2042 VETOES.

ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES.

Chapter 480 (Senate Bill No. 142). This bill undertook to
change the provisions for the licensing of hotels as to liquor
license privileges. The Board of Liquor License Commissioners
for Baltimore City vigorously opposed the change and pointed
out that eight Baltimore hotels, now licensed as such, would be
obliged to surrender their present licenses if this bill were
signed. This would result from the fact that their average
daily receipts from the hire of rooms and the sale of foods do
not exceed the average daily receipts from the sale of alcoholic
beverages.

The Liquor License Commissioners for Baltimore City fur-
ther point out that it is doubtful whether some of these hotels
could even qualify for the ordinary six-day license known as
Class D License, because of the requirement that the means
of observance from the street be afforded to any sales rooms.

The Board in requesting veto, stated that the eight hotels
in question had paid for their $750. 00 license and that if this
bill were signed, there would be no provision for refund of
such fees.

The Maryland Alcoholic Beverage Committee, Inc., also
requested veto, stating that it would have an adverse effect
upon proper regulation.

The Senator from the Fifth District of Baltimore City, who
introduced and was the principal sponsor of the bill, displayed
a very fair-minded attitude when subsequent developments
were brought to his attention. He has conferred with me and
I am convinced that he now has no objection to the veto of
this proposed measure.

Chapter 872 (Senate Bill 404). By the terms of this proposed
law, license fees in Carroll County would be increased as well
as the compensation of License Commissioners, through amend-
ment to the general law regarding certain classes of liquor
licenses.

I held a public hearing on this matter following the adjourn-
ment of the Legislature at which protesting attorneys pointed
out the disparities which would exist to the detriment of
licensees in Carroll County. Section 4, sub-section D, provides
that licensees in Carroll County shall be charged a different
fee than elsewhere in the State. Furthermore, under Section
6-A, this scale of fees is charged in Carroll County, based upon
gross legal sales during the previous year. Apparently gen-
eral discussion of the proposed changes was not possible and
while I do not wish to take the position that these proposals
are unsound and unreasonable, I think that the changes, if
made, should be brought about after a more extensive discus-
sion of all the facts.