1480                                      Vetoes

May 5, 1959.

Honorable George W. Della
President of the Senate
State House
Annapolis, Maryland

Dear Mr. President:

I have today vetoed Senate Bill 161 which seeks to amend Section
224 of Article 56 of the Annotated Code of Maryland, pertaining to
the suspension and revocation of the licenses of real estate brokers.

When Section 224 was originally enacted some years ago, it had
the support of realtor associations all over the State as it proposed a
"good housekeeping" measure for the real estate brokerage business,
in that it established safeguards to frustrate unconscionable indi-
viduals who seek to misrepresent real estate transactions to pros-
pective purchasers. However, the amendments now proposed by
Senate Bill 161 are too reactionary and result in discriminatory and
unreasonable restrictions on licensees who buy or sell property as
a principle.

I have, therefore, vetoed Senate Bill 161.

Respectfully,

(s) J. MILLARD TAWES,

JMT: ss                                                                           Governor.

Senate Bill No. 226—People's Counsel

AN ACT to repeal and re-enact, with amendments, Section 15 of
Article 78 of the Annotated Code of Maryland (1957 Edition),
title "Public Service Commission Law", sub-title "Public Service
Commission", sub-heading "People's Counsel", providing separate
office, technical and clerical personnel for People's Counsel of
Public Service Commission, plus funds to prosecute cases. , AND
RELATING TO THE DUTIES OF THE PEOPLE'S COUNSEL.

May 5, 1959.

Honorable George W. Della
President of the Senate
State House
Annapolis, Maryland

Dear Mr. President:

I have today vetoed Senate Bill 226. This bill was passed exclu-
sively to give to the People's Counsel of the Public Service Commis-
sion a greater opportunity for independent action by allowing him
to employ from time to time such expert or technical advisers as are
reasonably necessary to assist him in any particular matter or
proceeding pending before the Commission. However, the bill does
not accomplish what it sets out to achieve.

It has been called to my attention by various individuals skilled in
matters before the Commission, and by the Baltimore City Bar Asso-
ciation that this bill may well destroy the basic functions of the
People's Counsel, as it denies him his present privilege of consulting