOT HAVE TO BE REPAID TO THE
At the time the above measure was introduced, the
ADMINISTRATION presented another bill known the fifty
million dollar school bond bill, which enacted for the
following reasons:
Many of the Counties of the State particularly those
bordering on the cities of Baltimore and Washington had
already borrowed up to what the bankers consider the limit
Of safety namely percent Of the assessed of
desperately in need of additional funds for school consruc
ton because Of crowded conditions prevailing in their
schools also due lack of construction during the
If these Counties went into the market borrow additional
funds they would have been forced to ueasonaby
high rate of interest because of their outstanding indebted
1t therefore, proposed by the administration that
the State be given authority to borrow up to fifty million
dollars the would lend the City and
Counties up to certain amounts if application made
re[eoF ao GeIt an cohalGS e Inc reason 4r t
proposal was the States credit was very hgh and could
borrow at much cheaper rate of interest and the
money would in turn be loaned to the Counties at the
rate that the State had to There is nothing whatso
the Act that could be construed to make it manda
tTy upon any County to borrow from the fund This bill
passed without dissenting vote in either the Senate
House.
After the bill became law, of the Counties APP
piled for loans under its provisions and made commitments
for buildings expecting to the borrowed when
it found that there clerical defect in the
of the Act The situation presented such acute
gency in Counties that the Governor called special
of
rentroduced in exactly its original form and passed the
Senate without dissenting vote. When it reached the
House of Delegates, two amendments oferd to the
bill by the Garrett County delegation which immed
aey rejected without roll call vote and the bill passed by
of 121 to 2 Now Mr. Friend characterzes this dan
legislation and places dangerous in the hands
of dangerous the dangerous men assume being the
County Commissioners and the Board of Public Works OF
the State of Maryland the latter Board having to approve
all applications wonder what Mr. Friend would have done
prevent the passage of this legislation he had been
member Of the Senate in the face of this Overwhelming
sentiment in its favor suspect he would have gotten just