1984 VETOES.
This enactment would have made possible the opening of
Back River to fishing nets or seines between the 1st of March
and the 1st of June each year. Conservation officials, sports-
men's organizations and outdoor life groups oppose the meas-
ure which they contended would be detrimental to the inter-
ests of the State. Therefore, I am vetoing this bill.
FREDERICK COUNTY.
HOUSE BILL 871.
AN ACT to add a new section to Article 38 of the Annotated
Code of Maryland (1943 Edition), title "Fines and Forfei-
tures", said new section to be known as Section 5A and to
follow immediately after Section 5 of said Article, relating
to monies impounded in a prosecution under the gaming laws
belonging to the accused in Frederick County.
This bill directs that "Any monies impounded in any prose-
cution under the gaming laws of this State which belong to the
accused and which have been used by him in carrying on such
gaming shall, if the accused is found guilty, be paid to the
Clerk of the Circuit Court for Frederick County" for the use
of the library.
The title indicates that the Act was to be limited to prose-
cutions under the gaming laws in Frederick County, but cer-
tainly the body of the Act does not carry out this intention
and as the Act as drawn would seem to require that any
monies impounded in prosecutions under gaming laws any-
where in the State should be paid to the Clerk of the Court
for Frederick County, I am vetoing this measure,
GARRETT COUNTY.
HOUSE BILL 815.
AN ACT to add a new section to Article 12 of the Code of
Public Local Laws of Maryland (1930' Edition), title "Gar-
rett County", sub-title "Auctions", said new section to be
known as Section 22A, and to follow immediately after Sec-
tion 22 of said Article, relating to the licensing of auc-
tioneers.
House Bill 815 is a local bill relating to licensing of auc-
tioneers in Garrett County. The measure provides for a differ-
ent license fee for residents of the State of Maryland as
distinguished from non-residents. The State Law Department
informs me that the measure is discriminatory and should be
vetoed.
|