2048 VETOES.

that it would materially affect the revenues of the Motor
Vehicle and Conservation Departments, which departments
are operated from such specifically dedicated funds. Under
the circumstances, I feel compelled to veto the measure.

CUMBERLAND.

Chapter 104 (House Bill 160). Chapter 104 seeks to remove
the present property qualifications for the Mayor and members
of the City Council of Cumberland. I have recently signed
Chapter 649, under the provisions of which the property quali-
fications are removed and which latter measure also extends
the term and changes the salaries of the officials in question.
However, the important difference in the Bills is, that in
Chapter 649, a referendum is provided and the whole question
will be submitted to the voters at the regular municipal
election in March 1942. My opinion is that with the voters in
a position to decide this question for themselves, this would
be the better course and I am therefore vetoing House Bill 160.

DOG LICENSES.

Chapter 498 (Senate Bill 265). This measure seeks to
exempt Calvert County from the State-wide dog law.

Citizens of the County have appealed to me to veto this
measure, which would remove the general restrictions against
permitting dogs to run at large. These citizens point out that
the effect of this Bill becoming law would be adverse to the
game population. At a recent meeting of the Calvert County
Game Council, including many representative citizens, the
proposal was discussed, after which those present unanimously
opposed repealing the present statute.

No valid reason has been assigned as to why Calvert County
should be exempted from the State-wide law, and if the general
statute is advantageous elsewhere in the State, it would seem
to foe beneficial to the citizens of Calvert County also, providing
the measure wag properly enforced.

Under the circumstances, I am compelled to veto this
measure.

Chapter 894 (House Bill 581). This Bill seeks to change the
existing provisions relating to the issuance of dog licenses in
Frederick County.

The County Commissioners of Frederick County contend
that there are few provisions in the enactment which would be
an improvement over the general dog license law. The Com-
missioners also point out that the provisions of the law, par-
ticularly Section 144-G, would be difficult or impossible of
enforcement. Under the terms of the law, the County Com-