The Birmingham age-herald. [volume] (Birmingham, Ala.) 1902-1950, 1909-01-01
KING WILL WORK
FOR SPECIAL ACT
Says Smyer'S Non-Taxing
Scheme Will Not Work
SEE IF ELYT0N WANTS IT
Author of Greater Birmingham Bill
Says He VIII Press Another Mea-
sure If Extra Session
Is Called.
SEE IF ELYTON WANTS 1T

To the Editor of The Age-Herald:
see Mr.. Smyer is still fighting any
local measure which Arbitrarily enlarges
Blrmingham's city limits.
1t is the same old fight, by the same
old crowd that fought so hard to pre-
vent the passage of the Greater Bir-
mingham bill in july 1907. If Mr.. SINGER
would spend half as much time pushing
his non-taxing scheme before the various
city councils of the suburban towns that
he spends hunting up objections to my
scheme for charging the city of Bir-
mingham possibly he would have more
success We passed the Smyer law in
August, 1907, and SO far have not added
one single inhabitant, nor one foot of
new territory under this law. If Mr.
Smyer is sincere in wanting a Greater
Birmingham 1 suggest he appear before
the city council of Elyton with Felix
Blackburn present and see Mr. Blackburn
indorse his plan and have Elyton pass
a resolution favoring coming into Biz
mingham. 1 heard Mr.. Blackburn speak
an hour against the Smyer bill in Mont
gomery, but recently he seems to feel
more kindly to his friend Smyer II
both want a Greater Birmingham, sup
pose they begin on Elyton. l will be
delighted to help.
Seriously, I know of not one single city
council adjoining Birmingham that would
pass a resolution favoring coming into
Birmingham under the Smyer law. II
Mr.. Smyer knows of one l wish he would
name it.
There will, in my opinion, be another
session of the legislature some time the
coming year, and there will be intro
duced another bill like the first one, ex-
cept the referendum clause, and it will
be pressed for passage with all the vigor
that l possess.
MIR. SINGER said section of the King
bill was unconstitutional, but the su-
preme court said otherwise. In the recent
Sigsbee case the supreme court quoted
the identical subdivision under section
104 as quoted by Mr.. Smyer, and held
not prevent "the legislature from alter
ing or rearranging the boundary of the
city, town or village"
Section 1912 of the code of 1907 reads
as follows:
ANY city or town having extended
its corporate limits under the provisions
of this article or other law may again
extend Its corporate limits hereunder or
under any law authorizing an extension
of corporate limits by such city or town"
Mr.. Smyer has had an opportunity of
seeing whether or not his bill was pop
ular at the Hippodrome meeting in Au-
gust, 1907, when he fought SO hard to
prevent the governor from signing the
King bill. l am advised that he voted
against this bill in the Greater Birming-
ham election on January 6, 1908, and has
since furnished the enemies of Greater
Birmingham opinions as how to fight the
law. The secret of his opposition lies
In the fact that under my bill everybody.
rich and poor, pay taxes alike, 1 per
centum per annum; while under his
scheme he would allow the large corpor-
atoms to be exempt from taxes and levy
only license His original scheme was
to let ths large property holder escape
for long number of years the taxes.
while the man of small holdings owning
only one lot must come up and pay his
tax. Let Mr.. Smyer discuss his scheme
before the various suburban city coun-
ellis, and see how they take to his plan.
I do not like his scheme but If the
people want to come in under 1t I shall
not raise any objections to It,
In the meantime I shall prepare an
0ther Greater Birmingham bill and be-
ready to press It's passage before the
next session of the legislature, should
we have one. JERE C. KING
Birmingham, December 81 1908.